DOCSLIB.ORG

Universal Dependencies for Swedish Sign Language

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Universal Dependencies for Swedish Sign Language Universal Dependencies for Swedish Sign Language Robert Ostling,¨ Carl Borstell,¨ Moa Gardenfors,¨ Mats Wiren´ Department of Linguistics Stockholm University robert,calle,moa.gardenfors,mats.wiren @ling.su.se { } Abstract annotation is limited to Australian Sign Language, which contains some basic syntactic segmentation We describe the first effort to annotate and annotation (Johnston, 2014). Apart from this, a signed language with syntactic depen- smaller parts of the corpora of Finnish Sign Lan- dency structure: the Swedish Sign Lan- guage (Jantunen et al., 2016) and Polish Sign Lan- guage portion of the Universal Depen- guage (Rutkowski and Łozinska,´ 2016), have had dencies treebanks. The visual modality some syntactic segmentation and analysis, and an- presents some unique challenges in anal- other such project is under way on British Sign ysis and annotation, such as the possi- Language.1 bility of both hands articulating separate To the best of our knowledge, we present the signs simultaneously, which has implica- first dependency annotation and parsing experi- tions for the concept of projectivity in de- ments with sign language data. This brings us one pendency grammars. Our data is sourced step closer to the goal of bridging the gap in avail- from the Swedish Sign Language Corpus, ability between written, spoken and sign language and if used in conjunction these resources natural language processing tools. contain very richly annotated data: de- pendency structure and parts of speech, 2 Universal Dependencies video recordings, signer metadata, and since the whole material is also translated The Universal Dependencies project aims to pro- into Swedish the corpus is also a parallel vide uniform morphological and syntactic (in the text. form of dependency trees) annotations across lan- guages (Nivre et al., 2016b).2 Built on a language- 1 Introduction universal common core of 17 parts of speech and 40 dependency relations, there are also language- The Universal Dependencies (UD) project specific guidelines which interpret and when nec- (Nivre et al., 2016b) has produced a language- essary extend those in the context of a given lan- independent but extensible standard for morpho- guage. logical and syntactic annotation using a formalism based on dependency grammar. This standard has 3 Swedish Sign Language been used to create the Universal Dependencies treebanks (Nivre et al., 2016a), which in its Swedish Sign Language (SSL) is the main sign latest release at the time of writing (version 1.4) language of the Swedish Deaf community.3 It is contains 64 treebanks in 47 languages—one of estimated to be used by at least 10,000 as one which is Swedish Sign Language (SSL, ISO of their primary languages, and is the only sign 639-3: SWL), the topic of this article. language to be recognized in Swedish law, giv- There are very few sign languages for which ing it a special status alongside the official minor- there are corpora. Most of the available sign lan- 1http://www.bslcorpusproject.org/projects/ guage corpora feature only simple sign segmenta- bsl-syntax-project/ tion and annotations, often also with some type of 2Note that our work predates version 2 of the UD guide- translation into a spoken language (either as writ- lines, and is based on the first version. 3Capital D “Deaf” is generally used to refer to the lan- ten translations or as spoken voice-overs). Sign guage community as a cultural and linguistic group, rather language corpora with more extensive syntactic than ‘deaf’ as a medical label. 303 Proceedings of the 21st Nordic Conference of Computational Linguistics, pages 303–308, Gothenburg, Sweden, 23-24 May 2017. c 2017 Linkoping¨ University Electronic Press ity languages (Ahlgren and Bergman, 2006; Park- of discourse that can be represented by an id- vall, 2015). The history of SSL goes back at least iomatic Swedish translation. However, the transla- 200 years, to the inauguration of the first Deaf tion segmentations do not represent clausal bound- school in Sweden, and has also influenced the two aries in either SSL or Swedish (Borstell¨ et al., sign languages of Finland (i.e. Finnish Sign Lan- 2014). More recently, a portion of the SSLC was guage and Finland-Swedish Sign Language) with segmented into clausal units and annotated for ba- which SSL can be said to be related (Bergman and sic syntactic roles (Borstell¨ et al., 2016), which led Engberg-Pedersen, 2010). to the current UD annotation work. Figure 1 shows the basic view of the SSLC videos and annotations 4 Data source in the ELAN software, with tiers for sign glosses and translations on the video timeline. The SSL Corpus Project ran during the years 2009–2011 with the intention to establish the 5 Annotation procedure and principles first systematically designed and publicly avail- for SSL able corpus of SSL, resulting in the SSL Corpus (SSLC). Approximately 24 hours of video data of For practical purposes, annotation was performed pairs of signers conversing was recorded, compris- by extending the ELAN files of our source mate- ing 42 signers of different age, gender, and ge- rial from the SSLC project (see Figure 2 for an ographical background, spanning 300 individual example). These annotations were automatically video files (Mesch, 2012). The translation and an- converted to the CoNLL-U format used by Uni- notation work is still on-going, with new releases versal Dependencies. being made available online as the work moves The annotation of UD based syntactic structure forward. The last official release of the SSLC in- started by coming up with a procedure for anno- cludes just under 7 hours of video data (Mesch tating a signed language using ELAN. Signed lan- et al., 2012) along with annotation files contain- guage is more simultaneous than spoken language, ing 53,625 sign tokens across 6,197 sign types particularly in the use of paired parallel articula- (Mesch, 2016). tors in form of the signer’s two hands (Vermeer- The corpus is annotated using the ELAN soft- bergen et al., 2007). We handle this by allowing ware (Wittenburg et al., 2006), and the annotation signs from both hands into the same tree structure, files are distributed in the corresponding XML- which leads to well-formed trees consistent with based .eaf format. Each annotation file contains the dependency grammar formalism’s single-head, tiers on which annotations are aligned with the connectedness and acyclicity constraints. These video file, both video and annotation tiers being trees can however have some unusual properties visible in the ELAN interface (see Figure 1). The compared to spoken languages. For the purpose of SSLC annotation files currently include tiers for conforming to the CoNLL-U data format, which sign glosses, and others for Swedish translations. requires an ordered sequence of tokens, we sort Sign glosses are written word labels that repre- signs by their chronological order. The chrono- sent signs with approximate meanings (e.g. PRO1 logical order spans both sign tiers per signer, and for a first person pronoun). The sign gloss anno- is defined as the onset time of each sign anno- tation tiers are thus segmented for lexical items tation. In the case of two signs on each hand (i.e. individual signs), and come in pairs for each tier (i.e. dominant vs. non-dominant hand) hav- signer—each tier representing one of the signer’s ing identical onsets, favor is given to signs artic- hands (one tier for the so-called dominant hand, ulated by the signer’s dominant hand. This work- and another for the non-dominant hand) (Mesch ing definition is by no means the only reasonable 4 and Wallin, 2015). Sign glosses also contain a linearization, which means that the notion of pro- part-of-speech (PoS) tag which have been derived jectivity to some extent loses its meaning. A tree from manually correcting the output of a semi- can be considered projective or non-projective de- automatic method for cross-lingual PoS tagging pending on how the ordering of simultaneously ar- ¨ (Ostling et al., 2015). The translation tier is seg- ticulated signs is defined—assuming one wants to mented into longer chunks, representing stretches impose such an ordering in the first place. 4The dominant hand is defined as the hand preferred by a Because the source material contains no seg- signer when signing a one-handed sign. mentation above the sign level, we decided to use 304 Figure 1: Screenshot of an SSLC file in ELAN. This is the material we base our dependency annotations on, and the annotator can easily view the source video recording. Figure 2: Screenshot zooming into the UD annotation tiers and sign–dependency linking for the utterance from Figure 1. This is the interface used by the annotator. conj root conj conj dobj det verb verb verb noun det verb SATTA¨ -SIG ATA¨ (Q) TITTA-PA˚ SNO¨ ˆGUBBE PEK ATA¨ (Q) SIT-DOWN EAT(Q) LOOK-AT SNOWˆOLD-MAN POINT EAT(Q) ‘He is sitting there eating looking out at the snowman.’ Figure 3: The example from Figure 1 and Figure 2 with dependency annotations visualized. The (Q) suffix on the ATA¨ (Q) gloss indicates which of the multiple signs for ‘eat’ in SSL is used in this case. 305 7 Dependency parsing 25 Given that this is the first sign language UD tree- 20 bank, we decided to perform some dependency parsing experiments to establish baseline results. 15 We use the parser of Straka et al. (2015), part of the UDpipe toolkit (Straka et al., 2016), for our 10 Number of trees experiments. The training (334 tokens), develop- ment (48 tokens) and test (290 tokens) split from 5 UD treebanks 1.4 was used. A hundred itera- tions of random hyperparameter search was per- 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 formed for each of their parser models (projective, Number of sign tokens partially non-projective and fully non-projective), and the model with highest development set accu- Figure 4: Distribution of tree sizes for the Swedish racy was chosen.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sign Language Typology Series
    SIGN LANGUAGE TYPOLOGY SERIES The Sign Language Typology Series is dedicated to the comparative study of sign languages around the world. Individual or collective works that systematically explore typological variation across sign languages are the focus of this series, with particular emphasis on undocumented, underdescribed and endangered sign languages. The scope of the series primarily includes cross-linguistic studies of grammatical domains across a larger or smaller sample of sign languages, but also encompasses the study of individual sign languages from a typological perspective and comparison between signed and spoken languages in terms of language modality, as well as theoretical and methodological contributions to sign language typology. Interrogative and Negative Constructions in Sign Languages Edited by Ulrike Zeshan Sign Language Typology Series No. 1 / Interrogative and negative constructions in sign languages / Ulrike Zeshan (ed.) / Nijmegen: Ishara Press 2006. ISBN-10: 90-8656-001-6 ISBN-13: 978-90-8656-001-1 © Ishara Press Stichting DEF Wundtlaan 1 6525XD Nijmegen The Netherlands Fax: +31-24-3521213 email: [email protected] http://ishara.def-intl.org Cover design: Sibaji Panda Printed in the Netherlands First published 2006 Catalogue copy of this book available at Depot van Nederlandse Publicaties, Koninklijke Bibliotheek, Den Haag (www.kb.nl/depot) To the deaf pioneers in developing countries who have inspired all my work Contents Preface........................................................................................................10
    [Show full text]
  • Sign Language Endangerment and Linguistic Diversity Ben Braithwaite
    RESEARCH REPORT Sign language endangerment and linguistic diversity Ben Braithwaite University of the West Indies at St. Augustine It has become increasingly clear that current threats to global linguistic diversity are not re - stricted to the loss of spoken languages. Signed languages are vulnerable to familiar patterns of language shift and the global spread of a few influential languages. But the ecologies of signed languages are also affected by genetics, social attitudes toward deafness, educational and public health policies, and a widespread modality chauvinism that views spoken languages as inherently superior or more desirable. This research report reviews what is known about sign language vi - tality and endangerment globally, and considers the responses from communities, governments, and linguists. It is striking how little attention has been paid to sign language vitality, endangerment, and re - vitalization, even as research on signed languages has occupied an increasingly prominent posi - tion in linguistic theory. It is time for linguists from a broader range of backgrounds to consider the causes, consequences, and appropriate responses to current threats to sign language diversity. In doing so, we must articulate more clearly the value of this diversity to the field of linguistics and the responsibilities the field has toward preserving it.* Keywords : language endangerment, language vitality, language documentation, signed languages 1. Introduction. Concerns about sign language endangerment are not new. Almost immediately after the invention of film, the US National Association of the Deaf began producing films to capture American Sign Language (ASL), motivated by a fear within the deaf community that their language was endangered (Schuchman 2004).
    [Show full text]
  • What Sign Language Creation Teaches Us About Language Diane Brentari1∗ and Marie Coppola2,3
    Focus Article What sign language creation teaches us about language Diane Brentari1∗ and Marie Coppola2,3 How do languages emerge? What are the necessary ingredients and circumstances that permit new languages to form? Various researchers within the disciplines of primatology, anthropology, psychology, and linguistics have offered different answers to this question depending on their perspective. Language acquisition, language evolution, primate communication, and the study of spoken varieties of pidgin and creoles address these issues, but in this article we describe a relatively new and important area that contributes to our understanding of language creation and emergence. Three types of communication systems that use the hands and body to communicate will be the focus of this article: gesture, homesign systems, and sign languages. The focus of this article is to explain why mapping the path from gesture to homesign to sign language has become an important research topic for understanding language emergence, not only for the field of sign languages, but also for language in general. © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. How to cite this article: WIREs Cogn Sci 2012. doi: 10.1002/wcs.1212 INTRODUCTION linguistic community, a language model, and a 21st century mind/brain that well-equip the child for this esearchers in a variety of disciplines offer task. When the very first languages were created different, mostly partial, answers to the question, R the social and physiological conditions were very ‘What are the stages of language creation?’ Language different. Spoken language pidgin varieties can also creation can refer to any number of phylogenic and shed some light on the question of language creation.
    [Show full text]
  • Sign Language Recognition
    Sign Language Recognition by Carol-lee Aquiline OffidciLrecognition ojsign languages is an important aimpursued by WFD and many ojits member orqaniza­ nons. What exactly does "official recognition" mean? This may varyfrom country to country depending onthe legal system and which government bodies have responsibilityjorproviding services and enjorcing laws. ollowing is information that WFD nition around the world:' ' decided to put sign language under the has received from -~ountries world­ Sweden: The Swedish Parliament protection of cultural diversity, instead Fwidethat havesome level of recog­ accepted Swedish Sign Language in an of recognizing it as an official language nition of their national sign language: educational policy. Policies, as created as demanded by Deaf people. _ In national constitution: Brazil, Czech by the SwedishParliament, usuallyhave Finland: The Finnish Constitution Republic,_Ecuador, Finland, Greece, legal enforcement. Swedish Sign Lan- clearlyregardssignlanguageas an official Portugal, South Africa, Uganda; and guage has not been accepted as an language. This Constitution acceptsboth Venezuela. official languagebut it has been accepted the dominant and minority languages; In government legislation or policy: as a truelanguage. Uganda:The Ugandan Constitution was Australia, Belarus, Canada, Colombia, United States: The Americans with the first in the world to recognize sign Czech Republic, Denmark, Ecuador, Disabilities Act (ADA) acceptsAmerican language as an official language (see p. Finland,France,Iceland,Lithuania,Nor­ Sign Language (ASL) for accessibility 10). This Constitution was enacted in way, Peru, Poland, Russian Federation, reasons. In this sense,ASL is a protected 1995and clearlypromotes thedevelop­ Sweden, Switzerland, Ukraine, United language. ment of sign language for Deaf people. States of America, Uruguay,Zimbabwe, Slovak Republic: The Slovakian law is Colombia: The Colombian law has 14 and some German states.
    [Show full text]
  • Interpretation of Swedish Sign Language Using Convolutional Neural Networks and Transfer Learning
    DEGREE PROJECT IN INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY, FIRST CYCLE, 15 CREDITS STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN 2020 Interpretation of Swedish Sign Language using Convolutional Neural Networks and Transfer Learning Gustaf Halvardsson & Johanna Peterson KTH ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING AND COMPUTER SCIENCE Authors Gustaf Halvardsson & Johanna Peterson [email protected] & [email protected] The School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science KTH Royal Institute of Technology Place for Project KTH Royal Institute of Technology & Prevas AB Stockholm, Sweden Examiner Benoit Baudry - KTH Royal Institute of Technology Supervisors César Soto Valero - KTH Royal Institute of Technology Maria Månsson - Prevas AB ii Abstract The automatic interpretation of signs of a sign language involves image recognition. An appropriate approach for this task is to use Deep Learning, and in particular, Convolutional Neural Networks. This method typically needs large amounts of data to be able to perform well. Transfer learning could be a feasible approach to achieve high accuracy despite using a small data set. The hypothesis of this thesis is to test if transfer learning works well to interpret the hand alphabet of the Swedish Sign Language. The goal of the project is to implement a model that can interpret signs, as well as to build a user-friendly web application for this purpose. The final testing accuracy of the model is 85%. Since this accuracy is comparable to those received in other studies, the project’s hypothesis is shown to be supported. The final network is based on the pre-trained model InceptionV3 with five frozen layers, and the optimization algorithm mini-batch gradient descent with a batch size of 32, and a step-size factor of 1.2.
    [Show full text]
  • Finnish Sign Language [Fse] (A Language of Finland)
    “Finnish Sign Language [fse] (A language of Finland) • Alternate Names: FinSL, Suomalainen viittomakieli, SVK, Viittomakieli • Population: 5,000 (2006 Institute for the Languages of Finland–KOTUS). 5,000 deaf and 10,000 hearing signers (2006 Institute for the Languages of Finland–KOTUS). 5,000 deaf signers (2014 EUD). 26,500 (2014 IMB). • Location: Scattered • Language Status: 5 (Developing). Recognized language (2011, No. 61, Institute for sign language status). • Dialects: 2 major dialects from the Finnish (17 schools) and Swedish (1 school) communities. Signed Finnish, used by some teachers of the deaf, is distinct. Developed originally out of Swedish Sign Language [swl], but now distinct. Closely-related to Finland- Swedish Sign Language (FinSSL) [fss], but FinSL users generally have difficulty understanding FinSSL unless FinSSL users adapt towards FinSL. Some borrowing from Finnish [fin]. (Hoyer 2004.) Not intelligible with Danish Sign Language [dsl]. • Typology: One-handed fingerspelling. • Language Use: Used by deaf people whose families speak Finnish [fin] and who attended schools that used Finnish as the language of instruction (Hoyer 2004).The government pays interpreters to accompany the deaf to hospitals, college, church, etc. Interpreters required in court. • Language Development: Films. TV. Videos. Dictionary. Grammar. Bible portions: 1989. • Other Comments: Fingerspelling system similar to French Sign Language [fsl]. First deaf school founded 1850s. Government-paid interpreters. Interpreters required in court. Instruction for parents of deaf children. Many classes for hearing people. Christian (Protestant).” Lewis, M. Paul, Gary F. Simons, and Charles D. Fennig (eds.) 2015. Ethnologue: Languages of the World, Eighteenth edition. Dallas, Texas: SIL International. Online version: http://www.ethnologue.com.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 2 Sign Language Types
    Chapter 2 Sign language types This chapter defines four different sign language types, based on the infor- mation available in the respective sources. Before introducing the types of sign languages, I first report on the diachronic developments in the field of typological sign language research that gave rise to the distinction of the various sign language types. Sign language research started about five decades ago in the United States of America mainly due to the pioneering work of Stokoe (2005 [1960]), Klima and Bellugi (1979), and Poizner, Klima and Bellugi (1987) on American Sign Language (ASL). Gradually linguists in other countries, mainly in Europe, became interested in sign language research and started analyzing European sign languages e.g. British Sign Language (BSL), Swedish Sign Language (SSL), Sign Language of the Netherlands (NGT) and German Sign Language (DGS). Most of the in-depth linguistic descrip- tions have been based on Western sign languages. Therefore, it has long been assumed that some fundamental levels of linguistic structure, such as spatial morphology and syntax, operate identically in all sign languages. Recent studies, however, have discovered some important variations in spatial organization in some previously unknown sign languages (Washabaugh, 1986; Nyst, 2007; Marsaja, 2008; Padden, Meir, Aronoff, & Sandler, 2010). In the context of growing interest in non-Western sign languages towards the end of the 1990s and more recently, there have been efforts towards developing a typology of sign languages (Zeshan, 2004ab, 2008, 2011b; Schuit, Baker, & Pfau, 2011). Although it has been repeatedly emphasized in the literature that the sign language research still has too little data on sign languages other than those of national deaf communities, based in Western or Asian cultures (Zeshan, 2008).
    [Show full text]
  • Use of Nonmanuals by Adult L2 Signers in Swedish Sign Language – Annotating the Nonmanuals
    Use of Nonmanuals by Adult L2 Signers in Swedish Sign Language – Annotating the Nonmanuals Krister Schönström, Johanna Mesch Department of Linguistics, Stockholm University SE-106 91 Stockholm, Sweden E-mail: [email protected], [email protected] Abstract Nonmanuals serve as important grammatical markers for different syntactic constructions, e.g. marking clause types. To account for the acquisition of syntax by L2 SSL learners, therefore, we need to have the ability to annotate and analyze nonmanual signals. Despite their significance, however, these signals have yet to be the topic of research in the area of SSL as an L2. In this paper, we will provide suggestions for annotating the nonmanuals in L2 SSL learners. Data is based on a new SSL as L2 corpus from our ongoing project entitled “L2 Corpus in Swedish Sign Language.” In this paper, the combination of our work in grammatical analysis and in the creation of annotating standards for L2 nonmanuals, as well as preliminary results from the project, will be presented. Keywords: Swedish Sign Language, L2 signers, nonmanuals 1. Introduction In SSL, nonmanuals serve as important grammatical 2. Building L2 Corpus in Swedish Sign markers for different constructions, in particular with Language respect to the syntax required to mark negation and The first part of the L2 corpus - dataset collections 1 and 2 distinguish between different clause types (e.g. - consists of video recordings from 18 (14 female and 4 wh-questions and relative clauses). General L2 theories, male) non-native signers, ranging from 18 to 40 years of such as Processability Theory (Pienemann, 1998), age (Table 1).
    [Show full text]
  • Sign Language and Reading Development in Deaf and Hard-Of-Hearing Children
    Signs for Developing Reading Sign Language and Reading Development in Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Children Emil Holmer Linköping Studies in Arts and Science No. 681 Studies from the Swedish Institute for Disability Research No. 79 Linköpings University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning Linköping 2016 Linköping Studies in Arts and Science No. 681 Studies from the Swedish Institute for Disability Research No. 79 At the Faculty of Arts and Sciences at Linköping University, research and doctoral studies are carried out within broad problem areas. Research is organized in interdisciplinary research environments and doctoral studies mainly in graduate schools. Jointly, they publish the series Linköping Studies in Arts and Science. This thesis comes from the Swedish Institute for Disability Research at the Department of Behavioural Sciences. Distributed by: The Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning Linköping University SE-581 83 Linköping Emil Holmer Signs for Developing Reading Sign Language and Reading Development in Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Children Upplaga 1:1 ISBN 978-91-7685-767-0 ISSN 0282-9800 ISSN 1650-1128 © Emil Holmer Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, 2016 Cover illustration: Emma Stråle Printed by: LiU-tryck, Linköping 2016 Abstract Reading development is supported by strong language skills, not least in deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) children. Regional Special Needs Schools (RSNS) in Sweden have a bilingual curriculum, that is, DHH pupils at these schools learn Swedish Sign Language and written and/or spoken Swedish. The work in the present thesis investigates reading development in DHH children who attend these schools and who are learning to read.
    [Show full text]
  • Buttering Their Bread on Both Sides?
    Buttering their bread on both sides? The recognition of sign languages and the aspirations of deaf communities Maartje De Meulder and Joseph J. Murray University of Namur / Gallaudet University In the past two decades, a wave of campaigns to recognise sign languages have taken place in numerous countries. These campaigns sought official recognition of national sign languages, with the aim of enhancing signers’ social mobility and protecting the vitality of sign languages. These activities differ from a long his- tory of sign language planning from a ‘language as a problem’ approach largely used by educators and policymakers to date. However, the instrumental rights and social mobility obtained as a result have thus far been limited with educa- tional linguistic and language acquisition rights especially lacking. This article identifies two reasons for this situation. First, a view of Sign Language Peoples (SLPs) from a medical perspective has led to confusion about the meaning of linguistic rights for them and led governments to treat sign language planning differently than that for spoken languages. Furthermore, SLPs political participa- tion is hindered by recognition being offered by governments without substantial commitments to financial resources, changes in government practices or greater inclusion of sign languages in public life. One exception to this trend are sign language planning bodies, but even these face challenges in the implementation phase. Going forward, we argue that sign language recognition legislation should centre on deaf communities’ concerns regarding sign language vitality. In addi- tion to a need to ensure acquisition for deaf signers, we contend that while the expansion of hearing (and deaf) new signers can be interpreted in terms of lan- guage endangerment it can also be seen as strengthening sign languages’ vitality.
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparative Analysis of the Status of Sign Languages in Europe
    Report A comparative analysis of the status of sign languages in Europe ©Nina Timmermans, consultant Strasbourg, France December 2003 Table of contents Executive summary ………………………………………………………………………... 1 Chapter 1 Introduction ………………………………………………………………… 4 Chapter 2 European Union ……………………………………………………………. 5 2.1 European Parliament Resolution on Sign Languages for Deaf People (1988). 5 2.2 European Parliament Resolution on Sign Languages (1998) ……………….. 6 2.3 European Commission Action Plan promoting language learning and linguistic diversity (2003) …………………………………………………… 6 2.4 European Parliament Report on the position of regional and minority languages in the European Union (2003) ……………………………………. 7 2.5 Council and representatives of the governments of the member states Resolution on equality of opportunity for people with disabilities (1996) ….. 8 2.6 Council Resolution on equal opportunities for pupils and students with disabilities in education and training (2003) ………………………………… 9 2.7 EU funded project in Finland: virtual study and career counselling centre in sign language .……………………………………………………………… 10 Chapter 3 Council of Europe ………………………………………………………… 11 3.1 Introduction ………………………………………………………………… 11 3.2 The European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (1992) ………. 12 3.3 Flensburg Recommendations on the Implementation of Policy Measures for Regional or Minority Languages (2000) …………………………………… 13 3.4 Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1492 (2001) on the rights of national minorities …………………………………………………………. 13 3.5 Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights report on protection of sign languages in the member states of the Council of Europe (2003) ……….… 15 3.6 Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1598 (2003) on the protection of sign languages in the member states of the Council of Europe ………….… 15 Chapter 4 Constitution and legislation ………………………………..…………….. 17 4.1 Introduction ………………………………………………………..….….… 17 4.2 Constitutional recognition of sign language ……………………...……..….
    [Show full text]
  • The Kata Kolok Pointing System: Morphemization and Syntactic Integration
    Topics in Cognitive Science 7 (2015) 150–168 Copyright © 2014 Cognitive Science Society, Inc. All rights reserved. ISSN:1756-8757 print / 1756-8765 online DOI: 10.1111/tops.12124 The Kata Kolok Pointing System: Morphemization and Syntactic Integration Connie de Vos Language & Cognition Department, Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics Received 28 February 2013; received in revised form 20 June 2014; accepted 8 August 2014 Abstract Signed utterances are densely packed with pointing signs, reaching a frequency of one in six signs in spontaneous conversations (de Vos, 2012; Johnston, 2013a; Morford & MacFarlane, 2003). These pointing signs attain a wide range of functions and are formally highly diversified. Based on corpus analysis of spontaneous pointing signs in Kata Kolok, a rural signing variety of Bali, this paper argues that the full meaning potentials of pointing signs come about through the integration of a varied set of linguistic and extralinguistic cues. Taking this hybrid nature of point- ing phenomena into account, it is argued that pointing signs may become an intrinsic aspect of sign language grammars through two mechanisms: morphemization and syntactic integration. Although not entailed in this research, this approach could implicate that some highly systema- tized pointing systems of speaking communities may to a degree be grammatical as well. Keywords: Grammaticalization; Deixis; Gesture; Rural sign language; Language emergence; Sign language typology 1. Introduction Philosophers, linguists, psychologists, and other students of the human mind have had an interest in pointing for almost a century. Pointing has been understood as the founda- tion of human social cognition (Tomasello, 2006), a primordial form of language (Kita, 2003), and as a universal, prelinguistic form of communication in infants (Liszkowski, Brown, Callaghan, Takada, & de Vos, 2012).
    [Show full text]