DOCSLIB.ORG

Sign Language in Indo-Pakistan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sign Language in Indo-Pakistan SIGN LANGUAGE IN INDO-PAKISTAN SIGN LANGUAGE IN INDO-PAKISTAN A DESCRIPTION OF A SIGNED LANGUAGE ULRIKE ZESHAN La Trobe University JOHN BENJAMINS PUBLISHING COMPANY PHILADELPHIA/AMSTERDAM TM The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of Ameri- 8 can National Standard for Information Sciences — Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Zeshan, Ulrike. Sign language in Indo-Pakistan : a description of a signed language / Ulrike Zeshan. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Indopakistan Sign Language. 2. Deaf--India. 3. Deaf--Pakistan. I. Title. HV2469.I53 Z47 2000 419--dc21 00-029783 ISBN 90 272 2563 X (Eur.) / 1 55619 857 4 (US) (Hb; alk. paper) CIP © 2000 – John Benjamins B.V. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm, or any other means, without written permission from the publisher. John Benjamins Publishing Co. • P.O.Box 75577 • 1070 AN Amsterdam • The Netherlands John Benjamins North America • P.O.Box 27519 • Philadelphia PA 19118-0519 • USA To the deaf communities in India and Pakistan Table of Contents Preface ............................................... xi C 1 Introduction .......................................... 1 1.1 Indopakistan Sign Language (IPSL) ....................... 1 1.2 Data ............................................. 8 1.3 Transcription Conventions .............................. 12 C 2 The Signs ............................................ 17 2.1 Handshapes ........................................ 17 2.1.1 Basic Handshapes ............................... 18 2.1.2 Central Handshapes ............................. 21 2.1.3 Marginal Handshapes ............................ 23 2.1.4 Problematic Cases ............................... 24 2.1.5 Meaningful Handshapes .......................... 26 2.2 Sign Families ....................................... 28 2.2.1 Opposites .................................... 28 2.2.2 Signs Related by Common Handshape ................ 29 2.2.3 Signs Related by Common Place of Articulation ......... 30 2.2.4 Componential Signs ............................. 33 2.3 Extraneous Influences on IPSL .......................... 35 2.3.1 IPSL and Hindi/Urdu ............................ 35 2.3.2 IPSL and English ............................... 36 2.3.3 IPSL and Gestures .............................. 38 2.3.4 IPSL and Other Sign Languages ..................... 40 2.4 Nonmanual Components of Signs ........................ 42 2.4.1 Mouth Pattern, Mouth Gesture and Facial Expression ..... 42 2.4.2 Body Posture, Head Position and Eye Gaze ............ 44 2.4.3 A Nonmanual Parameter? ......................... 45 viii TABLE OF CONTENTS 2.5 Iconicity .......................................... 50 2.5.1 The Role of Iconicity in Sign Languages ............... 50 2.5.2 Iconic signs ................................... 51 2.5.3 Pantomimic Modification .......................... 53 C 3 Morphology .......................................... 55 3.1 Word Classes ....................................... 55 3.2 Directionality ....................................... 57 3.3 Aspects ........................................... 62 3.3.1 Completive Aspect .............................. 62 3.3.2 Aspectual Modulation ............................ 65 3.4 Complex Signs ...................................... 72 3.4.1 Numeral Incorporation ........................... 73 3.4.2 LENA: ‘take’ and DENA: ‘give’ ....................... 75 3.4.3 Fusion ....................................... 79 3.4.4 Compounds ................................... 82 C 4 Syntax ............................................... 87 4.1 Word Order ........................................ 88 4.1.1 Predicates and Participants ......................... 88 4.1.2 Temporal Expressions ............................ 91 4.1.3 Function Signs ................................. 92 4.1.4 Modifying Constructions .......................... 97 4.2 Localization ........................................ 99 4.2.1 Loci ......................................... 99 4.2.2 Directionality .................................. 102 4.2.3 Positioning .................................... 103 4.2.4 Index ........................................ 105 4.2.5 Eye Gaze ..................................... 107 4.2.6 Role Play ..................................... 108 4.2.7 Inconsistencies ................................. 109 4.3 Nonmanual Syntax ................................... 110 4.3.1 Affirmation and Negation ......................... 111 4.3.2 Interrogatives .................................. 115 4.3.3 Conditional Clauses .............................. 117 TABLE OF CONTENTS ix C 5 Discourse Strategies .................................... 121 5.1 Contrasts .......................................... 121 5.2 Use of the Left Hand ................................. 123 5.3 Perspective ......................................... 126 Bibliography .......................................... 131 Appendix A ........................................... 137 Appendix B ........................................... 147 Index ............................................... 175 Preface This book could not have been completed without the help of many dedicated persons to whom I wish to express my gratitude here. My thanks go to the teachers of the ABSA-School, the members of the Karachi Deaf Welfare Association and their president Mansoor Ahmed Bilal, and all the others who have voluntarily served as informants. Their frank and helpful attitude has made it possible for me to gather a rich corpus of data that shows many facets of the language. Considering that the conditions of research work in Karachi have been difficult at times, their cooperation is especially appreciated. The same applies to my deaf informants in New Delhi and the various institutions for the deaf that cooperated with me: the All India Federation of the Deaf, the Delhi Association of the Deaf, the Delhi Federation of Deaf Women, the Delhi Deaf Friendship Club and, above all, the Multipurpose Training Centre for the Deaf. Most of all I would like to thank my bilingual informant Ms. Tayyabah Mansoor, who put a lot of time and effort into helping me to produce the first transcriptions of the sign language texts. These later became the basis for further analysis. Her unexpectedly deep understanding of linguistic matters greatly facilitated the initial stages of work on the text corpus. Further thanks are due to the director of the ABSA-School in Karachi Mrs. Rukhsana Ahsan for providing me with the publications of the ABSA research group, to Ms. Qamar-un-Nisa Khan of the National Institute of Special Education (NISE) in Islamabad for a copy of the NISE’s 1991 dictio- nary and for information about the NISE’s activities, and to the director of the Department of Special Education at the University of Karachi Dr. Ismail Saad for the help and encouragement that the University provided during my research. Among those who have supported my research in India I would like to mention especially Dr. Onkar Sharma, Mr. Arun Rao and Mr. Arun Kanchan from Delhi, Mr. Samir Ray from Calcutta and Dr. Dilip Deshmukh from Ichalkaranji. Finally I would like to thank all those who led a helping hand to the practical realization of this research project such as video recordings, photo- graphs etc. I am especially grateful to my husband Hamid Mahmood Zeshan, who has been an able organizer and coordinator throughout the entire research xii PREFACE project both in Karachi and in New Delhi, and who has always supported me in every possible way. I hope that the results of my research will soon serve the interests of the deaf community all over Pakistan and India, and will become a step towards elevating the status of sign language in this region, so that government officials, schools for the deaf and the hearing population will recognize the real linguistic and social importance of the language. Many thanks in advance to all those who will help me with the realization of this project. This thesis was presented to the University of Cologne in 1996 and has been revised in the light of my latest research results, with a few errors corrected and a few additions made. More specifically, recent research that I have conducted in New Delhi indicates that what used to be called ‘Indian Sign Language’ is in fact the same language as ‘Pakistan Sign Language’, at least in the Delhi area and parts of Northern India. Therefore, the original title of the thesis has been changed from ‘Pakistan Sign Language’ to ‘Sign Language in Indopakistan’. Where applicable, I have noted differences between the data from Karachi and the data from Delhi. However, evaluation of the new data from Delhi is not complete yet, so that most of the examples of signed utterances are based on data from Karachi. Parts of this book have been published in its original German version (Zeshan 1997) and in an earlier English translation (Zeshan 1996). Presently, my research continues with a Ph.D. dissertation titled ‘Sign Languages of the Indian Subcontinent’ which is supervised by Prof. Hans-Jürgen Sasse from the Depart- ment of Linguistics of the University of Cologne, to whom I am indebted for his guidance and support. I also gratefully acknowledge research fellowships from the provincial government of Bavaria for completion of this thesis and the provincial government of Northrhine-Westphalia for the Ph.D. project. C 1 Introduction 1.1 Indopakistan Sign
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]
  • A Lexicostatistic Survey of the Signed Languages in Nepal
    DigitalResources Electronic Survey Report 2012-021 ® A Lexicostatistic Survey of the Signed Languages in Nepal Hope M. Hurlbut A Lexicostatistic Survey of the Signed Languages in Nepal Hope M. Hurlbut SIL International ® 2012 SIL Electronic Survey Report 2012-021, June 2012 © 2012 Hope M. Hurlbut and SIL International ® All rights reserved 2 Contents 0. Introduction 1.0 The Deaf 1.1 The deaf of Nepal 1.2 Deaf associations 1.3 History of deaf education in Nepal 1.4 Outside influences on Nepali Sign Language 2.0 The Purpose of the Survey 3.0 Research Questions 4.0 Approach 5.0 The survey trip 5.1 Kathmandu 5.2 Surkhet 5.3 Jumla 5.4 Pokhara 5.5 Ghandruk 5.6 Dharan 5.7 Rajbiraj 6.0 Methodology 7.0 Analysis and results 7.1 Analysis of the wordlists 7.2 Interpretation criteria 7.2.1 Results of the survey 7.2.2 Village signed languages 8.0 Conclusion Appendix Sample of Nepali Sign Language Wordlist (Pages 1–6) References 3 Abstract This report concerns a 2006 lexicostatistical survey of the signed languages of Nepal. Wordlists and stories were collected in several towns of Nepal from Deaf school leavers who were considered to be representative of the Nepali Deaf. In each city or town there was a school for the Deaf either run by the government or run by one of the Deaf Associations. The wordlists were transcribed by hand using the SignWriting orthography. Two other places were visited where it was learned that there were possibly unique sign languages, in Jumla District, and also in Ghandruk (a village in Kaski District).
    [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]
  • The 5 Parameters of ASL Before You Begin Sign Language Partner Activities, You Need to Learn the 5 Parameters of ASL
    The 5 Parameters of ASL Before you begin Sign Language Partner activities, you need to learn the 5 Parameters of ASL. You will use these parameters to describe new vocabulary words you will learn with your partner while completing Language Partner activities. Read and learn about the 5 Parameters below. DEFINITION In American Sign Language (ASL), we use the 5 Parameters of ASL to describe how a sign behaves within the signer’s space. The parameters are handshape, palm orientation, movement, location, and expression/non-manual signals. All five parameters must be performed correctly to sign the word accurately. Go to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrkGrIiAoNE for a signed definition of the 5 Parameters of ASL. Don’t forget to turn the captions on if you are a beginning ASL student. Note: The signer’s space spans the width of your elbows when your hands are on your hips to the length four inches above your head to four inches below your belly button. Imagine a rectangle drawn around the top half of your body. TYPES OF HANDSHAPES Handshapes consist of the manual alphabet and other variations of handshapes. Refer to the picture below. TYPES OF ORIENTATIONS Orientation refers to which direction your palm is facing for a particular sign. The different directions are listed below. 1. Palm facing out 2. Palm facing in 3. Palm is horizontal 4. Palm faces left/right 5. Palm toward palm 6. Palm up/down TYPES OF MOVEMENT A sign can display different kinds of movement that are named below. 1. In a circle 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Alignment Mouth Demonstrations in Sign Languages Donna Jo Napoli
    Mouth corners in sign languages Alignment mouth demonstrations in sign languages Donna Jo Napoli, Swarthmore College, [email protected] Corresponding Author Ronice Quadros, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, [email protected] Christian Rathmann, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, [email protected] 1 Mouth corners in sign languages Alignment mouth demonstrations in sign languages Abstract: Non-manual articulations in sign languages range from being semantically impoverished to semantically rich, and from being independent of manual articulations to coordinated with them. But, while this range has been well noted, certain non-manuals remain understudied. Of particular interest to us are non-manual articulations coordinated with manual articulations, which, when considered in conjunction with those manual articulations, are semantically rich. In which ways can such different articulators coordinate and what is the linguistic effect or purpose of such coordination? Of the non-manual articulators, the mouth is articulatorily the most versatile. We therefore examined mouth articulations in a single narrative told in the sign languages of America, Brazil, and Germany. We observed optional articulations of the corners of the lips that align with manual articulations spatially and temporally in classifier constructions. The lips, thus, enhance the message by giving redundant information, which should be particularly useful in narratives for children. Examination of a single children’s narrative told in these same three sign languages plus six other sign languages yielded examples of one type of these optional alignment articulations, confirming our expectations. Our findings are coherent with linguistic findings regarding phonological enhancement and overspecification. Keywords: sign languages, non-manual articulation, mouth articulation, hand-mouth coordination 2 Mouth corners in sign languages Alignment mouth demonstration articulations in sign languages 1.
    [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]
  • Building Rapport in American Sign Language.Pdf
    BUILDING RAPPORT IN… American Sign Language SMALL TALK/ ADMINISTRATION Hello Wave hello Nice to meet you NICE (place left hand with palm facing up and slide right hand across it) MEET (make two 1 handshapes and then touch them together so that thumbs are touching, like two people meeting) YOU (point out in front of you with index finger as if you were pointing to someone) My name is… MY (gesture to yourself by bringing an open palm to your chest). NAME (make H handshape with both hands; place left hand on top of right to form an X). Then, fingerspell your name. I am a genetic counselor I (point to your chest with your index finger) GENETIC (see below) COUNSEL (place your left hand in front of you with your palm facing down. Slide your right hand across your left hand from your thumb to your pinky starting with your fingers clenched together and opening up your fingers as your right hand slides across the left). Then, indicate “one who does” by placing your hands our in front of your chest facing each other and bringing your hands down in a swift motion. I know a little Sign I (point to your chest with your index finger). KNOW (tap bent handshape to temple). LITTLE Language (gesture a little bit by moving index finger and thumb together in a pinching motion). SIGN (make index finger handshapes and move them in alternating circles). LANGUAGE (touch L handshapes together at the thumbs and twist them as you pull hands away from each other).
    [Show full text]
  • Fingerspelling Detection in American Sign Language
    Fingerspelling Detection in American Sign Language Bowen Shi1, Diane Brentari2, Greg Shakhnarovich1, Karen Livescu1 1Toyota Technological Institute at Chicago, USA 2University of Chicago, USA {bshi,greg,klivescu}@ttic.edu [email protected] Figure 1: Fingerspelling detection and recognition in video of American Sign Language. The goal of detection is to find in- tervals corresponding to fingerspelling (here indicated by open/close parentheses), and the goal of recognition is to transcribe each of those intervals into letter sequences. Our focus in this paper is on detection that enables accurate recognition. In this example (with downsampled frames), the fingerspelled words are PIRATES and PATRICK, shown along with their canonical handshapes aligned roughly with the most-canonical corresponding frames. Non-fingerspelled signs are labeled with their glosses. The English translation is “Moving furtively, pirates steal the boy Patrick.” Abstract lated and do not appear in their canonical forms [22, 25]. In this paper, we focus on fingerspelling (Figure 1), a Fingerspelling, in which words are signed letter by let- component of sign language in which words are signed ter, is an important component of American Sign Language. letter by letter, with a distinct handshape or trajectory Most previous work on automatic fingerspelling recogni- corresponding to each letter in the alphabet of a writ- tion has assumed that the boundaries of fingerspelling re- ten language (e.g., the English alphabet for ASL finger- gions in signing videos are known beforehand. In this pa- spelling). Fingerspelling is used for multiple purposes, in- per, we consider the task of fingerspelling detection in raw, cluding for words that do not have their own signs (such as untrimmed sign language videos.
    [Show full text]
  • The French Belgian Sign Language Corpus a User-Friendly Searchable Online Corpus
    The French Belgian Sign Language Corpus A User-Friendly Searchable Online Corpus Laurence Meurant, Aurelie´ Sinte, Eric Bernagou FRS-FNRS, University of Namur Rue de Bruxelles, 61 - 5000 Namur - Belgium [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Abstract This paper presents the first large-scale corpus of French Belgian Sign Language (LSFB) available via an open access website (www.corpus-lsfb.be). Visitors can search within the data and the metadata. Various tools allow the users to find sign language video clips by searching through the annotations and the lexical database, and to filter the data by signer, by region, by task or by keyword. The website includes a lexicon linked to an online LSFB dictionary. Keywords: French Belgian Sign Language, searchable corpus, lexical database. 1. The LSFB corpus Pro HD 3 CCD cameras recorded the participants: one for 1.1. The project an upper body view of each informant (Cam 1 and 2 in Fig- ure 1), and one for a wide-shot of both of them (Cam 3 in In Brussels and Wallonia, i.e. the French-speaking part of Figure 1). Additionally, a Sony DV Handycam was used to Belgium, significant advances have recently been made record the moderator (Cam 4 in Figure 1). The positions of of the development of LSFB. It was officially recognised the participants and the cameras are illustrated in Figure 1. in 2003 by the Parliament of the Communaute´ franc¸aise de Belgique. Since 2000, a bilingual (LSFB-French) education programme has been developed in Namur that includes deaf pupils within ordinary classes (Ghesquiere` et al., 2015; Ghesquiere` et Meurant, 2016).
    [Show full text]
  • The Oxford Handbook of CHINESE LINGUISTICS
    The Oxford Handbook of CHINESE LINGUISTICS Edited by WILLIAM S-Y. WANG and CHAOFEN SUN Assisted by YACHING TSAI 1 3 Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford New York Auckland Cape Town Dar es Salaam Hong Kong Karachi Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Nairobi New Delhi Shanghai Taipei Toronto With offices in Argentina Austria Brazil Chile Czech Republic France Greece Guatemala Hungary Italy Japan Poland Portugal Singapore South Korea Switzerland Thailand Turkey Ukraine Vietnam Oxford is a registered trademark of Oxford University Press in the UK and certain other countries. Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press 198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016 © Oxford University Press 2015 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, by license, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reproduction rights organization. Inquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above. You must not circulate this work in any other form and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data The Oxford handbook of Chinese linguistics / Edited by William S-Y. Wang and Chaofen Sun. pages ; cm Includes bibliographical references and index.
    [Show full text]
  • 8. Classifiers
    158 II. Morphology 8. Classifiers 1. Introduction 2. Classifiers and classifier categories 3. Classifier verbs 4. Classifiers in signs other than classifier verbs 5. The acquisition of classifiers in sign languages 6. Classifiers in spoken and sign languages: a comparison 7. Conclusion 8. Literature Abstract Classifiers (currently also called ‘depicting handshapes’), are observed in almost all sign languages studied to date and form a well-researched topic in sign language linguistics. Yet, these elements are still subject to much debate with respect to a variety of matters. Several different categories of classifiers have been posited on the basis of their semantics and the linguistic context in which they occur. The function(s) of classifiers are not fully clear yet. Similarly, there are differing opinions regarding their structure and the structure of the signs in which they appear. Partly as a result of comparison to classifiers in spoken languages, the term ‘classifier’ itself is under debate. In contrast to these disagreements, most studies on the acquisition of classifier constructions seem to consent that these are difficult to master for Deaf children. This article presents and discusses all these issues from the viewpoint that classifiers are linguistic elements. 1. Introduction This chapter is about classifiers in sign languages and the structures in which they occur. Classifiers are reported to occur in almost all sign languages researched to date (a notable exception is Adamorobe Sign Language (AdaSL) as reported by Nyst (2007)). Classifiers are generally considered to be morphemes with a non-specific meaning, which are expressed by particular configurations of the manual articulator (or: hands) and which represent entities by denoting salient characteristics.
    [Show full text]
  • Negation in Kata Kolok Grammaticalization Throughout Three Generations of Signers
    UNIVERSITEIT VAN AMSTERDAM Graduate School for Humanities Negation in Kata Kolok Grammaticalization throughout three generations of signers Master’s Thesis Hannah Lutzenberger Student number: 10852875 Supervised by: Dr. Roland Pfau Dr. Vadim Kimmelman Dr. Connie de Vos Amsterdam 2017 Abstract (250 words) Although all natural languages have ways of expressing negation, the linguistic realization is subject to typological variation (Dahl 2010; Payne 1985). Signed languages combine manual signs and non-manual elements. This leads to an intriguing dichotomy: While non-manual marker(s) alone are sufficient for negating a proposition in some signed languages (non- manual dominant system), the use of a negative manual sign is required in others (manual dominant system) (Zeshan 2004, 2006). Kata Kolok (KK), a young signing variety used in a Balinese village with a high incidence of congenital deafness (de Vos 2012; Winata et al. 1995), had previously been classified as an extreme example of the latter type: the manual sign NEG functions as the main negator and a negative headshake remains largely unused (Marsaja 2008). Adopting a corpus-based approach, the present study reevaluates this claim. The analysis of intergenerational data of six deaf native KK signers from the KK Corpus (de Vos 2016) reveals that the classification of KK negation is not as straightforward as formerly suggested. Although KK signers make extensive use of NEG, a negative headshake is widespread as well. Furthermore, signers from different generations show disparate tendencies in the use of specific markers. Specifically, the involvement of the manual negator slightly increases over time, and the headshake begins to spread within the youngest generation of signers.
    [Show full text]