DOCSLIB.ORG

Jordanian Sign Language

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Jordanian Sign Language JordanianSignLanguage: Aspectsofgrammarfroma cross-linguisticperspective Publishedby LOT phone:+31302536006 Janskerkhof13 fax:+31302536406 3512BLUtrecht e-mail:[email protected] TheNetherlands http://www.lotschool.nl Coverillustration:PhotographoftheMonasteryinPetrawithLIUsignfor Jordan Dutch title: Jordaanse Gebarentaal: Grammaticale aspecten vanuit een taalvergelijkendperspectief ISBN978-90-78328-67-4 NUR616 Copyright©2008:BernadetHendriks.Allrightsreserved. JordanianSignLanguage: Aspectsofgrammarfroma cross-linguisticperspective ACADEMISCHPROEFSCHRIFT terverkrijgingvandegraadvandoctor aandeUniversiteitvanAmsterdam opgezagvandeRectorMagnificus prof.dr.D.C.vandenBoom tenoverstaanvaneendoorhetcollegevoorpromoties ingesteldecommissie, inhetopenbaarteverdedigenindeAgnietenkapel opdonderdag30oktober2008,te14:00uur door HerminaBerndinaHendriks geborenteSoest Promotiecommissie: Promotor: Prof.Dr.A.E.Baker Co-promotor: Dr.R.Pfau Overigeleden: prof.dr.U.Zeshan dr.M.Steinbach prof.dr.M.A.Woidich prof.dr.J.F.Quer dr.V.A.S.Nyst FaculteitderGeesteswetenschappen Tableofcontents Acknowledgements Chapter1:Introduction .............................................................................. 1 1.1ThesociolinguisticsituationoftheJordanianDeafcommunity.......... 2 1.1.1IntroducingJordan....................................................................... 2 1.1.2CulturalandreligiousattitudestowardsdisabilityinJordan ..... 4 1.1.3DeafnessinJordan....................................................................... 6 1.1.4EducationfortheDeafinJordan................................................. 9 1.2ThestatusofLIU ............................................................................... 14 1.2.1InfluencesfromArabicandArabgesturesonLIU..................... 14 1.2.2SociolinguisticattitudesofDeafpeopletowardsLIU................ 17 1.3DataandMethodology....................................................................... 19 1.4Glossesandtypologicalconventions................................................. 21 1.5Aimandoutlineofthebook .............................................................. 23 Chapter2:SignlanguagevarietiesinJordanandtheMiddleEast...... 25 2.1ThehistoryofsignlanguageintheMiddleEast ............................... 25 2.2Lexicalcomparisons:Dataandmethodology.................................... 27 2.2.1Datacollection ........................................................................... 27 2.2.2Thewordlist................................................................................ 28 2.2.3Dataanalysis.............................................................................. 31 2.3Resultsandinterpretationoflexicalcomparisons ............................. 34 2.3.1Results ........................................................................................ 34 2.3.2Interpretationofresults.............................................................. 36 2.4Conclusion ......................................................................................... 37 Chapter3:BriefoutlineofLIUgrammar ............................................... 39 3.1Phonology .......................................................................................... 39 3.1.1Handshapes ................................................................................ 39 3.1.2Mouthings................................................................................... 42 3.2LexicalsignsandmorphologicalprocessesinLIU ........................... 44 3.2.1Iconicityandarbitrariness ......................................................... 44 3.2.2Morphologicalrelationsinthelexicon:comparingLIUand Arabic ......................................................................................... 46 3.2.3SequentialandSimultaneousMorphology................................. 52 3.3Usingthesigningspace ..................................................................... 58 3.3.1Agreementverbs......................................................................... 59 3.3.2Classifiers................................................................................... 61 3.4Wordorder......................................................................................... 63 3.4.1BasicwordorderpatternsinLIU .............................................. 63 3.4.2Wordorderwithpronouns ......................................................... 66 3.4.3Wordorderwithinnounphrases................................................ 69 3.5Non-manualaspectsofgrammar ....................................................... 71 3.5.1Non-manualadverbialmarking ................................................. 72 3.5.2Sentencetypes............................................................................. 73 3.6Summary............................................................................................ 74 Chapter4:Negation................................................................................... 77 4.1Introduction........................................................................................ 77 4.2Dataandmethodology ....................................................................... 77 4.3Manualnegation ................................................................................ 78 4.3.1Manualnegativesigns:negativeinterjectionsandclause negators ...................................................................................... 78 4.3.2Negativemorphology.................................................................. 84 4.4Non-manualsinnegation .......................................................... …….88 4.4.1Backwardhead-tilt ..................................................................... 89 4.4.2Headshake,head-turn,andnegativefacialexpressions ............ 90 4.4.3Forwardhead-tilt ....................................................................... 96 4.5Negativeconcord ............................................................................... 97 4.6Conclusion:Cross-linguisticvariation............................................... 99 Chapter5:Possession .............................................................................. 101 5.1Introduction...................................................................................... 101 5.2DataandMethodology..................................................................... 102 5.3Attributivepossessiveconstructions................................................ 103 5.3.1Theemphatic/possessivepronounself...................................... 104 5.3.2Attributivepossessiveconstructionswithpronominal possessors ................................................................................ 105 5.3.3Attributivepossessiveconstructionswithnominalpossessors. 110 5.4Predicativepossessiveconstructions ............................................... 114 5.4.1‘Belong’constructions.............................................................. 114 5.4.2‘Have’constructions ................................................................ 118 5.5Conclusion ....................................................................................... 127 Chapter6:Simultaneoususeofthetwohands...................................... 131 6.1Introduction...................................................................................... 131 6.2Dataandmethodology ..................................................................... 132 6.3Simultaneityinsignlanguages:formsandfunctions ...................... 133 6.4SimultaneityinLIU:phonologicalrestrictions................................ 138 6.5SimultaneityinclassifierconstructionsinLIU................................ 141 6.6‘Buoys’inLIU................................................................................. 145 6.6.1Simultaneityinvolvingpronouns .............................................. 146 6.6.2Numeralsinsimultaneousconstructions.................................. 148 6.6.3Perseverations.......................................................................... 152 6.7Functionsofdominancereversal ..................................................... 154 6.8Theinteractionofsimultaneityanddominancereversals................ 158 6.9Conclusion ....................................................................................... 161 Chapter7:Perspectiveinnarrativediscourse....................................... 163 7.1Introduction...................................................................................... 163 7.2Dataandmethodology ..................................................................... 164 7.3Typesofperspectiveinsignlanguagenarratives ............................ 165 7.3.1Spatialwaystosignalperspectiveinevents............................. 166 7.3.2Non-spatialwaystosignalperspective .................................... 169 7.4Non-spatialwaystoexpresscharacterperspectiveinLIU ................ 171 7.4.1Bodyshift.................................................................................. 171 7.4.2Lexicalintroductionofreferents .............................................. 173 7.4.3Non-manualmarkersofperspective......................................... 175 7.4.4SummaryofLIUdataandcross-linguisticcomparisons ......... 177 7.5Introducingreferentsandcreatingspatialset-ups............................ 178 7.5.1Indexicalpointinginnarratorperspective............................... 179 7.5.2Introducingreferentsusingverbs............................................. 181 7.5.3Creatingspatiallay-outsincharacterperspective
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]
  • Download Full Issue In
    Theory and Practice in Language Studies ISSN 1799-2591 Volume 9, Number 11, November 2019 Contents REGULAR PAPERS Adoption of Electronic Techniques in Teaching English-Yoruba Bilingual Youths the Semantic 1369 Expansion and Etymology of Yoruba Words and Statements B T Opoola and A F, Opoola EFL Instructors’ Performance Evaluation at University Level: Prescriptive and Collaborative 1379 Approaches Thaer Issa Tawalbeh Lexico-grammatical Analysis of Native and Non-native Abstracts Based on Halliday’s SFL Model 1388 Massome Raeisi, Hossein Vahid Dastjerdi, and Mina Raeisi A Corpus-based 3M Approach to the Teaching of English Unaccusative Verbs 1396 Junhua Mo A Study on Object-oriented Adverbials in Mandarin from a Cognitive Perspective 1403 Linze Li Integrating Multiple Intelligences in the EFL Syllabus: Content Analysis 1410 Salameh S. Mahmoud and Mamoon M. Alaraj A Spatial Analysis of Isabel Archer in The Portrait of a Lady 1418 Chenying Bai Is the Spreading of Internet Neologisms Netizen-Driven or Meme-driven? Diachronic and Synchronic 1424 Study of Chinese Internet Neologism Tuyang Tusen Po Zongwei Song Recreating the Image of a “Chaste Wife”: Transitivity in Two Translations of Chinese Ancient Poem 1433 Jie Fu Yin Shilong Tao Evokers of the Divine Message: Mysticism of American Transcendentalism in Emerson’s “Nature” 1442 and the Mystic Thought in Rumi’s Masnavi Amirali Ansari and Hossein Jahantigh 1449 Huaiyu Mu Analysis on Linguistic Art of Broadcasting in the New Media Era 1454 Chunli Wang A Critical Evaluation of Krashen’s Monitor Model 1459 Wen Lai and Lifang Wei ISSN 1799-2591 Theory and Practice in Language Studies, Vol.
    [Show full text]
  • Learn to Use Signpuddle 1.0 on The
    Some Dictionaries: ™ SignPuddle Online American Sign Language www.SignBank.org/signpuddle Arabic Sign Languages Brazilian Sign Language British Sign Language Colombian Sign Language Czech Sign Language Danish Sign Language Finnish Sign Language Flemish Sign Language French Sign Language German Sign Language Greek Sign Language International Sign Languages Irish Sign Language Italian Sign Language Japanese Sign Language Maltese Sign Language Come Splash in a Sign Puddle! Netherlands Sign Language 1. FREE on the web! Nicaraguan Sign Language Northern Ireland Sign Language 2. Search Sign Language Dictionaries. Norwegian Sign Language 3. Create your own signs and add them. Polish Sign Language 4. Send email in SignWriting®. Quebec Sign Language 5. Translate words to SignWriting. Spanish Sign Language 6. Create documents with SignWriting. Swiss Sign Languages 7. Have fun sharing signs on the internet! Taiwan Sign Language ...and others... http://www.SignBank.org/signpuddle Search by Words 1. Click on the icon: Search by Words 2. In the Search field: Type a word or a letter. 3. Press the Search button. 4. All the signs that use that word will list for you in SignWriting. 5. You can then copy the sign, or drag and drop it, into other documents. http://www.SignBank.org/signpuddle Search by Signs 1. Click on the icon: Search by Signs 2. In the Search field: Type a word or a letter. 3. Press the Search button. 4. The signs will list in small size. 5. Click on the small sign you want, and a larger version will appear... http://www.SignBank.org/signpuddle Search by Symbols 1.
    [Show full text]
  • A Study of Lexical Variation, Comprehension and Language
    A Study of Lexical Variation, Comprehension and Language Attitudes in Deaf Users of Chinese Sign Language (CSL) from Beijing and Shanghai Yunyi Ma UCL Ph.D. in Psychology and Language Science I, Yunyi Ma, confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. The ethics for this project have been approved by UCL’s Ethics Committee (Project ID Number: EPI201503). Signed: ii Abstract Regional variation between the Beijing and Shanghai varieties, particularly at the lexical level, has been observed by sign language researchers in China (Fischer & Gong, 2010; Shen, 2008; Yau, 1977). However, few investigations into the variation in Chinese Sign Language (CSL) from a sociolinguistic perspective have previously been undertaken. The current study is the first to systematically study sociolinguistic variation in CSL signers’ production and comprehension of lexical signs as well as their language attitudes. This thesis consists of three studies. The first study investigates the lexical variation between Beijing and Shanghai varieties. Results of analyses show that age, region and semantic category are the factors influencing lexical variation in Beijing and Shanghai signs. To further explore the findings of lexical variation, a lexical recognition task was undertaken with Beijing and Shanghai signers in a second study looking at mutual comprehension of lexical signs used in Beijing and Shanghai varieties. The results demonstrate that Beijing participants were able to understand more Shanghai signs than Shanghai participants could understand Beijing signs. Historical contact is proposed in the study as a possible major cause for the asymmetrical intelligibility between the two varieties.
    [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]
  • Assessing the Bimodal Bilingual Language Skills of Young Deaf Children
    ANZCED/APCD Conference CHRISTCHURCH, NZ 7-10 July 2016 Assessing the bimodal bilingual language skills of young deaf children Elizabeth Levesque PhD What we’ll talk about today Bilingual First Language Acquisition Bimodal bilingualism Bimodal bilingual assessment Measuring parental input Assessment tools Bilingual First Language Acquisition Bilingual literature generally refers to children’s acquisition of two languages as simultaneous or sequential bilingualism (McLaughlin, 1978) Simultaneous: occurring when a child is exposed to both languages within the first three years of life (not be confused with simultaneous communication: speaking and signing at the same time) Sequential: occurs when the second language is acquired after the child’s first three years of life Routes to bilingualism for young children One parent-one language Mixed language use by each person One language used at home, the other at school Designated times, e.g. signing at bath and bed time Language mixing, blending (Lanza, 1992; Vihman & McLaughlin, 1982) Bimodal bilingualism Refers to the use of two language modalities: Vocal: speech Visual-gestural: sign, gesture, non-manual features (Emmorey, Borinstein, & Thompson, 2005) Equal proficiency in both languages across a range of contexts is uncommon Balanced bilingualism: attainment of reasonable competence in both languages to support effective communication with a range of interlocutors (Genesee & Nicoladis, 2006; Grosjean, 2008; Hakuta, 1990) Dispelling the myths….. Infants’ first signs are acquired earlier than first words No significant difference in the emergence of first signs and words - developmental milestones are met within similar timeframes (Johnston & Schembri, 2007) Slight sign language advantage at the one-word stage, perhaps due to features being more visible and contrastive than speech (Meier & Newport,1990) Another myth….
    [Show full text]
  • Sign Language Acquisition and Linguistic Theory: Contributions of Brazilian and North-American Researches
    REVISTA DA ABRALIN Sign language acquisition and linguistic theory: contributions of Brazilian and North-American researches The conference, given by Prof. Dr. Diane Lillo-Martin (University of Con- necticut), proposed to present the panorama of research on sign language (SL) acquisition, carried out in cooperation between North American and Brazilian researchers. The main objective was to reflect on how investiga- tions in the field of SL acquisition show details concerning linguistic uni- versals, in order to contribute to hypotheses and theories that are tradi- tionally followed in previous studies about oral languages (OL). Topics of interest to the areas of psycholinguistics and studies in language acquisi- tion were ad-dressed, such as structural issues of SL – specifically about American Sign Language (ASL) and Brazilian Sign Language (Libras); effects of visual-spatial modality, the specificity of the process of language acqui- sition by bimodal bilingual deaf children and the implications of linguistic deprivation. A conferência ministrada pela Prof.ª Dr.ª Diane Lillo-Martin (University of Connecticut) propôs-se à apresentação do panorama de pesquisas sobre aquisição de línguas de sinais (doravante LS), realizadas em cooperação entre pesquisadores norte-americanos e brasileiros. Teve como intuito REVISTA DA ABRALIN maior a reflexão de como investigações no domínio da aquisição de LS evi- denciam pormenores atrelados a universais linguísticos, de modo a contri- buir a hipóteses e teorias já difundidas em estudos anteriores com línguas orais (doravante LO). Em vista disso, abordaram-se tópicos de interesse às áreas de psicolinguística e estudos em aquisição de línguas, tais como questões estruturais das LS, especificamente de American Sign Language (ASL) e Língua Brasileira de Sinais (Libras); efeitos de modalidade visuo-es- pacial, especificidade do processo de aquisição de linguagem por crianças surdas bilíngues bimodais e implicaturas de privação linguística.
    [Show full text]
  • Critical Inquiry in Language Studies New Directions in ASL-English
    This article was downloaded by: [Gallaudet University], [Adam Stone] On: 26 August 2014, At: 09:23 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Critical Inquiry in Language Studies Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hcil20 New Directions in ASL-English Bilingual Ebooks Adam Stonea a Gallaudet University Published online: 22 Aug 2014. To cite this article: Adam Stone (2014) New Directions in ASL-English Bilingual Ebooks, Critical Inquiry in Language Studies, 11:3, 186-206, DOI: 10.1080/15427587.2014.936242 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15427587.2014.936242 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.
    [Show full text]
  • An Evaluation of Real-Time Requirements for Automatic Sign Language Recognition Using Anns and Hmms - the LIBRAS Use Case
    14 SBC Journal on 3D Interactive Systems, volume 4, number 1, 2013 An evaluation of real-time requirements for automatic sign language recognition using ANNs and HMMs - The LIBRAS use case Mauro dos Santos Anjo, Ednaldo Brigante Pizzolato, Sebastian Feuerstack Computer Science and Engineering Department Universidade Federal de Sao˜ Carlos - UFSCar Sao˜ Carlos - SP (Brazil) Emails: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Abstract—Sign languages are the natural way Deafs use to hands in front of the body with or without movements communicate with other people. They have their own formal and with or without touching other body’s parts. Besides semantic definitions and syntactic rules and are composed by all the hand and face movements, it is also important to a large set of gestures involving hands and head. Automatic recognition of sign languages (ARSL) tries to recognize the notice that face expressions contribute to the meaning signs and translate them into a written language. ARSL is of the communication. They may represent, for instance, a challenging task as it involves background segmentation, an exclamation or interrogation mark. As sign languages hands and head posture modeling, recognition and tracking, are very different from spoken languages and it is hard temporal analysis and syntactic and semantic interpretation. to learn them, it is natural, therefore, to expect computer Moreover, when real-time requirements are considered, this task becomes even more challenging. In this paper, we systems to capture gestures to understand what someone present a study of real time requirements of automatic sign is feeling or trying to communicate with a specific sign language recognition of small sets of static and dynamic language in order to promote social inclusion.
    [Show full text]
  • A Lexical Comparison of South African Sign Language and Potential Lexifier Languages
    A lexical comparison of South African Sign Language and potential lexifier languages by Andries van Niekerk Thesis presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree Masters in General Linguistics at the University of Stellenbosch Supervisors: Dr Kate Huddlestone & Prof Anne Baker Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences Department of General Linguistics March, 2020 Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za DECLARATION By submitting this thesis electronically, I declare that the entirety of the work contained therein is my own, original work, that I am the sole author thereof (save to the extent explicitly otherwise stated), that reproduction and publication thereof by Stellenbosch University will not infringe any third party rights and that I have not previously in its entirety or in part submitted it for obtaining any qualification. Andries van Niekerk March 2020 Copyright © 2020 University of Stellenbosch All rights reserved 1 Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za ABSTRACT South Africa’s history of segregation was a large contributing factor for lexical variation in South African Sign Language (SASL) to come about. Foreign sign languages certainly had a presence in the history of deaf education; however, the degree of influence foreign sign languages has on SASL today is what this study has aimed to determine. There have been very limited studies on the presence of loan signs in SASL and none have included extensive variation. This study investigates signs from 20 different schools for the deaf and compares them with signs from six other sign languages and the Paget Gorman Sign System (PGSS). A list of lemmas was created that included the commonly used list of lemmas from Woodward (2003).
    [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]
  • UC Merced Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society
    UC Merced Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society Title Event visibility in sign language motion: Evidence from Austrian Sign Language (ÖGS) Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/67r14298 Journal Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 43(43) ISSN 1069-7977 Authors Krebs, Julia Strutzenberger, Gerda Schwameder, Hermann et al. Publication Date 2021 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California Event visibility in sign language motion: Evidence from Austrian Sign Language Julia Krebs Research group Neurobiology of Language, Department of Linguistics, University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria Centre for Cognitive Neuroscience (CCNS), University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria Gerda Strutzenberger Department of Sport Science and Kinesiology, University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria Hermann Schwameder Department of Sport Science and Kinesiology, University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria Prof. Dr. Ronnie B Wilbur Department of Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, United States Linguistics Program, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, United States Dr. Evie Malaia Department of Communicative Disorders, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL, United States Prof. Dr. Dietmar Roehm Research group Neurobiology of Language, Department of Linguistics, University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria Centre for Cognitive Neuroscience (CCNS), University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria Abstract Segmentation Theory (Zacks & Swallow, 2007; Zacks & Tversky, 2001). Additionally, there is a correlation between This is the first kinematic investigation of articulator motion in Austrian Sign Language, which connects kinesiology of what one sees – the visual features of events - and how one sign production and linguistic markers of Aktionsart in the conceptualizes, or interprets the scene.
    [Show full text]