Point Buoys

Vogt-Svendsen, Marit; Bergman, Brita

doi:10.1075/cilt.281.10vog

Cited by 15 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition to ASL (Liddell, 2003), list buoys have been described for several signed languages, including Libras (Heitkoetter & Xavier, 2020; Leite, 2008); Danish Sign Language (Engberg-Pedersen, 1994); Finland–Swedish Sign Language (FinSSL) (Siltaloppi, 2018, 2019, 2023); French Belgian Sign Language (Gabarró-López, 2019); German Sign Language (Hansen & Hessmann, 2015); Norwegian Sign Language and Swedish Sign Language (Liddell et al, 2007; Vogt-Svendsen & Bergman, 2007); Québec Sign Language (Miller, 1994; Pinsonneault & Lelièvre, 1994); and others. In addition to enumeration, list buoys have been shown to have referential and textual (e.g., cohesion) functions, and are used for marking specificity and definiteness.…”

Section: Introduction: What Is a List?mentioning

confidence: 99%

List constructions in two signed languages

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines how signers make lists. One way is to use the fingers on the signer’s nondominant hand to enumerate items on a list. The signer points to these list-fingers with the dominant hand. Previous analyses considered lists to be nondominant, one-handed signs, and thus were called list buoys because the nondominant hand often remains in place during the production of the list. The pointing hand was largely ignored as a nonlinguistic gesture. We take a constructional approach based on Cognitive Grammar. In our approach, we analyze lists as a type of pointing construction consisting of two meaningful components: a pointing device (the pointing hand) used to direct attention; and a Place, also consisting of form and a meaning. Using data from Brazilian Sign Language (Libras) and Finland–Swedish Sign Language (FinSSL), we examine the semantic role of each component, showing how the nondominant list-fingers identify and track discourse referents, and how the pointing hand is used to create higher-order entities by grouping list-fingers. We also examine the integration of list constructions and their components with other conventional constructions.

show abstract

Section: Introduction: What Is a List?mentioning

confidence: 99%

List constructions in two signed languages

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Describing buoys from the perspective of discourse markers

Gabarró-López

2019

SL&L

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ResumenLa Lengua de Signos Española (LSE) se sirve de marcadores del discurso manuales y no manuales, entre otros mecanismos, para realizar discursos signados relevantes o pertinentes. Algunos de los marcadores extraídos en nuestro corpus tienen equivalencia en el español oral y otros no. El espacio en las lenguas de signos abriga el discurso y, además, en él se puede hacer ostensible -perceptible por la vista-su estructura. Uno de los mecanismos para lograrlo son los marcadores discursivos manuales y no manuales de la LSE. Gracias a la iconidad, algunas de estas partículas dejan constancia apreciable de los límites entre miembros del discurso o de todo el discurso. El significado procedimental que los marcadores portan, en el caso de la LSE, se entrevé en la propia forma del signo que lo especifica. El estudio de los marcadores del discurso en español y las investigaciones del espacio en las lenguas de signos proporcionan un marco idóneo para acercarnos a estas partículas en la LSE. Todos los elementos lingüísticos manuales seleccionados como posibles marcadores han sido cotejados con el fin de probar su autenticidad partiendo, para ello, de las propiedades gramaticales de los mismos en español y de su definición.Palabras clave: lengua de signos / de señas, marcadores del discurso, estructura del discurso, iconicidad, espacio. AbstractSpanish Sign Language (Lengua de Signos Española, LSE) uses discourse markers, among other mechanisms, to achieve relevant discourses. Some of the markers we have identified in our corpus have an equivalent in spoken Spanish whilst others do not. In sign languages, discourse is contained in space and within that space it is possible to make the discourse structure visually evident. One of the mechanisms to achieve this in LSE is the use of manual and non-manual discourse markers. Due to their iconicity some discourse markers show the boundaries of utterances or the limits of the entire discourse. The procedural meaning of the discourse markers can be seen in the perceptible shape of the sign. Previous research on Spanish discourse markers and the study of space in sign languages has provided a proper framework to examine these particles in LSE. The authenticity of these discourse markers has been confirmed by checking them against the grammatical properties and the definitions supplied by spoken Spanish Key words: sign language, discourse markers, discourse structure, iconicity, space. RiassuntoLa Lingua dei Segni Spagnola (LSE) si serve di marcatori del discorso manuali e non manuali, tra altri meccanismi, per elaborare discorsi segnati rilevanti e pertinenti. Certi marcatori tratti dal nostro corpus hanno un equivalente nello spagnolo orale ma altri invece non ce l'hanno. Lo spazio nelle lingue dei segni comprende il discorso ed, inoltre, attraverso lo spazio diventa percettibile (tramite il senso della vista) la sua struttura. Uno dei meccanismi per raggiungere questo scopo sono i marcatori del discorso manuali e non manuali della LSE. Grazie alla iconicità, alcune di queste par...

show abstract

Weak hand holds in two sign languages and two genres

Sáfár

Kimmelman

2015

SL&L

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we provide a quantitative analysis of weak hand holds based on corpus data. We include both a cross-linguistic analysis of these holds in narrative data from Russian Sign Language (RSL) and Sign Language of the Netherlands (NGT), and a language-internal, cross-genre analysis comparing NGT narrative and conversational data. We classified the functions of all holds found in two corpora of RSL and NGT, and analyzed their formal characteristics. We found that holds in RSL and NGT have similar functions. However, holds are significantly more frequent in RSL than in NGT. In addition, we found that the distribution of holds across different functions varies between different genres in NGT. The similarities between RSL and NGT in the domain of holds may be attributed to modality effects. The differences in frequency of holds ask for a language-specific explanation, and we discuss several possible scenarios.

show abstract

Point Buoys

Cited by 15 publications

References 0 publications

List constructions in two signed languages

List constructions in two signed languages

Describing buoys from the perspective of discourse markers

Weak hand holds in two sign languages and two genres

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About