The Construal of Events: Passives in American Sign Language

Abstract

The possibility of a passive construction existing in ASL has been alluded to from time to time in the literature on ASL grammar, but discussion is infrequent, and the usual conclusion is that a passive does not, in fact, exist. We contend, however, that a particular configuration of ASL grammatical features surrounding an otherwise transitive verb qualifies as a fully passive construction, and that these passives are more frequent in ASL discourse than may have been realized. This discussion continues and expands upon an earlier proposal in which we identify grammatical and functional characteristics of passive constructions in ASL discourse (Janzen, O'Dea, and Shaffer 2000).

Perspective in signed discourse: the privileged status of the signer’s locus and gaze

“…In Ill. 7b the starting point of the hand in the depicting construction meaning 'hit with a club' is to the right, which is the direction of the thief's locus. Janzen, O'Dea and Shaffer (2001) are undoubtedly right in pointing to similar functions of the relevant constructions in ASL and passives in spoken languages: the perspective is with the patient, and the agent is demoted or unidentified. The reason why I hesitate to talk about passives in DTS is the similarity between the constructions that form the basis of the classifications as P in Table 1 and constructions such as the one in Ill. 1 with a depicting construction of someone approaching the holder of the perspective.…”

“…(3) neutral forwards back + forwards up ONE THIEF / Handling:move-|club|-forwards-violently Handling:move-|club|-to-own-head… Example (3) also shows that, contrary to what is the case in ASL according to Janzen, O'Dea and Shaffer (2001), the signer needs not change her body orientation. The signer here changes her body posture along the sagittal axis, not her orientation, as she imitates the agent in the forward movement of the blow, and the patient in leaning back when signing Handling:move-|club|-to-own-head.…”

“…Furthermore, McNeill's and Perniss' classifications are limited to an analysis of representations and perspective at the level of the individual gesture in co-speech gesture or of the individual depicting construction in sign languages, the purpose is not to describe perspective at the clause or discourse level. The notion of dual viewpoint gesture or non-prototypically aligned representations do not do justice to the idea of perspective as a discourse notion manifested at the clause level: when more than one referent is represented, they are rarely on an equal footing (Janzen, O'Dea and Shaffer 2001, Janzen 2004, Janzen 2012, Dudis 2007 as suggested by the term dual viewpoint gesture. An analysis that limits itself to an enumeration of the different referent representations and describe their combinations as prototypical or non-prototypical alignment or single-or double-perspective does not explain why one referent representation is perceived as outranking others and therefore as embodying the perspective holder proper at the cost of other represented referents (cf.…”

“…But the results in Table 1 indicate that the use of the signer's locus is the decisive factor in determining discourse perspective. Janzen, O'Dea and Shaffer (2001) define passive in ASL as transitive clauses constructed such that…”

Tilegnelse af fortællerperspektiv og referentperspektiv i dansk tegnsprog: introduktion af en ny referent

“…britisk tegnsprog (Morgan et al 2002, Morgan & Woll 2003jf. her afsnit 3) og sydbelgisk tegnsprog (Meurant 2008). Janzen et al (2001) beskriver konstruktioner hvor locus c repraesenterer patienten (illustration 5b-c), som passiv i amerikansk tegnsprog (ASl). Da der ikke er mulighed for at omtale agenten i denne konstruktionstype, beskriver jeg den som konstruktioner hvor referentperspektivet er hos patienten.…”