When does a system become phonological? Handshape production in gesturers, signers, and homesigners

Brentari, Diane; Coppola, Marie; Mazzoni, Laura; Goldin‐Meadow, Susan

doi:10.1007/s11049-011-9145-1

Cited by 132 publications

(161 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

149

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In individual responses, the forms are coded based on whole sign/gesture form-meaning mappings that include both movement and handshape (not just handshape, as in Brentari et al, 2012Brentari et al, , 2015 and the relationship of the hands to the rest of the body.…”

Section: Overview Of the Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Of the body and the hands: patterned iconicity for semantic categories

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines how gesturers and signers use their bodies to express concepts such as instrumentality and humanness. Comparing across eight sign languages (American, Japanese, German, Israeli, and Kenyan Sign Languages, Ha Noi Sign Language of Vietnam, Central Taurus Sign Language of Turkey, and Al-Sayyid Bedouin Sign Language of Israel) and the gestures of American non-signers, we find recurring patterns for naming entities in three semantic categories (tools, animals, and fruits & vegetables). These recurring patterns are captured in a classification system that identifies iconic strategies based on how the body is used together with the hands. Across all groups, tools are named with manipulation forms, where the head and torso represent those of a human agent. Animals tend to be identified with personification forms, where the body serves as a map for a comparable non-human body. Fruits & vegetables tend to be identified with object forms, where the hands act independently from the rest of the body to represent static features of the referent. We argue that these iconic patterns are rooted in using the body for communication, and provide a basis for understanding how meaningful communication emerges quickly in gesture and persists in emergent and established sign languages

show abstract

Section: Overview Of the Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Of the body and the hands: patterned iconicity for semantic categories

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nonetheless, speakers have been shown to apply broad sonority restrictions on structures that are unattested in their language [34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44]. Moreover, sign languages, complete with both phonological and morphological patterns, emerge de novo in the human species [69][70][71][72][73][74][75][76]. Signed and spoken languages likewise share common developmental precursors [77] and brain mechanisms [78][79][80][81][82][83][84][85][86], and at least one of these mechanisms-the capacity to encode phonetic contrasts categorically-is present in all human infants [51,52].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Amodal Aspects of Linguistic Design

Berent¹,

Dupuis²,

Brentari³

2012

PsycEXTRA Dataset

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

All spoken languages encode syllables and constrain their internal structure. But whether these restrictions concern the design of the language system, broadly, or speech, specifically, remains unknown. To address this question, here, we gauge the structure of signed syllables in American Sign Language (ASL). Like spoken languages, signed syllables must exhibit a single sonority/energy peak (i.e., movement). Four experiments examine whether this restriction is enforced by signers and nonsigners. We first show that Deaf ASL signers selectively apply sonority restrictions to syllables (but not morphemes) in novel ASL signs. We next examine whether this principle might further shape the representation of signed syllables by nonsigners. Absent any experience with ASL, nonsigners used movement to define syllable-like units. Moreover, the restriction on syllable structure constrained the capacity of nonsigners to learn from experience. Given brief practice that implicitly paired syllables with sonority peaks (i.e., movement)-a natural phonological constraint attested in every human language-nonsigners rapidly learned to selectively rely on movement to define syllables and they also learned to partly ignore it in the identification of morpheme-like units. Remarkably, nonsigners failed to learn an unnatural rule that defines syllables by handshape, suggesting they were unable to ignore movement in identifying syllables. These findings indicate that signed and spoken syllables are subject to a shared phonological restriction that constrains phonological learning in a new modality. These conclusions suggest the design of the phonological system is partly amodal.

show abstract

“…For example in ASL (American Sign Language) the sign GIVE can be modulated grammatically in the visuo-spatial space to indicate "GIVE TO ONE PERSON", "GIVE TO MANY", and "GIVE REPEATEDLY". The classifier handshape system in signed languages, for instance a flat hand (B-proform) representing a driving car, is an important part of the morphology of signed languages [41]. Another feature of the morphology is the use of facial expression and other non-manual signals.…”

Section: Visual Sign Language Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Case Study of Tactile Language and its Possible Structure: A Tentative Outline to Study Tactile Language Systems among Children with Congenital Deafblindness

Dammeyer

Nielsen²,

Strøm³

et al. 2015

Commun Disord Deaf Stud Hearing Aids

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Few published research papers concern the study of communication and language development among children with congenital deafblindness. The aim of this study is to explore and discuss linguistic features of what may be considered as tactile languages. By analysing one pilot video observation of a five year old congenital deafblind child communicating with his mother about a slide experience tactile linguistic features of phonology, morphology, semantics and syntax were explored. The linguistic features of tactile language were found to involve a potential unique and complex structure based on direction, speed and acceleration of movements, pressure, and body position. It is discussed how tactile languages, if they exist, can be studied from its unique bodily-tactile nature and not as a modification of visual sign languages.

show abstract

When does a system become phonological? Handshape production in gesturers, signers, and homesigners

Cited by 132 publications

References 44 publications

Of the body and the hands: patterned iconicity for semantic categories

Of the body and the hands: patterned iconicity for semantic categories

Amodal Aspects of Linguistic Design

A Case Study of Tactile Language and its Possible Structure: A Tentative Outline to Study Tactile Language Systems among Children with Congenital Deafblindness

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About