Pointing to an ‘empty’ space: Deixis am Phantasma in face-to-face interaction

Stukenbrock, Anja

doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2014.08.001

Cited by 69 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In fact, Johnston (1991), van Hoek (1992 and Janzen (2004) argue that the use of space in sign languages is never truly arbitrary. Additionally, this motivated use of space is not different from non-signers who also use multimodal resources in face-to-face interaction, including space as well as their body, face, head and eyegaze in motivated ways (Sidnell 2006, Stukenbrock 2014. There is no reason to expect that signers would not exploit space and manual/nonmanual articulators in similar ways.…”

Section: Indicating Verbs Shifted Use Of Space and Constructed Actionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Indicating verbs in British Sign Language favour motivated use of space

Cormier¹,

Fenlon²,

Schembri³

2015

Open Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sign languages have traditionally been described as having a distinction between (1) arbitrary (referential or syntactic) space, considered to be a purely grammatical use of space in which locations arbitrarily represent concrete or abstract subject and/or object arguments using pronouns or indicating verbs, for example, and (2) motivated (topographic or surrogate) space, involving mapping of locations of concrete referents onto the signing space via classifier constructions. Some linguists have suggested that it may be misleading to see the two uses of space as being completely distinct from one another. In this study, we use conversational data from the British Sign Language Corpus (www.bslcorpusproject.org) to look at the use of space with modified indicating verbs -specifically the directions in which these verbs are used as well as the co-occurrence of eyegaze shifts and constructed action. Our findings suggest that indicating verbs are frequently produced in conditions that use space in a motivated way and are rarely modified using arbitrary space. This contrasts with previous claims that indicating verbs in BSL prototypically use arbitrary space. We discuss the implications of this for theories about grammaticalisation and the role of gesture in sign languages and for sign language teaching.

show abstract

Section: Indicating Verbs Shifted Use Of Space and Constructed Actionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Indicating verbs in British Sign Language favour motivated use of space

Cormier¹,

Fenlon²,

Schembri³

2015

Open Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This matter, in my opinion, touches on the larger issue of what might distinguish signed language signs from gestures, as discussed by, e. g., Kendon (2008), Parrill (2009), and many others. There is, for example, a recent description of how hearing people use pointing gestures, eye gaze and body posture when they interact (Stukenbrock 2014). Here, Stukenbrock describes spoken language interaction much in the way signed languages have long been described, but she does not use the concept Constructed Action (Metzger 1995) that has been used for this type of bodily behavior in signed language research.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Embodying metaphors: Signed language interpreters at work

Nilsson

2016

Cognitive Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study describes how Swedish Sign Language (SSL) interpreters systematically use signing space and movements of their hands, arms and body to simultaneously layer iconic expressions of metaphors for differences and for time, in ways previously not described. This is analyzed as the interpreters embodying metaphors, and each of the conceptual metaphors they embody seems to be expressed in a distinct manner not noted before in accounts of the structure of signed languages. Data consists of recordings of Swedish-SSL interpreting by native SSL signers. Rendering spoken Swedish into SSL, these interpreters produce complex sequences making abundant use of the circumstance that in signed language you can express several types of information simultaneously. With little processing time, they produce iconic expressions, frequently using several underlying conceptual metaphors to simultaneously layer information. The interpreters place individual signs in relation to time lines in order to express metaphorical content related to time, and use movement's of their bodies to express comparisons and contrasts. In all of the analyzed sequences, the interpreters express the metaphor DIFFERENCE-BETWEEN-IS-DISTANCE-BETWEEN. In addition, they layer metaphors for difference and time simultaneously, in some instances also expressing the orientational metaphor pair MORE-IS-UP and LESS-IS-DOWN at the same time.

show abstract

“…Puhuja siirtää deiktisen origon puhetapahtuman osallistujien puhe tilanteisesta havainto maailmasta vaihtoehtoiseen kuvitelmien tai muistojen tilaan, jonka puitteissa voi luoda aikapaikkaisia suhteita ja viitata olioihin, osallistujiin ja tapahtumiin ikään kuin ne olisivat läsnä puhujalle ja kuulijoille (mts. 142-143;Larjavaara 1990: 126-127, 160;Stukenbrock 2014). Esimerkit 31-33 havainnollistavat vaan-partikkelin kerronnallista kohosteisuutta luovaa funktiota ja sen yhteispeliä muiden mielikuvitus deiktisten ainesten kanssa.…”

Section: Kerronnan Kohokohdatunclassified

Voimadynaaminen ᴠᴀᴀ&#628. Odotusten, intentioiden ja kerrottavuuden partikkeli

Duvallon

Peltola

2017

Virittäjä

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Voimadynaaminen ᴠᴀᴀN. Odotusten, intentioiden ja kerrottavuuden partikkeli Artikkelissa tutkitaan suomen VAAN-sanaa, joka voi toimia normitetun yleiskielen ulkopuolella niin konjunktiona, fokuspartikkelina kuin diskurssinmerkitsimenä. Tarkastelu keskittyy diskurssinmerkitsinkäyttöön, jota lähestytään semanttis-diskursiivisen analyysin avulla. Oletuksena on, että VAAN-sanalla on abstrakti, eri käytöissä tunnistettava semanttinen identiteetti, josta sen merkityspotentiaali juontuu. Semanttisen identiteetin määrittely perustuu hypoteesiin, että VAAN on alkuaan yksikön instruktiivimuoto sanasta vaka, joka implikoi kahden vastakkaisen voiman, agonistisen ja antagonistisen, välistä vuorovaikutusta. Artikkelissa esitetään, että diskurssinmerkitsimenä käytetyn VAAN-partikkelin tehtävänä on saattaa ilmi puheena olevassa tilanteessa tai vuorovaikutuksessa vaikuttava voimadynamiikka. Ensinnäkin VAAN merkitsee, että lausuman sisältö poikkeaa odotuksista. Toiseksi se voi tehdä ilmeiseksi agentin intention ja sen vaikutuksen asiaintilan toteutumiseen. Kolmanneksi VAAN on merkki lausuman sisällön diskursiivisesta relevanssista: se nostaa lähikuvaan eli zoomauksen kohteeksi sen, mikä on asioiden välisissä suhteissa, tapahtumainkulussa tai meneillään olevassa puhetoiminnossa olennaista. Aineistoanalyysissä tutkitaan ensin muun muassa permissiivistä imperatiivilausumaa ja vapaan valinnan MIKÄ VAAN -rakennetta, joiden yhteydessä vaan on merkkinä agentin intention ja toisen, lähtökohtaisesti vastakkaisen voiman vuorovaikutuksesta. Sen jälkeen tarkastellaan VAAN-lausumien käyttöä diskurssin ohjailussa niiden reaktiivisuuden valossa. Tällöin VAAN suhteuttaa lausuman sisällön edellä ilmenneeseen diskurssin tai vuorovaikutuksen etenemistä koskevaan suuntaukseen. VAAN-lausuma pyrkii estämään tai pysäyttämään tämän diskursiivisen voiman vaikutuksen. Viimeisenä käsitellään VAAN-partikkelia yhtenä niistä suullisen kerronnan keinoista, joiden ansiosta tarinamaailma on puhehetkessä vahvasti läsnä ja joilla perustellaan kerrotun merkityksellisyyttä. Pääasiallisina aineistolähteinä on käytetty 1900-luvun lopun puhuttua suomen kieltä sisältäviä keskustelutallenteita sekä 1800-luvun loppupuolen ja 1900-luvun alun kaunokirjallisia teoksia. Finnish VAAN – the force dynamic particle of expectations, intentions and tellability This paper investigates the polyfunctional Finnish lexeme VAAN, which is used in variants other than the standard language as a conjunction ('but'), a focus particle ('only') and a discourse marker. The study concentrates on the particularities of this latter function, approaching it from a discourse-semantic perspective. The starting assumption is that an abstract semantic content can be discerned in the different uses of VAAN. The definition of its semantics is based on the hypothesis that it originates from the singular instructive form of the base vaka 'firm', which implies an interaction between two forces, agonist and antagonist. The analysis of the data (collected from a corpus of conversational Finnish and literary texts) concerns the uses of VAAN in grammatical constructions (permissive imperatives, free-choice items), as an interactional device and as a means for organising narratives. The article argues that the function of VAAN is to manifest an underlying tension involving intentional or discursive forces. This has a three-fold effect at the discursive level. First, VAAN implies that the content of the utterance is unexpected. Second, the modal meaning structure of the utterance foregrounds the intention of the agent. Third, VAAN marks discursive relevance, as it zooms in on what is of primary importance in the relationship between entities, the course of events or the ongoing speech activity.

show abstract

Pointing to an ‘empty’ space: Deixis am Phantasma in face-to-face interaction

Cited by 69 publications

References 26 publications

Indicating verbs in British Sign Language favour motivated use of space

Indicating verbs in British Sign Language favour motivated use of space

Embodying metaphors: Signed language interpreters at work

Voimadynaaminen ᴠᴀᴀ&#628. Odotusten, intentioiden ja kerrottavuuden partikkeli

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Pointing to an ‘empty’ space: Deixis am Phantasma in face-to-face interaction

Cited by 69 publications

References 26 publications

Indicating verbs in British Sign Language favour motivated use of space

Indicating verbs in British Sign Language favour motivated use of space

Embodying metaphors: Signed language interpreters at work

Voimadynaaminen &#7456;&#7424;&#7424;&#628. Odotusten, intentioiden ja kerrottavuuden partikkeli

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Voimadynaaminen ᴠᴀᴀ&#628. Odotusten, intentioiden ja kerrottavuuden partikkeli