Simultaneous Constructions in Adamorobe Sign Language (Ghana)

Nyst, Victoria

doi:10.1075/cilt.281.06nys

Cited by 27 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While simultaneous representations have been considered a hallmark of spatial representation in sign languages in previous research, here we found an overall low occurrence of direct, simultaneous representation of spatial relationships in both languages (see Nyst 2007 for a similar finding in Adamorobe Sign Language (AdaSL)). That is, in most cases, signers did not fully exploit the iconic and spatial affordances of the modality, and as such, spatial relationship encoding exhibited a low degree of semantic specificity as we have defined it.…”

Section: 1supporting

confidence: 46%

Does space structure spatial language?: A comparison of spatial expression across sign languages

Perniss¹,

Zwitserlood²,

Özyürek³

2015

lan

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The spatial affordances of the visual modality give rise to a high degree of similarity between sign languages in the spatial domain. This stands in contrast to the vast structural and semantic diversity in linguistic encoding of space found in spoken languages. However, the possibility and nature of linguistic diversity in spatial encoding in sign languages has not been rigorously investigated by systematic crosslinguistic comparison. Here, we compare locative expression in two unrelated sign languages, Turkish Sign Language (Türk İşaret Dili, TİD) and German Sign Language (Deutsche Gebärdensprache, DGS), focusing on the expression of figure-ground (e.g. cup on table) and figure-figure (e.g. cup next to cup) relationships in a discourse context. In addition to similarities, we report qualitative and quantitative differences between the sign languages in the formal devices used (i.e. unimanual vs. bimanual; simultaneous vs. sequential) and in the degree of iconicity of the spatial devices. Our results suggest that sign languages may display more diversity in the spatial domain than has been previously assumed, and in a way more comparable with the diversity found in spoken languages. The study contributes to a more comprehensive understanding of how space gets encoded in language.*

show abstract

Section: 1supporting

confidence: 46%

Does space structure spatial language?: A comparison of spatial expression across sign languages

Perniss¹,

Zwitserlood²,

Özyürek³

2015

lan

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This evidence comes from emerging sign languages such as Nicaraguan Sign Language (Senghas, Kita, & Ozyürek, 2004 ), Al-Sayyid Bedouin Sign Language (Aronoff, Meir, & Sandler, 2005 ), Kata Kolok (de Vos, 2015 ), and Adamarobe Sign Language (Nyst, 2007 ), among others. In these cases, a sufficient number of deaf individuals without access to an existing language are brought together either through the formation of deaf schools and clubs or by an increase in genes for deafness in a closed population (Meir, Israel, Sandler, Padden, & Aronoff, 2012 ).…”

Section: From Lab To the Real Worldmentioning

confidence: 99%

Culture and biology in the origins of linguistic structure

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Language is systematically structured at all levels of description, arguably setting it apart from all other instances of communication in nature. In this article, I survey work over the last 20 years that emphasises the contributions of individual learning, cultural transmission, and biological evolution to explaining the structural design features of language. These 3 complex adaptive systems exist in a network of interactions: individual learning biases shape the dynamics of cultural evolution; universal features of linguistic structure arise from this cultural process and form the ultimate linguistic phenotype; the nature of this phenotype affects the fitness landscape for the biological evolution of the language faculty; and in turn this determines individuals’ learning bias. Using a combination of computational simulation, laboratory experiments, and comparison with real-world cases of language emergence, I show that linguistic structure emerges as a natural outcome of cultural evolution once certain minimal biological requirements are in place.

show abstract

“…On the one hand, the holds described in the collection of works in Vermeerbergen et al (2007) easily lend themselves to an analysis in the terms proposed here. On the other hand, Nyst (2007) argued that Adamorobe Sign Language does not productively use holds. Further cross-linguistic research is thus necessary.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, another type of manual simultaneity is common in casual signing in most sign languages described so far (but see Nyst 2007 on the lack of simultaneity in Adamorobe Sign Language). In a simultaneous manual hold, the movement of the two hands is not…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a Classification of Weak Hand Holds

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The two symmetrical manual articulators (the hands) in signed languages are a striking modalityspecific phonetic property. The weak hand can maintain the end position of an articulation while the other articulator continues to produce additional signs. This weak hand spreading (hold) has been analysed from various perspectives, highlighting its prosodic, syntactic, or discourse properties. The present study investigates corpus data from Sign Language of the Netherlands (NGT) and Russian Sign Language (RSL), two unrelated sign languages, in order to question the necessity of a sign-language specific notion of 'buoy' introduced in the discourse analysis of American Sign Language by Liddell (2003). Buoys are defined as weak hand holds that serve as a visible landmark throughout a stretch of discourse, and several types are distinguished based on their function and form. In the analysis of nearly two and a half hours of narratives and conversations from NGT and RSL, we found over 600 weak hand holds. We show that these holds can be analysed in terms of regular phonetic, syntactic, semantic, or discourse notions (or a combination thereof) familiar from the linguistic study of spoken languages, without the need for a sign language-specific notion of 'buoy'.

show abstract

Simultaneous Constructions in Adamorobe Sign Language (Ghana)

Cited by 27 publications

References 5 publications

Does space structure spatial language?: A comparison of spatial expression across sign languages

Does space structure spatial language?: A comparison of spatial expression across sign languages

Culture and biology in the origins of linguistic structure

Towards a Classification of Weak Hand Holds

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About