The Challenge of Sign Language Phonology

The Routledge Handbook of Phonological Theory, 2018

2008

The research program developed by Peter MacNeilage seeks to derive aspects of phonological organization from fundamental physical properties of the speech system, and from there to arrive at reasonable hypotheses about the evolution of speech. Speech is the dominant medium for the transmission of natural human language, and characterizing its organization is clearly very important for our understanding of language as a whole. Speech is not the only medium available to humans, however, and a comprehensive theory of the nature and evolution of language has much to gain by investigating the form of language in the other natural language modality: sign language, the focus of this chapter. Like spoken languages, sign languages have syllables, the unit that will form the basis for comparison here. As a prosodic unit of organization within the word, sign language syllables bear certain significant similarities to those of spoken language. Such similarities help to shed light on universal properties of linguistic organization, regardless of modality. Yet the form and organization of syllables in the two modalities are quite different, and I will argue that these differences are equally illuminating. The similarities show that spoken and signed languages reflect the same cognitive system in a nontrivial sense. But the differences confirm that certain key aspects of phonological structure must indeed be derived from the physical transmission system, resulting in phonological systems that are in some ways distinct.

Language and Linguistics Compass, 2012

Visually perceivable and movable parts of the body-the hands, facial features, head, and upper body-are the articulators of sign language. It is through these articulators that words are formed, constrained, and contrasted with one another, and that prosody is conveyed. This article provides an overview of the way in which phonology is organized in the alternative modality of sign language.

2016

A basic design feature of language is duality of patterning, the existence of a meaningless level of elements that combine to create meaningful morphemes and words (Hockett 1960). Although the signs of sign languages have iconic origins, Stokoe (1960) showed that sign languages do have a meaningless level, akin to phonology, setting the stage for much subsequent linguistic research on sign languages at all levels (Sandler and Lillo-Martin 2006). Here we show, following Lepic et al. (2016), that part of the phonological structure across sign languages is often motivated by meaning. Specifically, two-handedness is motivated, as are details of structure in two-handed signs previously believed to be strictly phonological and hence meaningless, such as symmetry, dominance, type of movement, and patterns of contact between the two hands. We further develop a templatic model of sign structure (Sandler 1986, 1989) to reveal which aspects of the phonological form in two-handed signs are ofte...

sandlersignlab.haifa.ac.il

The research program developed by Peter MacNeilage seeks to derive aspects of phonological organization from fundamental physical properties of the speech system, and from there to arrive at reasonable hypotheses about the evolution of speech. Speech is the dominant medium for the transmission of natural human language, and characterizing its organization is clearly very important for our understanding of language as a whole. Speech is not the only medium available to humans, however, and a comprehensive theory of the nature and evolution of language has much to gain by investigating the form of language in the other natural language modality: sign language, the focus of this chapter. Like spoken languages, sign languages have syllables, the unit that will form the basis for comparison here. As a prosodic unit of organization within the word, sign language syllables bear certain significant similarities to those of spoken language. Such similarities help to shed light on universal properties of linguistic organization, regardless of modality. Yet the form and organization of syllables in the two modalities are quite different, and I will argue that these differences are equally illuminating. The similarities show that spoken and signed languages reflect the same cognitive system in a nontrivial sense. But the differences confirm that certain key aspects of phonological structure must indeed be derived from the physical transmission system, resulting in phonological systems that are in some ways distinct.

Lingua, 1996

The signs of sign language consist phonetically of hand configurations, locations on the body or in space, and movements. Some models claim that dynamic movements and static locations are the sequential segments of sign language, and even that movements are analogous to vowels. Others claim that movements are redundant, or in any ease should not be represented as fully-fledged sequential segments, The present study measures movements agains~ stringent phonological and morphological criteria for featurehood and classhood, in light of the current controversy over their status. Data from American Sign Language and from Israeli Sign Language support the claims made here, among them, that there is a set of phonologically contrastive features of movement which is phonetically coherent, and that these features constitute a class that is referred to in a blocking constraint on Multiple inflection and other processes. It is shown that the distinction between sequences of dynamic movements mid static elements in signs is exp]oited in templatic morphology in both sign languages. While this analysis supports the claim that movements are phonologically significant at the underlying level, it suggests that their linear position need not be lexically specified. i. The controversy From the earliest days of sign language linguistics, it has been accepted that there arc threc categories of phonological features: hand configuration, location, and ~' I am very grateful ~o Harry van der Hulsl and to anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on this paper. Thanks as well to paflic:.pants for their questions and comments at the following conferences where earlier versLon:+ of this paper were presented: the Workshop on Sign Language Phonology and

linguistics.uconn.edu

Transactions of the Philological Society, 2010

Language, 2005

Sign languages have two strikingly different kinds of morphological structure: sequential and simultaneous. The simultaneous morphology of two unrelated sign languages, American and Israeli Sign Language, is very similar and is largely inflectional, while what little sequential morphology we have found differs significantly and is derivational. We show that at least two pervasive types of inflectional morphology, verb agreement and classifier constructions, are iconically grounded in spatiotemporal cognition, while the sequential patterns can be traced to normal historical development. We attribute the paucity of sequential morphology in sign languages to their youth. This research both brings sign languages much closer to spoken languages in their morphological structure and shows how the medium of communication contributes to the structure of languages.* Si l'on pouvait inventer une langue dont les dictions eussent leur signification naturelle, de sorte que tous les hommes entendissent la pensée des autres à la seule prononciation sans en avoir appris la signification, comme ils entendent que l'on se rejoueit lorsque l'on rit, et que l'on est triste quand on pleure, cette langue serait la meilleure de toutes les possibles; car elle ferait la mesme impression sur tous les auditeurs, que feraient les pensées de l'esprit si elles se pouvaient immédiatement communiquer entre les hommes comme entre les Anges. (Mersenne, Harmonie universelle, 1636) [If one could invent a language whose expressions had their natural signification, so that all men could understand the thought of others by pronunciation alone without having learned its signification, as they understand that one is happy when one laughs, and that one is sad when one cries, this language would be the best of all possible: for it would make the same impression on all hearers as would the thoughts of the spirit if they could be communicated immediately between men as between the angels.] [our translation] If humans could communicate by telepathy, there would be no need for a phonological component, at least for the purposes of communication; and the same extends to the use of language generally. (Noam Chomsky, The minimalist program, 1995:221)