Home Size and shape depictions in the manual modality: A taxonomy of iconic devices in Adamorobe Sign Language
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Size and shape depictions in the manual modality: A taxonomy of iconic devices in Adamorobe Sign Language

  • Victoria Nyst EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: April 2, 2016

Abstract

This paper presents a model of size and shape depiction in the manual modality, based on a micro-level analysis of the lexicon of Adamorobe Sign Language (Ghana). The model combines strong elements of previous models, such as a dyadic labeling system separating form and meaning as suggested in Taub (2001, Language from the body: Iconicity and metaphor in American Sign Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), and the category of distance for size (Sowa and Wachsmuth 2003, Coverbal iconic gestures for object descriptions in virtual environments: An empirical study. In M. Rector, I. Poggi & N. Trigo (eds.), Gestures: Meaning and use, 365–376. Porto: Edicous Universidade Fernando Pessoa). It systematically describes depiction at the parameter level, viewing size and shape depiction as compositional in nature. The model is innovative in distinguishing two main categories for the expression of size and shape, i. e., shape for shape depiction, and distance for size depiction. The role of movement is seen as secondary to these two categories, and either signals extent (when combined with shape for shape depiction) or a change in it (when combined with distance for size depiction). Applying the model to a set of lexical data of Adamorobe Sign Language revealed the need for a new sub-category for distance for size depiction, i. e., of body-based distance for size depiction as found in so-called measure stick signs. Parameter-level analysis is indispensable for cross-linguistic comparisons. To this end, frequency data are presented as well.

Acknowledgments

I thank Els van der Kooij for inspiring discussions on this topic as well as for her valuable comments on an earlier version of this article. I also thank an anonymous reviewer for insightful feedback. As usual, any mistakes remain mine. This paper was written under the Veni-grant The role of hearing signers in the development of channel specific structures in sign languages of deaf communities (275–89–015), awarded by the Dutch Science Foundation (NWO).

References

Boyes-Braem, P. K. 1981. Features of the handshape in American Sign Language. Berkeley: University of California dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Brennan, Mary. 1990. Word formation in British Sign Language. Stockholm: University of Stockholm Press.Search in Google Scholar

Calbris, Geneviève. 1990. The semiotics of French gesture. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Cormier, Kearsy, David Quinto-Pozos, Zed Sevcikova & Adam Schembri. 2012. Lexicalisation and de-lexicalisation processes in sign languages: Comparing depicting constructions and viewpoint gestures. Language & communication 32(4). 329–348.10.1016/j.langcom.2012.09.004Search in Google Scholar

Crasborn, Onno & Els van der Kooij. 1997. Relative orientation in sign language phonology. In Jane Coerts & Helen de Hoop (eds.), Linguistics in the Netherlands 1997, 37–48. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/avt.14.06craSearch in Google Scholar

Engberg-Pedersen, Elisabeth. 2004. Review of language from the body: Iconicity and metaphor in American sign language, by Sarah F. Taub. Linguistic review 21(1). 67–86.10.1515/tlir.2004.002Search in Google Scholar

Holler, Judith, & Geoffrey Beattie. 2002. A micro-analytic investigation of how iconic gestures and speech represent core semantic features in talk. Semiotica 142(1/4). 31–70.10.1515/semi.2002.077Search in Google Scholar

Kendon, Adam. 1980. A description of a deaf-mute sign language from the Enga province of Papua New Guinea with some comparative discussion. Part I: the formational properties of Enga signs. Semiotica 32(2/4). 98–117.10.1515/semi.1980.32.1-2.81Search in Google Scholar

Kendon, Adam. 1988. Sign languages of Aboriginal Australia: Cultural, semiotic and communicative perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Kendon, Adam. 2004. Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511807572Search in Google Scholar

Klima, Edward S. & Ursula Bellugi. 1979. The signs of language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Kooij, Els van der. 2002. Phonological categories in sign language of the Netherlands: The role of phonetic implementation and iconicity. Utrecht: Leiden University dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Kusters, Annelies. 2011. “Since time immemorial until the end of days”: An ethnographic study of the production of deaf space in Adamorobe, Ghana. Bristol: University of Bristol dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Mandel, Mark. 1977. Iconic devices in American Sign Language. In Lynn A. Friedman (ed.), On the other hand: New perspectives on American Sign Language, 57–107. New York: Academic Press.Search in Google Scholar

McNeill, David. 2008. Gesture and thought. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

Müller, Cornelia. 1998. Redebegleitende gesten: Kulturgeschichte, Theorie, Sprachvergleich. Berlin: Arno Spitz.Search in Google Scholar

Nyst, Victoria. 2007a. A descriptive analysis of Adamorobe Sign Language (Ghana). Utrecht: Leiden University dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Nyst, Victoria. 2007b. Simultaneous constructions in Adamorobe Sign Language (Ghana). In Myriam Vermeerbergen, Lorraine Leeson & Onno Crasborn (eds.), Simultaneity in signed languages, 127–145. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.281.06nysSearch in Google Scholar

Nyst, Victoria. forthcoming. A cross-linguistic comparison of size and shape gestures in West African and European languages.Search in Google Scholar

Nyst, Victoria. under review. Areal features in iconicity: Size depictions in six sign languages. In J. Quer & R. Pfau (eds.), Sign language and linguistics. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Benjamins.Search in Google Scholar

Padden, Carol A., Irit Meir, So-One Hwang, Ryan Lepic, Sharon Seegers & Tory Sampson. 2013. Patterned iconicity in sign language lexicons. In John B. Haviland (ed.), Where do nouns come from? 181–202. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Benjamins.10.1075/gest.13.3.03padSearch in Google Scholar

Poggi, Isabella & Emanuela Caldognetto. 1998. Mani que parlano. Padova: Unipress.Search in Google Scholar

Schembri, Adam. 2003. Rethinking “classifiers” in signed languages. In Karen Emmorey (ed.), Perspectives on classifier constructions in sign languages, 3–34. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Search in Google Scholar

Schermer, Trude & Corline Koolhof. 2009. Van Dale Basiswoordenboek Nederlandse Gebarentaal. Utrecht/Antwerpen: Van Dale.Search in Google Scholar

Sowa, Timo & Ipke Wachsmuth. 2002. Interpretation of shape related iconic gestures in virtual environments. In I. Wachsmuth & T. Sowa (eds.), Gesture and sign language in human-computer interaction, 21–33. Berlin: Springer.10.1007/3-540-47873-6_3Search in Google Scholar

Sowa, Timo & Ipke Wachsmuth. 2003. Coverbal iconic gestures for object descriptions in virtual environments: An empirical study. In M. Rector, I. Poggi & N. Trigo (eds.), Gestures: Meaning and use, 365–376. Porto: Edicous Universidade Fernando Pessoa.Search in Google Scholar

Sowa, Timo & Ipke Wachsmuth. 2005. A model for the representation and processing of shape in coverbal iconic gestures. In K. Opwis & I. K. Penner (eds.), Proceeding of KogWis05: The German Cognitive Science Conference 2005, 183–188. Basel: Schwabe.Search in Google Scholar

Streeck, Jürgen. 2008. Depicting by gestures. Gesture 8(3). 285–301.10.1075/gest.8.3.02strSearch in Google Scholar

Taub, Sarah F. 2001. Language from the body: Iconicity and metaphor in American Sign Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511509629Search in Google Scholar

Wundt, Wilhelm. 1973. The language of gestures, vol. 6. The Hague: Mouton.10.1515/9783110808285Search in Google Scholar

Zwitserlood, Ingeborg. 2003. Classifying hand configurations in Nederlandse Gebarentaal (Sign Language of the Netherlands). Utrecht: Utrecht University dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Zwitserlood, Inge. 2008. Morphology below the level of the sign-frozen forms and classifier predicates. In J. Quer (ed.), Proceedings of the 8th Conference on Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research (TISLR), 251–272. Hamburg: Signum Verlag.Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2016-4-2
Published in Print: 2016-5-1

©2016 by De Gruyter Mouton

Downloaded on 28.10.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/sem-2016-0049/html
Scroll to top button