We aim to demonstrate the importance of defining linguistic phenomena by using constructed action or CA (i.e. a stretch of discourse that represents one role or combination of roles depicting actions, utterances, thought, attitudes and/or feelings of one or more referents) as an example. The problem is that different assumptions about CA have led to some apparent contradictions about the nature and characteristics of this phenomenon. Based on observations and analyses of British Sign Language narrative data, we outline criteria and recommendations for defining and annotating CA. We show that, in carefully defining the phenomenon in question and providing criteria for its identification, applying these criteria to usage data leads to emergence of particular types of CA. We also show how identifying these types can help resolve some of the apparent contradictions in the literature.

/pdf/rethinking-constructed-action-6oqw81n6yc.pdf

Rethinking constructed action

Cilticization and Prosodic Words in a Sign Language

Code-blends in sign languages consist of simultaneously articulated manual signs and spoken language words. These ‘mouthings’ (typically silent articulations) have been observed for many different sign languages. The present study aims to investigate the extent of such bimodal code-mixing in sign languages by investigating the frequency of mouthings produced by deaf users of Sign Language of the Netherlands (NGT), their co-occurrence with pointing signs, and whether any differences can be explained by sociolinguistic variables such as regional origin and age of the signer. We investigated over 10,000 mouth actions from 70 signers, and found that the mouth and the hands are equally active during signing. Moreover, around 80% of all mouth actions are mouthings, while the remaining 20% are unrelated to Dutch. We found frequency differences between individual signers and a small effect for level of education, but not for other sociolinguistic variables. Our results provide genuine evidence that mouthings form an inextricable component of signed interaction. Rather than displaying effects of competition between languages or spoken language suppression, NGT signers demonstrate the potential of the visual modality to conjoin parallel information streams.

The prominence of spoken language elements in a sign language

In a few universities around the world courses are offered where the primary language of instruction is a national sign language. Many of these courses are given by bilingual/multilingual deaf lect ...

Deaf lecturers’ translanguaging in a higher education setting. A multimodal multilingual perspective

Abstract Signed languages have been classified typologically as being manual dominant or non-manual dominant for negation. In the former negation is conveyed primarily by manual lexical signs whereas in the latter negation is primarily conveyed by nonmanual signs. In support of this typology, the site and spread of headshaking in negated clauses was also described as linguistically constrained. Headshaking was thus said to be a formal part of negation in signed languages so it was linguistic, not gestural. This paper aims to establish the role of headshaking in negation in Auslan with reference to this typology. In this corpus-based study, I show that Auslan users almost always negate clauses using a manual negative sign. Although headshakes are found in just over half of these manually negated clauses, the position and spreading behaviour of headshakes do not appear to be linguistically constrained. I also show that signers use headshakes as the sole negating element in a clause extremely rarely. I conclude that headshaking in Auslan appears similar to headshaking in the ambient face-to-face spoken language, English. I explore the implications of these findings for the proposed typology of negation in signed languages in terms of the type of data that were used to support it, and assumptions about the relationship between gesture and signed languages that underlie it.

A corpus-based study of the role of headshaking in negation in Auslan (Australian Sign Language): Implications for signed language typology

This study investigates the conventionalization of mouth actions in Australian Sign Language. Signed languages were once thought of as simply manual languages because the hands produce the signs which individually and in groups are the symbolic units most easily equated with the words, phrases and clauses of spoken languages. However, it has long been acknowledged that non-manual activity, such as movements of the body, head and the face play a very important role. In this context, mouth actions that occur while communicating in signed languages have posed a number of questions for linguists: are the silent mouthings of spoken language words simply borrowings from the respective majority community spoken language(s)? Are those mouth actions that are not silent mouthings of spoken words conventionalized linguistic units proper to each signed language, culturally linked semi-conventional gestural units shared by signers with members of the majority speaking community, or even gestures and expressions common to all humans? We use a corpus-based approach to gather evidence of the extent of the use of mouth actions in naturalistic Australian Sign Language-making comparisons with other signed languages where data is available--and the form/meaning pairings that these mouth actions instantiate.

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0023830915569334

On the Conventionalization of Mouth Actions in Australian Sign Language.

We describe a corpus-based study of one type of non-manual in signed languages (SLs) — mouth actions. Our ultimate aim is to examine the distribution and characteristics of mouth actions in Auslan (Australian Sign Language) to gauge the degree of language-specific conventionalization of these forms. We divide mouth gestures into categories broadly based on Crasborn et al. (2008), but modified to accommodate our experiences with the Auslan data. All signs and all mouth actions are examined and the state of the mouth in each sign is assigned to one of three broad categories: (i) mouthings, (ii) mouth gestures, and (iii) no mouth action. Mouth actions that invariably occur while communicating in SLs have posed a number of questions for linguists: which are ‘merely borrowings’ from the relevant ambient spoken language (SpL)? which are gestural and shared with all of the members of the wider community in which signers find themselves? and which are conventionalized aspects of the grammar of some or all SLs? We believe these schema captures all the relevant information about mouth forms and their use and meaning in context to enable us to describe their function and degree of conventionality.

Mouth-based non-manual coding schema used in the Auslan corpus: explanation, application and preliminary results

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Jane van Roekel

Author Tools

Chat about Author

Papers

On the Conventionalization of Mouth Actions in Australian Sign Language.

Mouth-based non-manual coding schema used in the Auslan corpus: explanation, application and preliminary results