Jump to content

American Sign Language phonology

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sign languages such as American Sign Language (ASL) are characterized by phonological processes analogous to, yet dissimilar from, those of oral languages. Although there is a qualitative difference from oral languages in that sign-language phonemes are not based on sound, and are spatial in addition to being temporal, they fulfill the same role as phonemes in oral languages.[1]

Phonemes and features

[edit]

Signs consist of units smaller than the sign. These are often subdivided into parameters: handshapes with a particular orientation, that may perform some type of movement, in a particular location on the body or in the "signing space", and non-manual signals. These last may include movement of the eyebrows, the cheeks, the nose, the head, the torso, and the eyes. Parameter values are often compared to spoken language phonemes, although sign language phonemes can occur simultaneously, which is not true for phonemes in spoken languages. Phonemes in signed languages, as in oral languages, consist of features. For instance, the /B/ and /G/ handshapes are distinguished by the number of selected fingers: [all] versus [one].

Most phonological research focuses on the handshape. A problem in most studies of handshape is the fact that often elements of a manual alphabet are borrowed into signs, although not all of these elements are part of the sign language's phoneme inventory.[2] Also, allophones are sometimes considered separate phonemes. The first inventory of ASL handshapes contained 19 phonemes (or cheremes [3]).

In some phonological models, movement is a phonological prime.[4][5] Other models consider movement as redundant, as it is predictable from the locations, hand orientations and handshape features at the start and end of a sign.[6][7] Models in which movement is a prime usually distinguish path movement (i.e. movement of the hand[s] through space) and internal movement (i.e. an opening or closing movement of the hand, a hand rotation, or finger wiggling).

Phonotactics

[edit]

As yet, little is known about ASL phonotactic constraints (or those in other signed languages). The Symmetry and Dominance Conditions[2] are sometimes assumed to be phonotactic constraints. The Symmetry Condition requires both hands in a symmetric two-handed sign to have the same or a mirrored configuration, orientation, and movement. The Dominance Condition requires that only one hand in a two-handed sign moves if the hands do not have the same handshape specifications, and that the non-dominant hand has an unmarked handshape.[8] Since these conditions apply in more and more signed languages as cross-linguistic research increases, it may not apply to only ASL phonotactics.

Six types of signs have been suggested: one-handed signs made without contact, one-handed signs made with contact (excluding on the other hand), symmetric two-handed signs (i.e. signs in which both hands are active and perform the same action), asymmetric two-handed signs (i.e. signs in which one hand is active and one hand is passive) where both hands have the same handshape, asymmetric two-handed signs where the hands have differing handshapes, and compound signs (that combine two or more of the above types).[9] The non-dominant hand in asymmetric signs often functions as the location of the sign. Monosyllabic signs are the most common type of signs in ASL and other sign languages.[10]

Allophones and assimilation

[edit]

Each phoneme may have multiple allophones, i.e. different realizations of the same phoneme. For example, in the /B/ handshape, the bending of the selected fingers may vary from straight to bent at the lowest joint, and the position of the thumb may vary from stretched at the side of the hand to fold in the palm of the hand. Allophony may be free, but is also often conditioned by the context of the phoneme. Thus, the /B/ handshape will be flexed in a sign in which the fingertips touch the body, and the thumb will be folded in the palm in signs where the radial side of the hand touches the body or the other hand.

Assimilation of sign phonemes, to signs in the context, is a common process in ASL. For example, the point of contact for signs like THINK, normally at the forehead, may be articulated at a lower location if the location in the following sign is below the cheek. Other assimilation processes concern the number of selected fingers in a sign, that may adapt to that of the previous or following sign. Also, it has been observed that one-handed signs are articulated with two hands when followed by two-handed signs.

Phonological processing in the brain

[edit]

The brain processes language phonologically by first identifying the smallest units in an utterance, then combining them to make meaning. In spoken language, these smallest units are often referred to as phonemes, and they are the smallest sounds we identify in a spoken word. In sign language, the smallest units are often referred to as the parameters of a sign (i.e. handshape, location, movement and palm orientation), and we can identify these smallest parts within a produced sign. The cognitive method of phonological processing can be described as segmentation and categorization, where the brain recognizes the individual parts within the sign and combines them to form meaning.[11] This is similar to how spoken language combines sounds to form syllables and then words. Even though the modalities of these languages differ (spoken vs. signed), the brain still processes them similarly through segmentation and categorization.

Measuring brain activity while a person produces or perceives sign language reveals that the brain processes signs differently compared to regular hand movements. This is similar to how the brain differentiates between spoken words and semantically lacking sounds. More specifically, the brain is able to differentiate actual signs from the transition movements in between signs, similarly to how words in spoken language can be identified separately from sounds or breaths that occur in between words that don't contain linguistic meaning. Multiple studies have revealed enhanced brain activity while processing sign language compared to processing only hand movements. For example, during a brain surgery performed on a deaf patient who was still awake, their neural activity was observed and analyzed while they were shown videos in American Sign Language. The results showed that greater brain activity occurred during the moments when the person was perceiving actual signs as compared to the moments that occurred during transition into the next sign [12] This means the brain is segmenting the units of the sign and identifying which units combine to form actual meaning.

An observed difference in location for phonological processing between spoken language and sign language is the activation of areas of the brain specific to auditory vs. visual stimuli. Because of the modality differences, the cortical regions will be stimulated differently depending on which type of language it is. Spoken language creates sounds, which affects the auditory cortices in the superior temporal lobes. Sign language creates visual stimuli, which affects the occipitotemporal regions. Yet both modes of language still activate many of the same regions that are known for language processing in the brain.[13]  For example, the left superior temporal gyrus is stimulated by language in both spoken and signed forms, even though it was once assumed it was only affected by auditory stimuli. [14] No matter the mode of language being used, whether it be spoken or signed, the brain processes language by segmenting the smallest phonological units and combining them to make meaning.

References

[edit]
  1. ^ Fenlon, Jordan; Cormier, Kearsy; Brentari, Diane (2017-12-14), Hannahs, S. J.; Bosch, Anna R. K. (eds.), "The phonology of sign languages", The Routledge Handbook of Phonological Theory (1 ed.), Routledge, pp. 453–475, doi:10.4324/9781315675428-16, ISBN 978-1-315-67542-8, retrieved 2024-10-17
  2. ^ a b Battison, Robbin (1974). "Phonological Deletion in American Sign Language". Sign Language Studies. 1005 (1): 1–19. doi:10.1353/sls.1974.0005. ISSN 1533-6263. S2CID 143890757.
  3. ^ Landar, Herbert; Stokoe, William C. (April 1961). "Sign Language Structure: An Outline of the Visual Communication Systems of the American Deaf". Language. 37 (2): 269. doi:10.2307/410856. ISSN 0097-8507. JSTOR 410856.
  4. ^ Perlmutter, David M. (1993), "Sonority and Syllable Structure in American Sign Language **A slightly different version of this article appeared in Linguistic Inquiry, Vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 407–442 (1992). © 1992 by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Reprinted by permission.", Current Issues in ASL Phonology, Elsevier, pp. 227–261, doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-193270-1.50016-9, ISBN 9780121932701, retrieved 2022-04-14
  5. ^ Sandler, Wendy (December 1999). "Diane Brentari (1999). A prosodic model of sign language phonology. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Pp. xviii+376". Phonology. 16 (3): 443–447. doi:10.1017/s0952675799003802. ISSN 0952-6757. S2CID 60944874.
  6. ^ van der Hulst, Harry (August 1993). "Units in the analysis of signs". Phonology. 10 (2): 209–241. doi:10.1017/s095267570000004x. ISSN 0952-6757. S2CID 16629421.
  7. ^ Demey, Eline (2003-12-31). "Review of Van der Kooij (2002): Phonological Categories in Sign Language of the Netherlands. The Role of Phonetic Implementation and Iconicity". Sign Language & Linguistics. 6 (2): 277–284. doi:10.1075/sll.6.2.11dem. ISSN 1387-9316.
  8. ^ Napoli, Donna Jo; Wu, Jeff (2003-12-31). "Morpheme structure constraints on two-handed signs in American Sign Language". Sign Language & Linguistics. 6 (2): 123–205. doi:10.1075/sll.6.2.03nap. ISSN 1387-9316.
  9. ^ Battison, Robbin (2011). "Analyzing Signs". Linguistics of American Sign Language (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press. pp. 209–210. ISBN 978-1-56368-508-8.
  10. ^ Sandler, Wendy (2008). "The Syllable in Sign Language: Considering the Other Natural Language Modality". Ontogeny and phylogeny of syllable organization, Festschrift in honor of Peter MacNeilage. New York: Taylor Francis. p. 384.
  11. ^ Petitto, L. A.; Langdon, C.; Stone, A.; Andriola, D.; Kartheiser, G.; Cochran, C. (November 2016). "Visual sign phonology: insights into human reading and language from a natural soundless phonology". WIREs Cognitive Science. 7 (6): 366–381. doi:10.1002/wcs.1404. ISSN 1939-5078. PMID 27425650.
  12. ^ Leonard, Matthew K.; Lucas, Ben; Blau, Shane; Corina, David P.; Chang, Edward F. (November 2020). "Cortical Encoding of Manual Articulatory and Linguistic Features in American Sign Language". Current Biology. 30 (22): 4342–4351.e3. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2020.08.048. PMC 7674262. PMID 32888480.
  13. ^ MacSweeney, M. (2002-07-01). "Neural systems underlying British Sign Language and audio-visual English processing in native users". Brain. 125 (7): 1583–1593. doi:10.1093/brain/awf153. ISSN 1460-2156. PMID 12077007.
  14. ^ Petitto, Laura Ann; Zatorre, Robert J.; Gauna, Kristine; Nikelski, E. J.; Dostie, Deanna; Evans, Alan C. (2000-12-05). "Speech-like cerebral activity in profoundly deaf people processing signed languages: Implications for the neural basis of human language". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 97 (25): 13961–13966. doi:10.1073/pnas.97.25.13961. ISSN 0027-8424. PMC 17683. PMID 11106400.

Bibliography

[edit]
  • Battison, R. (1978) Lexical Borrowing in American Sign Language. Silver Spring, MD: Linstok Press.
  • Brentari, D. (1998) A Prosodic Model of Sign Language Phonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Hulst, Harry van der. 1993. Units in the analysis of signs. Phonology 10, 209–241.
  • Liddell, Scott K. & Robert E. Johnson. 1989. American Sign Language: The phonological base. Sign Language Studies 64. 197–277.
  • Perlmutter, D. 1992. Sonority and syllable structure in American Sign Language. Linguistic Inquiry 23, 407–442.
  • Sandler, W.(1989) Phonological representation of the sign: linearity and nonlinearity in American Sign Language. Dordrecht: Foris.
  • Stokoe, W. (1960) Sign language structure. An outline of the visual communication systems of the American Deaf. (1993 Reprint ed.). Silver Spring, MD: Linstok Press.
  • Van der Kooij, E.(2002). Phonological Categories in Sign Language of the Netherlands. The Role of Phonetic Implementation and Iconicity. PhD Thesis, Universiteit Leiden, Leiden.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=American_Sign_Language_phonology&oldid=1256095392"