Change search
Refine search result
12 1 - 100 of 157
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Rows per page
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sort
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
Select
The maximal number of hits you can export is 250. When you want to export more records please use the Create feeds function.
  • 1.
    Gabarró-López, Sílvia
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Describing buoys from the perspective of discourse markers: a cross-genre study in French Belgian Sign Language (LSFB)2020In: Sign Language and Linguistics, ISSN 1387-9316, E-ISSN 1569-996X, Vol. 2, no 22Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This paper provides a description of the distribution of buoys across genres and of their possible functions as discourse markers in French Belgian Sign Language (LSFB). We selected a sample of dialogic genres—argumentative, explanatory, narrative and metalinguistic—produced by different signers from the LSFB Corpus. In our dataset, buoys are unequally distributed across genres, and list and fragment buoys are the most frequent. Apart from a pointer and a point buoy, only some list buoys have discourse-marking functions, including enumeration, alternative and addition. On the basis of the distribution of all types of buoys, the narrative dialogic genre is the most different as compared to the other three genres. It is characterised by a lower frequency of list buoys and a higher frequency of fragment buoys. When focusing on discourse-marking buoys, the explanatory genre attracts the higher number of tokens, which we relate to the higher degree of preparation as compared to the other genres.

  • 2.
    Gabarró-López, Sílvia
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Discourse markers, where are you? Investigating the relationship between their functions and their position in French Belgian Sign Language conversations2020In: Sign Language Studies, ISSN 0302-1475, E-ISSN 1533-6263, Vol. 20, no 2Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This paper studies the position of two discourse markers, namely PALM-UP and SAME, and the existence of a possible functional paradigm in French Belgian Sign Language. The position is investigated at three different levels: the clause, the basic discourse unit and the turn. The positions in which PALM-UP can appear in the basic discourse unit and the turn are more varied than the positions in which SAME can be found. Most functions of the two discourse markers predominantly appear in a particular position, whereas other functions have a great deal of variation. Most subjective meanings (i.e., related to the signer) expressed by the two discourse markers appear in left peripheral positions, but intersubjective meanings (i.e., related to the addressee) are not restricted to right peripheral positions. The two discourse markers in this position will predominantly occur with a directed gaze towards the addressee, but those in the left periphery occur with either an addressed or a non-addressed eye gaze.

  • 3.
    Holmström, Ingela
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Ryttervik, Magnus
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Schönström, Krister
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Swedish as a Second Language for the Deaf.
    A note on phonological acquisition of novice/L2 signers through a sign repetition task2019Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This paper has two aims. First, it presents the development of a sign repetition test for novice/L2 signers. The test was originally developed and used within the project Teaching Swedish Sign Language (SSL) as a second language to interpreter students (UTL2) at Stockholm University, Sweden (Holmström 2018). Second, it provides a description of the signers’ phonological acquisition from a longitudinal perspective through a qualitative examination of the test outcomes.

    Studies on phonological acquisition of L2 signers confirm that phonology is a challenge to acquire among L2 signers (Bochner et al. 2011; Rosen 2004;). With this as a point of departure, in the project UTL2 we developed a sign repetition test, SignRepL2, targeted at L2 signers, with a focus on sign structure, i.e., phonological features of signs. Several recent studies have shown that repetition tests are an efficient and reliable tool for measuring language proficiency for both L1 users and L2 learners (Gaillard & Tremblay 2016; Klem et al. 2015). And sign languages seem to provide no exception, as in recent years there has been a growing number of sign language repetition tests, e.g. American Sign Language, ASL-SRT (Hauser et al. 2008), and Swedish Sign Language, SSL-SRT (Schönström 2014).

    The procedure in the SignRepL2 test is that the test-taker is instructed to repeat the sign or the short sentences provided in the stimuli as exactly as possible during video recording. In version one, 50 test items were used: 30 single-sign sentences, 10 two-sign sentences and 10 three-sign sentences. However, while the test worked well for the novice signers, a ceiling effect could be observed after one semester. As a consequence, version two of the SignRepL2 was developed by reducing the single-sign sentences from 30 to 10 and by adding 10 new four-sign sentences, now totaling 40 test items.

    The scoring of results follows a five-point rating scale as inspired by Ortega (Ortega cited in Gaillard & Trembly 2016). Here, scores from 0 to 4 are used, depending on the degree of correctness of the test responses. If the whole sign or sentence is correctly produced, 4 points are given. If the manual signing is correct but with missing or wrong mouth action, 3 points are given. If at least half of the sign or sentence is correct, 2 points are given, and a correct rate less than half results in 1 point. If the whole sentence is missing or totally wrong, 0 points are given.

    To date, the SignRepL2 has been tested on 37 SSL L2 students using a longitudinal approach. The students are tested five times under a period of two years during their SSL interpreting education. The first time was before their first ever SSL instruction, the second session took place after approximately 100 hours of instruction, the third after 200 hours, the fourth after 400 hours, and the fifth after 600 hours. The first three times, the primary version of SignRepL2 was used, and in the last two instances, the second version was used. The whole test procedure takes 10-12 minutes to administer and 30 minutes to score.

    In this paper, we will present the test development including the item selection process, scoring and the test results, as well as provide a qualitative examination of the phonological features. In the first test session, it appears that the students primarily try to imitate the actor’s manual signs without understanding the meaning of them, and thereby also exclude the mouth movements. In the later test sessions, there is a gradual change from solely an imitation of form to an imitation of the signs connected to their meaning, revealed, e.g., through the increased use of mouth movements and through the errors made when they replace signs that the actor uses with synonyms that they themselves have mastered. The tests also provide opportunities for a deep analysis of phonological features in the students’ imitation of the signs, and different phonological errors can be revealed at the group level. For example, the primary results indicate that it is the type of movement that the students most often fail to produce correctly. The results from the five test sessions will be compared to each other and detected differences between them will be discussed.

    References

    Bochner, J. H., Christie, K., Hauser, P. C., & Searls, J. M. (2011). When is a difference really different? Learners’ discrimination of linguistic contrasts in American Sign Language. Language Learning, 61(4), 1302–1327. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00671.x

    Gaillard, S., & Tremblay, A. (2016). Linguistic Proficiency Assessment in Second Language Acquisition Research: The Elicited Imitation Task. Language Learning, 1-29. http://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12157

    Hauser, P. C., Paludnevičiene, R., Supalla, T., & Bavelier, D. (2008). American Sign LanguageSentence Reproduction Test: Development and implications. In R. M. de Quadros (ed.), Sign Language: Spinning and unraveling the past, present and future (pp. 160-172). Petropolis, Brazil: Editora Arara Azul.

    Holmström, I. (2018). Teaching Swedish Sign Language as second language to interpreter students. Proceedings from the Nordic Seminar, Umeå, Sweden, 23-25 February 2018.

    Klem, M., Melby-Lervåg, M., G, M., Hagtvet, B., Lyster, S. A. H., Gustafsson, J. E., & Hulme, C. (2015). Sentence repetition is a measure of children’s language skills rather than working memory limitations. Developmental Science, 18(1), 146–154. http://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12202

    Rosen, R. S. (2004). Beginning L2 production errors in ASL lexical phonology: A cognitive phonology model. Sign Language & Linguistics, 7(1), 31–61. http://doi.org/10.1075/sll.7.1.04beg

    Schönström, K. (2014). Swedish Sign Language Sentence Reproduction Test (SSL-SRT). Unpublished test, Stockholm: Stockholm University, Department of Linguistics.

  • 4.
    Schönström, Krister
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Swedish as a Second Language for the Deaf.
    Mesch, Johanna
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Corpus in Swedish Sign Language as a Second Language (SSLC-L2) – A Report2019Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Since 2013 we have been building up a learner corpusin Swedish Sign Language (SSL) as a second language (L2). From 2017 this work has been funded by Riksbanken Jubileumsfond (RJ) for three years. In our presentation we will report on the work with the SSLC-L2. A short overview and some examples of the corpus design will be provided. The main scope of the talk, however, will be description of the annotation work of the L2 structures, i.e. the learners’ interlanguage. Here we discuss some challenges in annotating the L2 interlanguage. This include analysis ofspecific L2 structures and how to annotate them as well as examples on some preliminary results.

  • 5.
    Schönström, Krister
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Swedish as a Second Language for the Deaf.
    Mesch, Johanna
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Frequency and distribution of signs and sign proficiency in second language (L2) signers – a longitudinal and comparative study2019Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Production of vocabulary is one of the essential components of language competence. However, no study has yet investigated the L2 acquisition of signs of any sign language in a broader sense. Such a study is motivated by the fact that vocabulary is a particularly interesting area in sign languages considering the categories of signs, i.e., sign types (see e.g. Johnston 2010). This paper examines the frequency and distribution of signs produced by L2 learners of Swedish Sign Language. In addition, we make an attempt to describe the sign proficiency and to track the development of L2 signs.

    Earlier research on L2 sign acquisition has mostly focused upon phonological structures of signs (e.g. Bochner et al. 2011; Ortega & Morgan 2015; Rosen 2004), with some studies on other structures e.g. classifier constructions (Marshall & Morgan 2015). Due to our corpus-based data we are able to attempt a description of the frequency and distribution of signs, as well as L2 analysis of signs used by the learners. Our L2 analysis has included phonological, morphological and lexical analysis according to the complexity, accuracy and fluency (CAF) framework (Housen & Kuiken 2009), i.e., L2 signers’ proficiency is accounted through three components: degree of complexity, degree of accuracy and degree of fluency.

    Sampled longitudinal corpus data from 16 adult L2 signers from the Swedish Sign Language as an L2 Corpus (SSLC-L2) (Schönström & Mesch 2017) was analyzed. Two kinds of data were included: dialogue data based on interviews, and retellings of a movie clip. This was compared with data from 9 L1 signers.

    We provide results outlining the distribution and frequency of signs in L2 signers at two different time points in their development as well a comparison with L1 signers with regard to distribution and frequency of (1) signs, (2) sign types and (3) parts of speech. For example, with regard to the verbs, it was revealed that the proportion of lexical verb signs increases with time while the proportion of depicting signs remains the same. We discuss this in light of the contributing role of gesture in L2 sign production, as the line between some depicting signs (e.g. handling handshapes) and gestures is not always crystal clear. With regard to sign proficiency according to the CAF framework, the results revealed, among other things, that phonological errors are common, and in line with results provided by earlier research which suggest a learning order in which location parameter is acquired before handshape and movement parameters.

  • 6.
    Mesch, Johanna
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Raanes, Eli
    Questions and response in tactile sign language use2019Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In this study, we will focus on questions and responses of deafblind people in two sign languages in tactual modality: Swedish Sign Language and Norwegian Sign Language. Everyday conversation in sign language works by the combination of manual expressions made by the hands and body in combination with non-manual (visual) expressions. The visual non-manual expressions may include eye gaze, facial expressions and mouth movement. The usage of interrogative structures (how to express questions) is a typical part of signed languages where the visual and non-manual components have specific importance as signals of a question or a wish for response. Many studies have focused on various aspects of question and response in several sign languages, giving insight on the importance of precise usage of the non-manual parts of signing (e.g. Zeshan, 2006). Tactile sign languages are used in dialogical situations where those involved in the interaction not are able to see each other. Based on earlier studies of tactile sign languages (Mesch, 1998, 2013; Mesch, Raanes, & Ferrara, 2015; Raanes, 2006, 2011), we are investigating understanding practices and mistakes concerning questions and responses. Based on our empirical data from natural interaction between adult deafblind signers, we will focus on a selection on ways of getting attention towards request for response and how to question-constructions are formed in datasets from those two sign languages. The findings from this study show that there are different type of questions (content, polar, rhetorical) and type of social actions (e.g. request for confirmation or clarification, repair, etc.), where deafblind signers have their own strategies (e.g. fingerspelling, repetition etc.) to understand each other.

  • 7. Webster, Jenny
    et al.
    Safar, Josefina
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Scoring sign language vitality: Adapting a spoken language survey to target the endangerment factors affecting sign languages2019In: Language Documentation & Conservation, ISSN 1934-5275, E-ISSN 1934-5275, Vol. 13, p. 346-383Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This article explores factors affecting the vitality/endangerment levels of sign languages, and how these levels were assessed through an international collaboration using a systematic scoring scheme. This included adapting UNESCO's Linguistic Vitality and Diversity survey and developing a system for determining endangerment levels based on the responses. Other endangerment scales are briefly explored along with UNESCO's, and the survey adaptation and systematic scoring processes are explained. The survey needed to be carefully adapted because even though many spoken language procedures can be also used for sign languages, there are additional challenges and characteristics that uniquely affect sign language communities. The article then presents the vitality scores for 15 languages, including both national and village sign languages, and the major factors threatening their vitality. The methodology of scoring based on averages is innovative, as is the workflow between the questionnaire respondents and scoring committee. Such innovations may also be useful for spoken languages. Future efforts might develop best practice models for promoting sign language vitality and compile diachronic data to monitor changes in endangerment status. The findings can also inform policy work to bring about legal recognition, greater communication access, and the protection of deaf signers' linguistic and cultural identity.

  • 8.
    Mesch, Johanna
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Müller de Quadros, Ronice
    Segmentation in sign languages2019Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The aim of this paper is to discuss different levels of segmentation considering linguistic analyses of sign languages. These levels of segmentation include the (1) word, sign by sign; (2) the utterance, based on each statement; (3) the syntactic segments focusing on the predicates; (4) the sentence, including subordinates, coordinates, complements, relative clauses; and, (5) translation. Each level of segmentation will be presented considering specific criteria. The segmentation of sign languages focused on in this presentation was proposed based on data from two sign language corpora: Swedish Sign Language Corpus and Brazilian Sign Language Corpus. We analyzed annotations from conversation settings of eight Deaf people, four from each country, each one an interactive setting in pairs. Conversation is a setting that involves more spontaneous production, without previous planning. This kind of setting needs additional criteria for segmentation to be analyzed at different levels of linguistic analysis.

    An utterance is a full proposition, and is a segment including formal marks such as intonation and pauses in association with the context in which is produced. A syntactic segment is expressed through a predicate (verbal or nominal). Each predicate is separated in this specific segment. Following Börstell et al. (2016:19), we define a clause (here a syntactic segment) as a unit in which a predicate asserts something about one or more elements (the arguments). The base of the sentence is driven by syntax, while the utterance is driven by meaning. A full proposition can have more than one syntactic segment. In both cases, prosody is taken into account. Prosody includes non-manual markers, pauses, body- or gaze shifting, blinks and head nod (as analyzed for Finnish Sign Language and Swedish Sign Language, in Puupponen et al. 2016).

    For syntactic analysis, we can consider multiple syntactic segments for studying different sentence levels of only one syntactic phrase or more, including different scopes of the sentence (such as a verbal phrase, or nominal phrase, an adverbial phrase, an adjectival phrase, a topic phrase, a focus phrase, a complement phrase).

    The translation tier is created through utterances in another language (such as Swedish and Portuguese, and into English). We have seen that it might coincide with the utterance in sign language, but not always. This seems to happen because the proposition in each language may be slightly different.

    The following examples illustrate the criteria established for both languages:

    SSL (SSLC01_246 00:02:18.500-00:02:24.090)One utterance, four syntactic segmentsUtterance: TO DEAF YOUNG POINT.PL YOUNG PRO1 OLDER PU PRO1 MUST TELL POINT.PL KNOW-NOT WHO POINTSyntactic segments: TO DEAF YOUNG POINT.PL YOUNG / PRO1 OLDER PU / PRO1 MUST TELL / POINT.PL KNOW-NOT WHO POINTTranslation: When I, a little older, meet deaf young people, I usually tell them about him, they usually do not know who he is.SSL (SSLC01_246 00:01:12.936-00:01:15.756)One utterance, two syntactic segmentsUtterance: IMPORTANT GET SIGN-LANGUAGE GRAMMAR (facial expression) EFFECTSyntactic segments: IMPORTANT GET SIGN-LANGUAGE GRAMMAR / (facial expression) / EFFECTTranslation: It is important to acquire sign language grammar, it is a wow experience and a good start.Libras (FLN_G1_D1_CONVER_Escolasurdoouvinte 00:00:01:000-00:00:10:000)One utterance, three syntactic segmentsUtterance: SCHOOL INCLUSION HARD BECAUSE THERE-IS-NO THINKING KNOW DEAF CULTURE RIGHT?Syntactic segments: SCHOOL INCLUSION HARD / BECAUSE THERE-IS-NO THINKING KNOW DEAF CULTURE / RIGHT?Translation: The inclusive school finds some difficulty, because there is no knowledge of deaf culture, isn’t it?Libras (FLN_G3_D6_CONVER_EscolasurdoouvinteOne utterance, three syntactic segmentsUtterance: POINT.PL STUDENTS HEARING TALK PRO1 DEAF DV(stay-static) HELP NOTHINGSyntactic segment: POINT.PL STUDENTS HEARING TALK / PRO1 DEAF DV(stay-static) / HELP NOTHINGTranslation: The hearing students talk to each other, while I, a deaf child, stay still observing without help (to communicate) from the others.

    The purpose of establishing the same criteria for segmentation is to make possible contrastive and comparative studies among sign languages.

  • 9.
    Björkstrand, Thomas
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Balkstam, Eira
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Willing, Josephine
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Sign language dictionary as a digital tool in L2 teaching: Score evaluation of sentences for CEFR levels A1-B22019Conference paper (Other academic)
  • 10.
    Björkstrand, Thomas
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Balkstam, Eira
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Willing, Josephine
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Sign language dictionary as a digital tool in Sign language interpreting education: Score evaluation of sentences for CEFR levels A1-B22019Conference paper (Other academic)
  • 11. Lillo-Martin, Diane
    et al.
    Rathmann, Christian
    Mesch, Johanna
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Sign Language Linguistics Society: Sign language research and sign language rights for all2019In: Sign Language Rights for All: Programme & Abstracts, 2019, p. 128-128Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    The international Sign Language Linguistics Society was founded by a group of sign language linguists in 2000 and aims to promote sign language research on an international scale and the maintenance of high scientific and ethical standards of research into the languages of deaf communities. SLLS encourages the exchange of information through meetings and publications, particularly the Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research (TISLR) conference series. SLLS signed a memorandum of understanding with the WFD in 2016. In this presentation, we will discuss some of the ways that SLLS members are involved in activities that support sign language rights for all. Many SLLS members work on research into sign language acquisition by deaf and hearing children (Chen Pichler et al., 2018), and on promoting linguistic human rights and the avoidance of language deprivation for deaf children (Humphries et al., 2016). Most SLLS members also work in other less obvious ways in supporting sign language rights, particularly in the linguistic description and documentation of the sign languages of deaf communities. In the last decade, we have seen the rise of corpus-based approaches to sign language linguistics. Corpora are large representative samples of language data that can be search by computer and which can provide a collection for many uses. We have also seen more online dictionaries of sign languages, many of them supported by the work done by sign language researchers. Linguists also work on reference grammars, and work with deaf communities in many parts of the world to document their sign languages, including many endangered village sign languages. Sign language researchers provide evidence to language policy makers, and work to promote linguistic and cultural diversity to government. Sign language corpora, reference grammars and online dictionaries provide invaluable resources to sign language teachers, students and trainee interpreters. The increased understanding of sign language structure and use that comes from the work of linguists leads to improved sign language teaching resources that describe how the language is used within deaf communities. This will in turn enable us to create more reliable and valid sign language assessment instruments, for example. The greater understanding of and improved resources for sign language teaching and learning will also provide an evidence base for policy makers in supporting appropriate education, training and services for deaf children and adults. More appropriate resources for the bilingual education of deaf children and for sign language teaching interpreter training will lead to improved quality of educational and interpreting services for deaf people and provide more opportunities for self-development and employment. All of these aspects of the struggle for sign language rights are supported by the work of SLLS members.

  • 12.
    Holmström, Ingela
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Mesch, Johanna
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Schönström, Krister
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics.
    Teckenspråksforskningen under 2000-talet: En översikt2019Report (Other academic)
    Abstract [sv]

    Det finns många olika inriktningar inom teckenspråksforskningen idag och en avsevärd mängd studier utifrån olika perspektiv och på olika språkliga nivåer. I den här forskningsrapporten görs en översikt över svensk och internationell teckenspråksforskning under 2000-talet, med särskilt fokus på allmänspråkvetenskap. Rapporten berör dock även kognitiv lingvistik, psyko- och neurolingvistik samt sociolingvistik. Dessutom fokuseras i ett varsitt avsnitt barns teckenspråk och inlärning av teckenspråk som andraspråk. Det som tas upp är ett urval av den forskning som bedrivits och rapporten gör inte anspråk på att vara heltäckande, men ger utöver de översiktliga beskrivningarna också ett stort antal referenser för fortsatt egen läsning inom de olika områden som tas upp.

  • 13.
    Simper-Allen, Pia
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Mesch, Johanna
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    The Use of Signing Space in Signed News Broadcasts / L’utilisation de l’espace de signation dans les émissions signées2019In: Lidil, ISSN 1146-6480, E-ISSN 1960-6052, no 60Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This study focuses on the use of tokens, that is, empty non-topographical areas in front of the signer, in two different production sets of Swedish news broadcasts in Swedish Sign Language, one for deaf adults and another for deaf upper school-aged children. The sample includes altogether 1,084 tokens in token blends. The presenters refer to an earlier established token frequently, and the most frequent sign types used to indicate a presence of a token are lexical signs, pointing and indicating signs. The tokens are mainly placed either to the left or right side of the presenter and to a lesser degree in the area straight ahead. The introduction and conclusion parts in news have fewer tokens. Interestingly, the signing space in token blends seems to be larger than the signing space in informal settings. We suggest these findings may be characteristic of the media genre. We also take into consideration the use of pictures on the screen and what effect they have on the creation of tokens.

  • 14. Leeson, Lorraine
    et al.
    Fenlon, Jordan
    Mesch, Johanna
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Grehan, Carmel
    Sheridan, Sarah
    The uses of corpora in L1 and L2/Ln sign language pedagogy2019In: The Routledge Handbook of Sign Language Pedagogy / [ed] Russell S. Rosen, Routledge, 2019, p. 339-352Chapter in book (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This chapter explores the use of sign language corpora in L1 and L2/Ln sign language classes. We discuss how corpora have been developed and used by linguists working on spoken and, more recently, signed languages. The corpora can be leveraged for pedagogic purposes. Examples from corpora-based pedagogical practice in Sweden, Ireland, and Australia are offered. We outline some possible future pedagogical applications of sign language corpora and propose some research pathways that presently remain unexplored.

  • 15.
    Mesch, Johanna
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Schönström, Krister
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Swedish as a Second Language for the Deaf.
    Use of non-manual mouth actions in L1 and L2 signers based on data from two different SL corpora (SSLC and SSLC-L2)2019Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    This presentation focuses on non-manual mouth actions performed by deaf signers and adult second language (L2) learners of Swedish Sign Language (SSL). The discussion of the linguistic status of mouth actions in the literature motivates our work and study. Based data from SSLC (Swedish Sign Language Corpus) (Mesch & Wallin 2015) and SSLC-L2 (L2 learner corpus in SSL) (Mesch & Schönström 2018), we compare the use of mouth actions in L1 as well as L2learners. The presentation will also describe the annotation work of non-manual mouth actions. The annotation and analysis depart from Crasborn et al.’s (2008) categories of mouth actions that have been applied to several sign languages. Distribution, frequency and spreading patterns of use of mouth actions are observed and described. The results reveal some similarities as well as differences in use of mouth actions between the groups. Furthermore, the analysis reveals qualitative differences related to the interaction and synchronization of mouth actions and hand movements among L2 learners of SSL. Challenges of annotating mouth actions will also be discussed. 

  • 16. Sutton-Spence, Rachel
    et al.
    Mesch, Johanna
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    What are norms of sign language poetry? Studies from sign language poetry anthologies and collections2019Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This research uses recent developments in online, digital collections and anthologies of sign language poetry to describe the poetic norms that govern the expectations of sign language poets and their audiences. We follow Toury’s idea of norms, as “the general values or ideas shared by a community […] appropriate for and applicable to particular situations, specifying what is prescribed and forbidden as well as what is tolerated and permitted in a certain behavioural dimension.” (1995: 55). Norms are particularly important to avoid prescriptivism, enabling researchers of sign language literature and poetry to describe what is currently considered good, and what has been considered good in different times and different communities, without prescribing how sign language poetry should be done. We draw on sign language poetry anthologies from three different sign languages to look at the language, literary and cultural norms underlying the poetry, in search of what may be considered “the best” in each culture. We find similarities and differences across the anthologies and their languages.

    Anthologies of literary productions in sign languages are needed as a resource for research and teaching in sign language literary and linguistics and for translators and poets to develop their work. Early research on sign language poetry focused on the work of a small selection of poets, simply because that was all that was available for research purposes (for example Christie and Wilkins, 2007; Sutton-Spence, 2005, Crasborn 2006; Rose, 2006). Such limited materials enabled researchers to perform in-depth analyses of signed poetry and afforded great insights into the art form but could not give broader overviews of the range of norms existing in the poets’ communities.

    Anthologies pre-suppose that their selected content is “the best” (Hopkins 2008), as considered by the community’s “expectancy norms” (Pym, 2010). Di Leo (2004) has noted that traditional views of anthologies require them to include work that has been published previously and has “stood the test of time”. Sign language anthologies rarely follow this maxim because of the recency of the art-form, and the collections used for this research include new material as well as previously published works. The relationship between canons and anthologies is also well-recognised (Guillory, 1993; Finke 2004), as anthologies reflect and create canons of literature.

    We investigated the poems and literary performances in four online anthologies and collections of sign language literature in three countries (two in Brazilian Sign language, one in British Sign Language, and one in Swedish Sign Language). Although our primary interest was sign language poetry, we note (along with Peters 2000) that there is no watertight definition of a poem in sign language (or possibly in any language). One Brazilian anthology contains 35 poems by 21 poets, and the other contains 20 poems by 19 poets. There is no overlap in the content of poems, although several poets are represented in both. The British anthology contained 100 poems. The majority were by 9 individual poets, although three poems, being Renga poems were composed and performed by an additional 25 people. The Swedish collection contains 25 poems by 14 individual poets and also some collective Renga poems.

    In our study, we find that the accepted and valued forms of sign language poetry are diverse, with a range of genres. Analysis of the poems found that some norms for sign language poems arise from within the wider literary world (for example signed haiku and renga), with varying degrees of adaptations (including duets and lyric poems), but some are specific to sign languages (such as multiple perspective poems, classifier poems and Visual Vernacular pieces). Basic concepts, such as how closely the poetry fits sign language grammar may be seen within the poems in the anthologies.

    As Pym (2010) acknowledges, however, norms have a prescriptive undertone, given that work that does not adhere to the current norms may not be considered “good”. Difficult work (Shetley 1993) may be seen as deviating from the norm and thus risks not being included in anthologies and not being considered as material for research (which promotes poetic work considerably). Anthologies are traditionally seen as conservative phenomena (Gilbert and Guber, 1979). Knowing that norm-breaking leads to innovation and that poetry’s business is innovation, norms are in constant tension with the games that poets play, as new trends emerge. In the anthologies studied, we see evidence of new forms developing, and more established forms being created.

  • 17.
    Gabarró-López, Sílvia
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    What can discourse markers tell us about genres and vice versa? A corpus-driven study of French Belgian Sign Language (LSFB)2019In: Lidil, ISSN 1146-6480, E-ISSN 1960-6052, no 60Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This paper focuses on the use of three discourse markers – namely list buoys, PALM-UP and SAME – across genres in French Belgian Sign Language. Our sample contains argumentative, explanatory, metalinguistic and narrative dialogues produced by six signers. We present a functional description of the three discourse markers and their distribution across genres. PALM-UP and SAME are highly polyfunctional, whereas list buoys express fewer functions in the dataset. In our sample, there are few differences in frequency of use of the three discourse markers and their functions across genres.

  • 18.
    Gabarró-López, Sílvia
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    When the meaning of SAME is not restricted to likeness: A preliminary study from the perspective of discourse relational devices in two sign languages2019In: Discours - Revue de linguistique, psycholinguistique et informatique, ISSN 1963-1723, E-ISSN 1963-1723, no 24Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This paper presents a study of a discourse relational device, namely same, in French Belgian Sign Language and Catalan Sign Language. Three aspects of same are examined including its distribution across genres, its functional description and its position in discourse. Two comparable samples were extracted from the reference corpora of these two sign languages. An annotation protocol and a segmentation model designed for the study of discourse relational devices in the spoken modality were used with the necessary adaptations to the signed modality. The results show a different distribution of same across genres in each sign language and several possible positions. Although same is polyfunctional in the two datasets, the most frequent function in the French Belgian Sign Language dataset (i.e., addition) is not found in the Catalan Sign Language dataset. This finding indicates that equivalent discourse relational devices in the signed modality also have language-specific functions as their counterparts in the spoken modality do.

  • 19. Bono, Mayumi
    et al.
    Efthimiou, EleniFotinea, Stavroula-EvitaHanke, ThomasHochgesang, JulieKristoffersen, JetteMesch, JohannaStockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.Osugi, Yutaka
    8th Workshop on the Representation and Processing of Sign Languages: Involving the Language Community: Proceedings2018Conference proceedings (editor) (Refereed)
  • 20. Clark, Becky
    et al.
    Mesch, Johanna
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    A global perspective on disparity of gender anddisability for deaf female athletes2018In: Sport in Society: Cultures, Media, Politics, Commerce, ISSN 1743-0437, E-ISSN 1743-0445, Vol. 21, no 1, p. 64-75Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Although the significance of gender and disability issues has graduallyincreased in the global society during the past three decades,there are only few studies with regard to the deaf community andsport. This article examines the level of Deaf or Hard-of-Hearingwomen’s participation in sports and the factors for their continuedunderrepresentation. The WomenSport International’s Task Force onDeaf and Hard of Hearing Girls and Women in Sport conducted aworld-wide survey to determine and assess the needs of deaf andhard of hearing girls and women in sport. A snapshot of the resultsand issues and future aspirations are provided.

  • 21.
    Wallin, Lars
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Mesch, Johanna
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Annoteringskonventioner för teckenspråkstexter: Version 7 (januari 2018)2018Report (Other academic)
  • 22.
    Mesch, Johanna
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Challenges of creating a sign dictionary2018In: Records of Visible Language: Sign Language Dictionary, Seoul: The National Institute of Korean Langauge (NIKL) , 2018, p. 61-77Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    The article will describe how the Swedish Sign Language Dictionary has developed, and why it takes a long time to establish such a dictionary. A lexicographic work of Swedish Sign Language was initiated in 1988 at Stockholm University, and it resulted, in 2001, the first dictionary online. The Swedish Sign Language Dictionary was created in 2008 and has been in development since. When the direction of the corpus construction started in 2003, and when the corpus data, thanks to the three-years project of the Swedish Sign Language Corpus 2009-2011, expanded with gloss annotations, a discussion has arisen about how the Online Swedish Sign Language Dictionary should continue to be in its development and in which direction, and how to use the SSL Corpus as a source of input for new signs and lexical variation in the SSL Dictionary.

  • 23.
    Riemer Kankkonen, Nikolaus
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Björkstrand, Thomas
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Mesch, Johanna
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Börstell, Carl
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Crowdsourcing for the Swedish Sign Language Dictionary2018In: 8th Workshop on the Representation and Processing of Sign Languages: Involving the Language Community: Proceedings / [ed] Mayumi Bono, Eleni Efthimiou, Stavroula-Evita Fotinea, Thomas Hanke, Julie Hochgesang, Jette Kristoffersen, Johanna Mesch, Yutaka Osugi, European Language Resources Association, 2018, p. 171-174Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In this paper, we describe how we are actively using the Swedish Sign Language (SSL) community in collecting and documenting signs and lexical variation for our language resources, particularly the online Swedish Sign Language Dictionary (SSLD). Apart from using the SSL Corpus as a source of input for new signs and lexical variation in the SSLD, we also involve the community in two ways: first, we interact with SSL signers directly at various venues, collecting signs and judgments about signs; second, we discuss sign usage, lexical variation, and sign formation with SSL signers on social media, particularly through a Facebook group in which we both actively engage in and monitor discussions about SSL. Through these channels, we are able to get direct feedback on our language documentation work and improve on what has become the main lexicographic resource for SSL. We describe the process of simultaneously using corpus data, judgment and elicitation data, and crowdsourcing and discussion groups for enhancing the SSLD, and give examples of findings pertaining to lexical variation resulting from this work.

  • 24.
    Mesch, Urban
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Mesch, Johanna
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Den medelpadska dövhistorien: Från Sundsvallsbranden till Sundsvallsbron2018Book (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 25.
    Mesch, Johanna
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Schönström, Krister
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Swedish as a Second Language for the Deaf.
    From Design and Collection to Annotation of a Learner Corpus of Sign Language2018In: 8th Workshop on the Representation and Processing of Sign Languages: Involving the Language Community: Proceedings / [ed] Mayumi Bono, Eleni Efthimiou, Stavroula-Evita Fotinea, Thomas Hanke, Julie Hochgesang, Jette Kristoffersen, Johanna Mesch, Yutaka Osugi, European Language Resources Association, 2018, p. 121-126Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This paper aims to present part of the project “From Speech to Sign – learning Swedish Sign Language as a second language” which include a learner corpus that is based on data produced by hearing adult L2 signers. The paper describes the design of corpus building and the collection of data for the Corpus in Swedish Sign Language as a Second Language (SSLC-L2). Another component of ongoing work is the creation of a specialized annotation scheme for SSLC-L2, one that differs somewhat from the annotation work in Swedish Sign Language Corpus (SSLC), where the data is based on performance by L1 signers. Also, we will account for and discuss the methodology used to annotate L2 structures.

  • 26.
    Mesch, Johanna
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Signing and showing in tactual modality2018In: Sign CAFÉ 1: The first international workshop on cognitive and functional explorations in sign language linguistics, 2018, p. 16-17Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Tactile sign languages are described as sign language variants for DeafBlind (DB) signers. When losing their sight, they sign in the tactile modality, while holding each other's hand/s (Edwards, 2015; Mesch, 2001, 2016). Presence of constructed action through eye gaze, and also other articulators such as head and body, requests modification of indicating verbs or depicting verbs (Cormier, Smith, & Sevcikova-Sehyr, 2015). DB signers can be a part of the event and imagine themselves as other referents when producing indicating verbs, or tend to imagine themselves as other referents during production of these verbs in a motivated way (cf. surrogate space of Liddell (2003)). An earlier study (Mesch, Raanes, & Ferrara, 2015) shows that the signer can use her/his own or the other interlocutor’s hand or body part as part of the utterance to create joint attention/meaning.The Tactile Sign Language Corpus currently features one long and 60 short video files (totally 4:30 hours) with accompanying annotation files created in the multimodal annotation tool ELAN. Annotation work with glosses and translation is ongoing. Only two of the video files are selected, with two DB male signers, to highlight the study on referring people and constructing events without gaze directions and head movements. The elicitation method for data collection differs from other sign language corpora because of limited possibilities to use a picture book, cartoons or video. In this presentation, we will describe tactual elicitation methods.In general, the results show that the use of constructed action by DB signers differs from the one by sighted signers. The DB signers use different strategies to show what the referents are doing in the narratives. The results also show that they create fewer surrogate and token spaces, but they are able to complete them tactually through placing signs in different directions and distances, and also using the other interlocutor’s hand or arm as part of the mental space, see Figures 1-3.

  • 27.
    Mesch, Johanna
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Teckenspråkets framtid2018Other (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 28.
    Holmström, Ingela
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics.
    Mesch, Johanna
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Teckenspråkskommunikation och nyttjande av teckenrummet i dialog mellan personer med dövblindhet2018Report (Other academic)
    Abstract [sv]

    Det finns i Sverige runt 2000 personer under 65 år med dövblindhet. En andel av dem är döva sedan barndomen och har förvärvat sin synnedsättning senare i livet. De har då vanligen svenskt teckenspråk som sitt förstaspråk och har i takt med att synen blivit sämre övergått till att använda sig av taktilt teckenspråk som är en del av det svenska teckenspråket, men som inte i samma utsträckning grundar sig i vad som kan uppfattas visuellt. I den här forskningsrapporten studeras taktil teckenspråkskommunikation och hur de personer med dövblindhet som först lärt sig det visuella svenska teckenspråket innan de övergår till att använda taktilt svenskt teckenspråk använder sig av teckenrummet i dialoger med varandra. Till grund för analysen ligger en korpus som består av åtta informanter i varierande åldrar från olika delar av Sverige. Denna korpus har kunnat skapas tack vare medel från Mo Gårds forskningsfond och arbetet med att annotera dialogerna har pågått allt sedan inspelningarna genomfördes år 2013. Idag har strax under hälften av korpusen annoterats och det är den annoterade delen som ligger till grund för analysen som redovisas i denna rapport. Bland annat beskrivs hur informanterna skapar gemensam mening och förståelse när de inte ser varandra och hur de ger återkopplingar på ett sätt som skiljer sig från hur man gör i det visuella svenska teckenspråket. Dessutom visas skillnader mellan det visuella och taktila svenska teckenspråket avseende andelen bokstaveringar, som är högre i det taktila, liksom förekomsten av pekningar som istället är mindre vanliga där.

  • 29.
    Mesch, Urban
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Mesch, Johanna
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    The Deaf Sport Movement in Europe: Deaf Sport Without Borders2018Book (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
    Abstract [en]

    The European Deaf Sport Organisation (EDSO), formed 1983, is an umbrella organisation for the entire European sports movement for the deaf and hearing-impaired. EDSO consists of deaf national sport associations in 40 European countries. This book describes the development and significance of European deaf sport as well as its organizational development. The content is based on information from minutes, business reports, newspapers, EDSO bulletins and archive documents, and more importantly, on interviews with those involved in EDSO. The book offers an inspiring picture of the history of European cooperation in the form of competitions and sports meetings.

  • 30.
    Holmström, Ingela
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics.
    Balkstam, Eira
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Tolkad tolkutbildning2018In: Tolking: språkarbeid og profesjonsutøvelse / [ed] Hilde Haualand, Anna-Lena Nilsson, Eli Raanes, Oslo: Gyldendal Akademisk, 2018, p. 317-335Chapter in book (Refereed)
    Abstract [sv]

    I kapitlet fokuseras olika aspekter av tolkanvändning inom ramen för teckenspråkstolkutbildningen. Kapitlet bygger på intervjuer med studenter, lärare och tolkar och analysen visar att tolkstudenter under utbildningen genomgår en process från att vara rena nykomlingar till att bli legitima perifera deltagare (Lave och Wenger, 1991) i en teckenspråkstolkgemenskap. Genom att använda tolk i utbildningen får studenterna ett situerat lärande där de genom att möta professionella tolkar övergår från att mer eller mindre omedvetet använda tolk i syfte att tillägna sig undervisningsinnehållet, till att bli medvetna såväl om tolkyrket som profession som om tolkens maktposition gentemot döva tolkanvändare.

  • 31.
    Börstell, Carl
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Jantunen, Tommi
    Mesch, Johanna
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Kimmelman, Vadim
    Oomen, Marloes
    de Lint, Vanja
    Transitivity prominence within and across modalities2018Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The idea of transitivity as a scalar phenomenon is well known (e.g., Hopper & Thompson 1980; Tsunoda 1985; Haspelmath 2015). However, as with most areas of linguistic study, it has been almost exclusively studied with a focus on spoken languages. A rare exception to this is Kimmelman (2016), who investigates transitivity in Russian Sign Language (RSL) on the basis of corpus data. Kimmelman attempts to establish a transitivity prominence hierarchy of RSL verbs, and compares this ranking to the verb meanings found in the ValPal database (Hartmann, Haspelmath & Bradley 2013). He arrives at the conclusion that using the frequency of overt objects in corpus data is a successful measure of transitivity prominence, and that the prominence ranking of RSL verbs correlate with that found for spoken languages in Haspelmath (2015). In this paper, we expand on these intra- and cross-modal comparisons of transitivity prominence by introducing four other sign languages to the sample: Finnish Sign Language (FinSL), Swedish Sign Language (SSL), Sign Language to the Netherlands (NGT), and German Sign Language (DGS). FinSL and SSL are known to be historically related (cf. Bergman & Engberg-Pedersen 2010), while the other are not related, which allows us to look at both modality and relatedness effects in our sample. Of the 80 core verb meanings in the ValPal database, Kimmelman (2016) included the 25 most frequent verbs in his corpus. For our study, we have annotated all occurrences of these 25 verb meanings in a subset of the corpora of FinSL (2h 40min; 18,446 tokens), SSL (2h 5min; 16,724 tokens), NGT (≈80,000 tokens), and DGS (≈58,000 tokens). We annotate whether a verb occurs with an overt object as well as the type of object (direct, indirect, clausal, or a locative). Looking at the ValPal verb meanings with ≥5 sign tokens in all four new languages, we arrive at 12 verbs that are found in all five sign languages and the spoken languages (SpL) of the ValPal database – see Table 1. In Table 1, we see that there is a general agreement across languages – both signed and spoken – in how transitivity prominent a verb meaning is. Spearman’s rank correlation shows a significant (p<0.05) correlation between all possible pairs except SSL–SpL (p=0.091) and SSL– RSL (p=0.074), corroborating Kimmelman’s finding that there are patterns of transitivity prominence present across languages and modalities. It is interesting that SSL thus diverges from the other sign languages in this sample: this deserves further investigation. We also wanted to investigate the transitivity prominence as a property of individual languages. In order to do so, we took the individual languages of the ValPal database and measured each verb meaning in each language with regard to its transitivity prominence. This meant calculating how many of the verb forms associated with a specific verb meaning took a P argument. Note that this is quite different from calculating transitivity prominence based on corpus data: with corpora, we calculated the proportion of verbal tokens occurring with an overt object, and with the ValPal database, we calculated the proportion of transitive verb associated with a particular concept. We included the 12 verb meanings found across all languages (the five sign languages and 33 spoken languages). We then calculated mean distances across verb meanings and languages, and plotted this with multidimensional scaling in Figure 1. In the figure, we see that the five sign languages form a part of a cluster, suggesting either modality-based similarities, or similarities that come with the difference in data (corpus data rather than lexical data). On the other hand, sign languages as a group are not clearly opposed to spoken languages as a group, which implies that the corpus-based and lexical calculations of transitivity are comparable. Interestingly, FinSL and SSL are not more strongly associated than the other sign languages, which implies that their historical relatedness is not directly relevant to transitivity. In our presentation, we will present the results and the conclusions in more detail, as well as discuss the possibilities of using corpus data to establish valency patterns for languages in the signed modality.

  • 32.
    Mesch, Johanna
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Schönström, Krister
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Swedish as a Second Language for the Deaf.
    Larsson, Ylva
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Use of ENTITY, HANDLE and DESCRIPTOR in L2 learners of Swedish Sign Language2018In: Sign CAFÉ 1: The first international workshop on cognitive and functional explorations in sign language linguistics, 2018, p. 27-28Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    In our paper, we describe the acquisition of classifier constructions of L2 learners of SSL. Previous studies show that learning a sign language, contributes a high degree of iconically motivated lexicon and enable L2 learners to gesturally imitate the tasks or events from stimulus in an elicited narrative task. However, despite of this “gestural advantage”, L2 learners have been reported to differ in the phonological structure of iconically motivated lexical signs (e.g. Ortega & Morgan, 2015). In addition, regarding the L2 acquisition of the classifier constructions, it has been shown that the location seems to be acquired before the handshape parameter (e.g. Marshall & Morgan, 2015). However, research on this area is limited, especially on authentic data, i.e. corpus-based studies on L2 acquisition. In our study, the use of classifier constructions by L2 learners at different developmental stages using SSL was investigated. The corpus consists of a set of longitudinal data of adult L2-learners’ signed production. In total, the corpus consists of 20:38 hours of data from 38 learners, along with a control cohort consisting of 9 L1 signers ( 01:22 hours). For this study, a sampled annotated data, consists of 05:55 hours of a video retelling of a movie clip “The plank” from 23 learners, at two phases i.e. six months after course onset (N=14), and 1.5 years after onset (N=9), was analyzed. Comparisons to an L1 cohort (9 fluent signers) was made. Specifically, three broad types of classifier constructions were analyzed: ENTITY (entity handshapes), HANDLE (handle handshapes), and DESCRIPTOR (size and shape descriptive handshapes) (c.f. Schembri, 2003). A total of 779 tokens were identified and analyzed. The results show that the L2 learners tend to differ in the use in comparison with the L1 signers. First, L1 signers use classifier constructions to a greater extent (Table 1). Second, there were some qualitative differences with the regard of use. For example, in respect of HANDLE, simultaneous use of two separate handshape units were more common in L1 signers. Concerning ENTITY, the handshapes were more identically used across the groups, apart fromthe handshape unit representing ‘human being’. The third type: DESCRIPTOR, was more identically used within the L1 group, whereas the use of handshapes and movements varied in the L2 group. The study assumes that this finding can be explained by the way L2 learners imitate task events in comparison to L1 signers. Implications for the acquisition of classifier constructions in terms of conventionalism and L2 acquisition will be discussed.

  • 33.
    Mesch, Johanna
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Schönström, Krister
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Swedish as a Second Language for the Deaf.
    A second language learner corpus in Swedish Sign Language2017Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This paper describes work on an ongoing learner corpus in Swedish Sign Language (SSL) as a second language (L2). The purpose of this learner corpus is to provide a solid database for second language research in SSL, as there is a lack of research regarding how adults learn a signed language as a second language, and the availability of such a corpus for research would ultimately lead to new insights in the field. Work on this SSL learner corpus started in 2013 (Schönström & Mesch, 2014), and it now contains longitudinal data collected from 2013 to 2016. The corpus consists of data from two groups of learners. Data collection for the first group was completed in 2014 and contains 9:06 hours of data from a total of 18 learners. Data collection from the second group is ongoing.

    The longitudinal data collection consisted of interviews as well as picture and video retellings recorded on four occasions over a period of 1.5 years. The learners consisted of students from a sign language interpreter program at university level. The first collection began one month after course onset, and the second one 1.5 years after onset. The aim was to obtain a wider range of data illustrating the learners’ different developmental stages. The recorded material has been annotated and transcribed in the multimodal annotation tool ELAN using current SSL annotation conventions, especially for annotation of glosses as well as a special annotation schema for L2 analysis according to our particular research objectives.

    For those who are learning SSL, we hypothesize that simultaneous and spatial structures in a gestural-visual modality are challenging to learn (cf. Ortega & Morgan, 2015). Earlier we began analyzing the mouth actions of L2 learners (Mesch, Schönström, Riemer-Kankkonen & Wallin, 2016). Data was annotated according to annotation tiers for mouthing categories, such as mouth movements borrowed from Swedish (mouthing without sound), and mouth gestures, as well as L2 tiers. The next step is to analyze a set of complex sign categories (i.e. signs modified according to meaning and space). We are interested in how learners acquire depicting signs as well as other complex sign categories, i.e. modified signs and indicating signs. This overlaps partly with the use of space for meaning and reference, which is a challenge to annotate. In our presentation, we will show our annotation scheme and discuss the challenges of annotating these structures in an L2 context. 

  • 34.
    Simper-Allen, Pia
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    “Cut and Break”-descriptions in Swedish Sign Language: Children´s and adults´ depicting verb constructions2017Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The present study focus on depicting verb construction in Swedish Sign Language. The study describe both adults’ and children’s verb constructions in descriptions of cutting and breaking events in Swedish Sign Language (SSL), specifically focusing on the number of hands used in signing, handshape category and hand activity. 14 deaf adults (ages 20–72) and 11 deaf children (2;1–6;6) of deaf parents, all native-users of SSL, performed a task that involved describing 53 video clips of cutting and breaking events. The clips show an event in which an actor separates material, either with the aid of a tool or without. Additionally, some clips show an entity separating by itself without an actor being involved.The adults described the events with depicting verb constructions that are produced with two hands. The analysis of the handshapes produced three categories: substitutor, manipulator and descriptor. The most frequent construction in the description of events without a tool was two acting manipulators (depicting a hand handling an object), whereas in descriptions of events with a tool the combinations were acting substitutor or manipulator with a non-acting manipulator. The acting hand referred to the tool and the non-acting manipulator to the affected entity. In descriptions of events without an actor, either two substitutors or two manipulators were used. In addition to depicting verb constructions, the descriptions also contained resultative complements, i.e. signs carrying information about the result of the activity being carried out. The complements were either lexical signs or some form of depicting verb construction. Similar observations have not been noted for any other signed language.In the manner of the adults, the children used depicting verb constructions in descriptions of cutting and breaking events (681 tokens). Nearly half of the verb constructions that were used by the children corresponded to the adult target forms. The majority of the constructions describing events without a tool corresponded to the adult target forms using two acting manipulators, even among the youngest informants. In events with a tool, only a third of the constructions corresponded to the adult target forms (emerging at 4;8–5;0); the remaining two-thirds were deviating constructions in terms of number of hands, handshape category and hand activity.Pervasive features of children’s constructions were the addition of contact between the hands and a preference for substitutors, something not found in adults’ constructions. These features were elucidated within the framework of Real Space blending theory, with the study showing that children first use visible blended entities and that invisible blended entities do not emerge until 4;8–5;0. Moreover, if children did imitate the activities in cutting and breaking events, they would use constructions with two manipulators imitating the actor manipulating an object. But that’s not the case!

  • 35.
    Mesch, Urban
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Mesch, Johanna
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Den uppländska dövhistorien: Profiler, pionjärer och dövas föreningsliv i Uppland2017Book (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 36.
    Schönström, Krister
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Swedish as a Second Language for the Deaf.
    Holmström, Ingela
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Elicited imitation tasks (EITs) as a tool for measuring sign language proficiency in L1 and L2 signers2017In: Book of abstracts, 2017, p. 6-7Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In previous literature, elicited imitation tasks (EITs) have been discussed with regard to the effect that memory skills have on performing tasks. More recent studies have shown, however, that EITs are a reliable tool for measuring language proficiency for L1 users and L2 learners (Klem et al., 2015; Gaillard & Tremblay, 2016). There have also been recommendations for minimizing the negative impacts of poor memory skills, for example, by shortening sentence structures.

    In contrast to spoken languages, which are merely linear in structure, sign languages operate in the gestural-visual mode, which relies on a visual pattern that allows for a degree of simultaneity in production. For instance, when signing a single lexical sign, the shape, movement and location of the hand combine to express phonological properties at the same time. Additionally, there are more complex signs with internal morphological structures that involve multiple handshapes, movements and locations. Such features need to be taken into account when valid and reliable EITs are developed for signed languages, and in recent years, there have been a growing number of sign language tests developed within the framework of EITs, e.g. American Sign Language, ASL-SRT (Hauser et al., 2008), and Swedish Sign Language, SSL-SRT (Schönström, 2014).

    In this talk, we will discuss sentence structure as well as the scoring method of the tests we have developed on two EITs for Swedish Sign Language: SSL-SRT, which is targeted for L1 signers, and SignRepL2, targeted for L2 signers. We found that for the L2 group, complex (single) signs can be used as test items, and there are qualitative differences related to the linguistic properties of signs. We will also describe different scoring paradigms for the respective tests. Our results will be presented and discussed in relation to the EIT theoretical framework.

  • 37.
    Schönström, Krister
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Swedish as a Second Language for the Deaf.
    Mesch, Johanna
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Gesture, signs and L2/M2 acquisition corpus in Swedish Sign Language2017Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The emerging research field of L2/M2 acquisition in signed languages is contributing toour understanding of human languages in various ways. What are the challenges oflearning a new language that is manifested in a different modality? Is there anymodality-specific component, as well as language-specific component, that is harder toacquire than others? And how does this relate to questions concerning the acquisition ofsigned modalities in light of gesture-language discussions (Kendon, 2014)? For example,it has been shown in earlier research that a gesture “strategy” can be advantageous aswell as disadvantageous for the L2 learners of any signed language (Ortega & Morgan,2015). In light of this, our paper will present some preliminary notes from the analysis of an L2learner corpus in Swedish Sign Language that consists of longitudinal data (1.5 years) from hearing adult students learning SSL in an SSL interpreting program at theuniversity level. The learner corpus in SSL, which was started in 2013, so far contains approximately 14 hours of data from a total of 26 learners and is still expanding. We also collected data from a control group consisting of three L1 learners. Additionally, part of the corpus has been annotated with tiers for sign glosses and an L2 relatedanalysis. We conducted a qualitative analysis that included a performance analysis on the sign vocabulary on annotated data in the SSL as L2 corpus and compared the outcomes with the L1 control group. In our analysis, we adopted an applied view, dividing up thevocabulary into the three main sign types proposed by (Hodge & Johnston, 2014): 1) lexical signs; 2) partly lexical signs; and 3) non-lexical signs. In our study, we are specifically interested in how L2 learners acquire “partly lexical signs”, i.e. pointing signs (pronouns, indexing signs) and depicting signs (classifier constructions, polycomponential signs). We hypothesized that learning a language in a modality thatallows for a high degree of iconically motivated vocabulary makes it possible forlearners to, in fact, imitate the tasks or events from a stimulus in an elicited narrative task. But what are the error types, and how should the differences between depicting signs by L1 and L2 signers be described? Is there a gesture strategy used here, and is it linked to a typical L2/M2 strategy? Our results showed qualitative differences between L2 and L1 learners regarding theuse of depicting signs. In the L2 group, depicting signs describing size and shape were used less frequently than in the L1 group, while the L2 group varied more in depicting signs representing handle (agentive) classifiers. Furthermore, the learners also relied onother strategies, e.g. fingerspellings and mouthings. The results will be discussed froman acquisition view as well in light of the gesture-language discussion.

  • 38. Jantunen, Tommi
    et al.
    Mesch, Johanna
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Börstell, Carl
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    GIVE or TAKE: Transitivity prominence of Finnish Sign Language and Swedish Sign Language verbs2017Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In this paper we apply methodology presented in Kimmelman (2016) and investigate the transitivityprominence of verbs in Finnish Sign Language (FinSL) and Swedish Sign Language (SSL). Specifically,we ask how similar or different FinSL and SSL verbs are in terms of their transitivity prominence,and how the transitivity prominence of FinSL and SSL verbs compares with that of verbs inother languages. The term transitivity prominence refers to the relative frequency with which a verboccurs with an object. Haspelmath (2015) has shown that in spoken languages, verbs form a rankedcontinuum between those that are highly transitivity prominent and those that occur with no objectat all. Recently, Kimmelman (2016) has argued that Haspelmath's ranking applies also to the verbsof Russian Sign Language (RSL).Our investigation is based on annotated corpus data comprising narratives, conversations andpresentations. For FinSL, we use material from 20 signers (2h 40min, 18446 sign tokens) and forSSL from 28 signers (1h 54min, 15186 sign tokens). From this data, we identified 18 verb lexemeswhich all have enough tokens and which are all comparable between languages. In FinSL, the totalnumber of verb tokens is 745 and in SSL the corresponding number is 579. All the verbs were annotatedfor overt direct and indirect objects and for overt clausal complements. The annotation workwas carried out by different annotators following common guidelines.Concerning the results, our data suggests that there are clear similarities in what verbs rankhighest (e.g. GIVE, TAKE) and what lowest (e.g. HAPPY, COLD) in terms of their transitivity prominencein FinSL and SSL. On the basis of Haspelmath (2015) and Kimmelman (2016), these are thesame verbs that are ranked highest and lowest also in spoken languages and in RSL (Table 1).However, the data also shows that certain verbs (e.g. SEARCH, TALK, PLAY) may differ considerablyin the position they occupy in the ranking. Although some of these differences can be assumed to betrue differences between languages, we suspect that some may, despite our best efforts, be traceableback to issues relating to the type of data as well as to the way the samples were formed and objectsannotated. In our presentation, we will present the results of our comparative study and discuss thedata and methodology-related issues in more detail.

  • 39.
    Börstell, Carl
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Härmed tecknar jag dig ...2017In: Språktidningen, ISSN 1654-5028, no 7, p. 52-57Article in journal (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 40.
    Börstell, Carl
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Östling, Robert
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Computational Linguistics.
    Iconic Locations in Swedish Sign Language: Mapping Form to Meaning with Lexical Databases2017In: Proceedings of the 21st Nordic Conference on Computational Linguistics, NoDaLiDa / [ed] Jörg Tiedemann, Linköping: Linköping University Electronic Press, 2017, p. 221-225, article id 026Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In this paper, we describe a method for mapping the phonological feature location of Swedish Sign Language (SSL) signs to the meanings in the Swedish semantic dictionary SALDO. By doing so, we observe clear differences in the distribution of meanings associated with different locations on the body. The prominence of certain locations for specific meanings clearly point to iconic mappings between form and meaning in the lexicon of SSL, which pinpoints modalityspecific properties of the visual modality.

  • 41.
    Mesch, Johanna
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    International Sign: Linguistic, Usage, and Status Issues, edited by Rachel Rosenstock and Jemina Napier (Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press, 2016)2017In: Sign Language Studies, ISSN 0302-1475, E-ISSN 1533-6263, Vol. 17, no 3, p. 403-406Article, book review (Other academic)
  • 42.
    Börstell, Carl
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Object marking in the signed modality: Verbal and nominal strategies in Swedish Sign Language and other sign languages2017In: Sign Language and Linguistics, ISSN 1387-9316, E-ISSN 1569-996X, Vol. 20, no 2, p. 279-287Article in journal (Refereed)
  • 43.
    Börstell, Carl
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Persontecken avslöjar vilka vi är2017In: Dövas tidning, ISSN 1402-1978, Vol. 3, p. 7-7Article in journal (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 44.
    Holmström, Ingela
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Schönström, Krister
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Swedish as a Second Language for the Deaf.
    Resources for deaf and hard-of-hearing students in mainstream schools in Sweden: A survey2017In: Deafness and Education International, ISSN 1464-3154, E-ISSN 1557-069X, Vol. 19, no 1, p. 29-39Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Although once placed solely in deaf schools, a growing number of deaf students in Sweden are now enrolling in mainstream schools. In order to maintain a functional educational environment for these students, municipalities are required to provide a variety of supporting resources, e.g. technological equipment and specialized personnel. However, the functions of these resources and how these relate to deaf students’ learning is currently unknown. Thus, the present study examines public school resources, including the function of a profession called a hörselpedagog (HP, a kind of pedagogue that is responsible for hard-of-hearing students). In particular, the HPs’ perspectives on the functioning and learning of deaf students in public schools were examined. Data were collected via (i) two questionnaires: one quantitative (n = 290) and one qualitative (n = 26), and (ii) in-depth interviews (n = 9). These show that the resources provided to deaf children and their efficacy are highly varied across the country, which holds implications for the language situations and learning of deaf students.

  • 45.
    Mesch, Johanna
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Kaneko, Michiko
    Signed renga: Exploration of collaborative forms in sign language poetry2017In: African Studies, ISSN 0002-0184, E-ISSN 1469-2872, Vol. 76, no 3, p. 381-401Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    South African Sign Language (SASL) poetry is still exploring many forms of poetry genres. This article describes the recent development of a new ‘genre’ in sign language poetry: signed renga (group poetry). The article will outline the form – what it is, how it has developed and spread, and why it is an apparently successful poetic genre. A sketch of a workshop from Signing Hands Across the Water 2 (SHAW 2) will also be provided to illustrate how renga emerges out of group work. First we will briefly explain common features of signed renga, drawing on a body of signed renga in British, Irish and Swedish Sign Languages. The second half of the article is an in-depth analysis of one signed renga, titled South Africa, which emerged from the SHAW 2 festival, with a focus on transitions as collaborative performance using shared signing space and eye gaze direction

  • 46. Meir, Irit
    et al.
    Aronoff, Mark
    Börstell, Carl
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Hwang, So-One
    Ilkbasaran, Deniz
    Kastner, Itamar
    Lepic, Ryan
    Lifshitz Ben-Basat, Adi
    Padden, Carol
    Sandler, Wendy
    The effect of being human and the basis of grammatical word order: Insights from novel communication systems and young sign languages2017In: Cognition, ISSN 0010-0277, E-ISSN 1873-7838, Vol. 158, p. 189-207Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This study identifies a central factor that gives rise to the different word orders found in the world’s languages. In the last decade, a new window on this long-standing question has been provided by data from young sign languages and invented gesture systems. Previous work has assumed that word order in both invented gesture systems and young sign languages is driven by the need to encode the semantic/syntactic roles of the verb’s arguments. Based on the responses of six groups of participants, three groups of hearing participants who invented a gestural system on the spot, and three groups of signers of relatively young sign languages, we identify a major factor in determining word order in the production of utterances in novel and young communication systems, not suggested by previous accounts, namely the salience of the arguments in terms of their human/animacy properties: human arguments are introduced before inanimate arguments (‘human first’). This conclusion is based on the difference in word order patterns found between responses to depicted simple events that vary as to whether both subject and object are human or whether the subject is human and the object inanimate. We argue that these differential patterns can be accounted for uniformly by the ‘human first’ principle. Our analysis accounts for the prevalence of SOV order in clauses with an inanimate object in all groups (replicating results of previous separate studies of deaf signers and hearing gesturers) and the prevalence of both SOV and OSV in clauses with a human object elicited from the three groups of participants who have the least interference from another linguistic system (nonliterate deaf signers who have had little or no exposure to another language). It also provides an explanation for the basic status of SOV order suggested by other studies, as well as the scarcity of the OSV order in languages of the world, despite its appearance in novel communication systems. The broadest implication of this study is that the basic cognitive distinction between humans and inanimate entities is a crucial factor in setting the wheels of word ordering in motion.

  • 47.
    Börstell, Carl
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Types and trends of name signs in the Swedish Sign Language community2017In: SKY Journal of Linguistics, ISSN 1456-8438, E-ISSN 1796-279X, Vol. 30, p. 7-34Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This paper investigates the domain of name signs (i.e., signs used as personal names) in the Swedish Sign Language (SSL) community. The data are based on responses from an online questionnaire, in which Deaf, hard of hearing, and hearing participants answered questions about the nature of their name signs. The collected questionnaire data comprise 737 name signs, distributed across five main types and 24 subtypes of name signs, following the categorization of previous work on SSL. Signs are grouped according to sociolinguistic variables such as age, gender, and identity (e.g., Deaf or hearing), as well as the relationship between name giver and named (e.g., family or friends). The results show that name signs are assigned at different ages between the groups, such that children of Deaf parents are named earlier than other groups, and that Deaf and hard of hearing individuals are normally named during their school years. It is found that the distribution of name sign types is significantly different between females and males, with females more often having signs denoting physical appearance, whereas males have signs related to personality/behavior. Furthermore, it is shown that the distribution of sign types has changed over time, with appearance signs losing ground to personality/behavior signs – most clearly for Deaf females. Finally, there is a marginally significant difference in the distribution of sign types based on whether or not the name giver was Deaf. The study is the first to investigate name signs and naming customs in the SSL community statistically – synchronically and diachronically – and one of the few to do so for any sign language.

  • 48.
    Östling, Robert
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Computational Linguistics.
    Börstell, Carl
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Gärdenfors, Moa
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Wirén, Mats
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Computational Linguistics.
    Universal Dependencies for Swedish Sign Language2017In: Proceedings of the 21st Nordic Conference on Computational Linguistics, NoDaLiDa / [ed] Jörg Tiedemann, Linköping: Linköping University Electronic Press, 2017, p. 303-308Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    We describe the first effort to annotate a signed language with syntactic dependency structure: the Swedish Sign Language portion of the Universal Dependencies treebanks. The visual modality presents some unique challenges in analysis and annotation, such as the possibility of both hands articulating separate signs simultaneously, which has implications for the concept of projectivity in dependency grammars. Our data is sourced from the Swedish Sign Language Corpus, and if used in conjunction these resources contain very richly annotated data: dependency structure and parts of speech, video recordings, signer metadata, and since the whole material is also translated into Swedish the corpus is also a parallel text.

  • 49.
    Holmström, Ingela
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Bagga-Gupta, Sangeeta
    ”Va sa han?”: Technologies and Participation Strategies in Mainstream School Settings2017In: Marginalization Processes across Different Settings: Going beyond the Mainstream / [ed] Sangeeta Bagga-Gupta, Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2017, p. 164-196Chapter in book (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The number of pupils with cochlear implant (CI) has seen a sharp increase in mainstream schools in Sweden. This study focuses on communicative strategies in mainstream classrooms where pupils with CI are members. The empirical ethnographic data comes from two mainstream classrooms in Sweden where pupils and adults use a range of technologies, and strategies, (co)creating opportunities for communication and learning in everyday classroom life. The analyses indicate that pupils with CIs are responsible for their own communicative participation in mainstream classrooms (when they can't make sense of or don't hear oral talk), while their right to choose or regulate communication channels are not uncommonly curtailed by the adults. Different technologies play an important role in mainstream classrooms where pupils with CIs are members but these at the same time sometimes create barriers for participation. Technologies cannot therefore be seen as a panacea for pupils with CI in mainstream educational settings.

  • 50.
    Börstell, Carl
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Lepic, Ryan
    Belsitzman, Gal
    Articulatory plurality is a property of lexical plurals in sign language2016In: Lingvisticæ investigationes, ISSN 0378-4169, E-ISSN 1569-9927, Vol. 39, no 2, p. 391-407Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Sign languages make use of paired articulators (the two hands), hence manual signs may be either one- or two-handed. Although two-handedness has previously been regarded a purely formal feature, studies have argued morphologically two-handed forms are associated with some types of inflectional plurality. Moreover, recent studies across sign languages have demonstrated that even lexically two-handed signs share certain semantic properties. In this study, we investigate lexically plural concepts in ten different sign languages, distributed across five sign language families, and demonstrate that such concepts are preferentially represented with two-handed forms, across all the languages in our sample. We argue that this is because the signed modality with its paired articulators enables the languages to iconically represent conceptually plural meanings.

  • 51. Jantunen, Tommi
    et al.
    Mesch, Johanna
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Puupponen, Anna
    Aspects of the rhythm in Finnish and Swedish Sign Language2016Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In this paper we investigate a hypothesis, derived from the intuitions of native signers, that there is a rhythmic difference between two historically related sign languages, Finnish Sign Language (FinSL) and Swedish Sign Language (SSL). We define the notion of rhythm as 'the organization of units in time' and presume that the rhythmic feel of a language is determined by the phonetic properties and events that are used in the marking of the areas and borders of temporally ordered units such as signs and sentences (Patel & Daniele 2003; Patel 2006). In previous studies (Boyes Braem 1999; Sandler 2012), it has been suggested that the markers of rhythmic sequences in signed language are, for example, temporal duration, punctual indices (e.g. head nods), and articulatory contours. Accordingly, we approach our hypothesis with three main research questions: (i) Are the signing speed and sign duration different in FinSL and SSL, (ii) Are head nods aligned differently in terms of syntactic units in FinSL and SSL, and (iii) Is the motion of the head different in terms of its articulatory contour in FinSL and SSL sentences? The study is based on narratives collected with identical tasks in both languages (5 Snowman and Frog, where are you? stories per language). The total amount of video material is one hour (30+30 minutes) and it includes signing from twenty (10+10) signers. All of the material has been annotated for signs, sentences and nods. The material also includes 3D numerical data on the head motion of signers (the yaw, pitch, and roll angles). The 3D data has been obtained with computer-vision technology implemented in SLMotion software (Karppa et. al 2014). Concerning question (i), we have not so far found any significant differences in the signing speed and sign duration of the two languages. With a pilot sample of 4+4 signers and 1100 signs per language, we have determined the average signing speed to be two signs per second in both languages, and the average duration of (the core of) the sign to be 0.27 seconds in SSL and 0.29 seconds in FinSL. Concerning (ii), the average number of nods per story was higher in FinSL than in SSL but both languages tended to align nods with syntactic boundaries: of the total number of nods, 81% in FinSL and 77% in SSL occurred on a syntactic boundary, and generally also at the end of the sentence (Figure 1). Concerning question (iii), our initial tests with Snowman revealed that, for example, the amplitude of the tilting-like (roll) motion of the head decreased similarly toward the end of sentences in both languages (Figure 2) but FinSL signers employed this particular type of motion more often in the marking of syntactic junctures than SSL signers (Figure 3). The preliminary results indicate some differences between FinSL and SSL. In our presentation we will present the final results and discuss them in detail with respect to our initial hypothesis.

  • 52.
    Börstell, Carl
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Sign Language.
    Hörberg, Thomas
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, General Linguistics.
    Östling, Robert
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Linguistics, Computational Linguistics.
    Distribution and duration of sig