Sign Language & Linguistics - Online First

This paper presents an analysis of four discourse genres in French Sign Language (LSF): narrative, explanatory, argumentative and dialogical. We examine the association between the frequency and type of linguistic categories with regard to the discourse genres considered. The linguistic categories used are based on the Semiological Approach (Cuxac 2000), which suggests the existence of two main types of units: units stemming from an illustrative intent, grouped under the name ‘Transfer Units’, in contrast with units without any illustrative intent, i.e., Lexical Units, Pointing Units, and Fingerspelling Units. The data for this study were taken from two corpora and annotations were performed using the ELAN software. A range of descriptive statistics were used to complement the overall qualitative view of the data. One of the main outcomes of the quantitative approach is the identification, through Principal Component Analysis and Specificity Analysis, of an association between the two main types of units and different discourse genres. These findings deepen our understanding of genre-based variation in sign language, and hold potential for practical applications in areas such as bilingual education and automatic sign language processing.

This article describes the use of a specific type of enactment — constructed action (CA) — by children acquiring Finnish Sign Language (FinSL) and adults who use FinSL as their first language. Constructed action was investigated from the recordings of two narrative tasks performed by the children and the adults. In the tasks, the signers were shown still-image and video materials and asked to retell the events happening in the materials. The children’s recordings were part of a larger cross-sectional dataset that evaluated the language development of children acquiring FinSL. The adults’ recordings were part of the Corpus of Finnish Sign Language. In the present study, the children’s and adults’ data were systematically annotated and analyzed for CA tokens. The corresponding analysis provided the opportunity to compare CA use practices between the two age groups. Statistical tests were conducted to examine whether any statistically significant differences could be found between the two narrative tasks and the two age groups regarding CA use. The results showed clear differences between the use of CA by the children and the adults. The children used CA significantly less than the adults did in both narrative tasks. However, the findings also showed similarities in the patterns of CA use. Both groups used CA significantly more when they were shown video materials than when they were shown still images. The differences found between the groups support the view that CA is a gradually acquired skill, whereas the similarities show how viewing the dynamic actions of human referents encourages the use of enactment in narrative discourse contexts.

The recognition of sign languages’ literary potential is relatively recent. A movement in the late 1960s and early 1970s, starting with literary translation and expanding to original works (see Sutton-Spence 2005), established the concept of deaf literature. Jakobson (1959) identified three translation types: intralinguistic, interlinguistic, and intersemiotic. Scholars have examined translations involving sign languages, highlighting interlinguistic, intersemiotic (Buonomo 2009; Buonomo & Celo 2010), and intermodal aspects (Gambini & Fontana 2016). This study explores the intermodal/intersemiotic processes in translating poems between vocal and sign languages, emphasizing the body’s role in embodied cognition and simulation (Gallese & Sinigaglia 2011). We discuss “intersensoriality” — the blending of senses in translation — and its impact on linguistic choices, illustrated with translations from Italian to Italian Sign Language (LIS) and vice versa. Specifically, we analyse translations of Giuseppe Giuranna’s “Musica” into Italian and Giacomo Leopardi’s “L’Infinito” into LIS, aiming to understand the sensory dialogue in translation.

The relation between gestures and signs is highly debated both in gestures and sign language studies. Addressing the common symbolic ground from which both gestures and signs arise could improve our general knowledge about the body’s role in meaning construction and in shaping communication. To effectively compare how signers and speakers employ their bodies to convey meanings, we investigated how actions are depicted in gestures and signs by collecting and comparing data from 15 hearing Italian speakers and 10 Deaf LIS signers. Specifically, the present study addresses the use of representational strategies (i.e., own body, hand-as-hand, hand-as-object) in co-speech gestures and signs in different action domains (i.e., to break, to take, to attach, to open, to turn). We aim to look at how different action domains affect the distribution of representational strategies in gestures and signs. Our results showed that action domains influenced the use of representational strategies similarly among signers and speakers, suggesting that action events are conceptualized alike. Nevertheless, there are qualitative differences in action depiction, discussed throughout the paper, as well as in the combination of different representational strategies, used less by Italian speakers, compared to LIS signers.