Summary of writing steps for SignWriting

[Stuart Thiessen]

Certainly, it does act as a classifier. I don't have the article in 
front of me. But, I believe the article said that only Swedish Sign 
Language has "true" classifiers as hearing linguistics define the term. 
According to hearing linguistics, a classifier is a morpheme (bound or 
unbound) that identifies the classification of that noun according to 
the way that language classifies nouns. Swahili is an obvious example 
where it requires both the subject and the verb to have a classifier 
morpheme to associate the two words as well as tell what kind of noun 
it is. While sign language "classifiers" do exhibit some of that 
behavior, their actions seem to go beyond that. So that is why some are 
suggesting polycomponential verbs or polysynthetical verbs to show that 
it does more than just identify the noun's class.

Interesting thing that I learned this summer in my reading.

Thanks,

Stuart


On Oct 7, 2005, at 9:14, Ingvild Roald wrote:

> Scandivian sign linguists seem to prefer 'polysynthetical' verbs. But 
> still, the hand act as a classifier, as I understand this. So an index 
> finger pointing upwards and moving towards me (the signer) means 
> 'something high and thin approacing' and may be a person, but the sign 
> may also be me walking into a lamp post ...
>
> Ingvild
>
>
>
>
>
>> From: "Stuart Thiessen" <sw at PASSITONSERVICES.ORG>
>> Reply-To: sw-l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu
>> To: sw-l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu
>> Subject: Re: [sw-l] Summary of writing steps for SignWriting
>> Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 08:55:31 -0500
>>
>> Good point. I agree with your distinction about writing lexical items 
>> and writing a sign in discourse. Perhaps that means I should expand 
>> #1?
>>
>> 1. Identify the sign's anchor. For lexical items, it may mean the 
>> neutral space in front of the body or it could be some location on or 
>> near the body. In some cases, body shifts or other non-manual markers 
>> may shift the "anchor" of the sign to a different location than its 
>> lexical "anchor" during a discourse. Further, signs whose "anchors" 
>> have spatial meaning (such as index pronouns or polycomponential 
>> verbs) may vary widely where their "anchor" is located depending on 
>> its use in a sentence.
>>
>> (Side Note: I learned that some linguists prefer the term 
>> "polycomponential verbs" instead of "classifiers". I think their 
>> reasoning makes sense when you consider the original linguistic 
>> meaning for "classifier".  So that is why I used that term above.)
>>
>> Does this take us closer to a helpful description?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Stuart
>>
>> On Oct 7, 2005, at 4:29, Ingvild Roald wrote:
>>
>>> Very commendable, Stuart
>>>
>>> Personally, I would say that a sign seen in context is often 
>>> different from the sign given as a lexical item. But even lexil 
>>> items may be articulated to the side of the body, or high up or 
>>> down, even if it is not in contact with the body.
>>>
>>> For writing fluent texts, location becomes very important. So a 
>>> lexical item that is in neutral space may have to be written far off 
>>> to the left, or somewhere else, depending.
>>>
>>> Thus I think that our first step is to decide wether what we see is 
>>> part of a signed meaning, or if it is a sigel sign that we can enter 
>>> as a lexical item. If it is part of a signed meaning, we have to 
>>> decide wether the sign has been modified because of the context, or 
>>> if it is in the lexical form.
>>>
>>>
>>> Ingvild
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> From: "Stuart Thiessen" <sw at PASSITONSERVICES.ORG>
>>>> Reply-To: sw-l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu
>>>> To: sw-l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu
>>>> Subject: [sw-l] Summary of writing steps for SignWriting
>>>> Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 00:46:24 -0500
>>>>
>>>> I was just looking for a way to describe in basic, simple terms how 
>>>> we move from a sign we see to a sign we write. Any feedback on 
>>>> these steps as a way to describe this process? It would be much 
>>>> appreciated. I came up with these steps. I am not sure about the 
>>>> timing of #6, but I just put it there for now. I wanted to think of 
>>>> a way to help people visualize the process. This is what I catch 
>>>> myself doing. What about you all?
>>>>
>>>> 1. Identify the sign’s “anchor.” This could be neutral space in 
>>>> front of the body or it could be some location on the body.
>>>> 2. If hands are involved (we should never assume always), we need 
>>>> to identify the handshape(s) and orientation(s) and select the 
>>>> corresponding symbol(s), placing the symbol(s) in 2D relationship 
>>>> to the anchor.
>>>> 3. If the hand(s) contact the body or each other, we need to select 
>>>> the appropriate contact symbol to represent the contact.
>>>> 4. Unless the sign is stationary or only consisting of simple 
>>>> contact, we now look to identify the movement of the hand(s) and 
>>>> select the appropriate movement symbol(s).
>>>> 5. If the hand(s) change to another handshape(s) during the 
>>>> movement, we select those handshape(s) and note their location(s).
>>>> 6. Finally, we note any particular dynamics (fast, slow, tense, 
>>>> etc.) and any non-manual markers that are essential to the sign.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Stuart
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>