37.1271, Diss: African Deaf Sign Languages; South African Sign Language; Phonology: Andries Van Niekerk: "A Lexical Comparison of South African Sign Language and Potential Lexifier Languages"

Mon Mar 30 20:05:02 UTC 2026

LINGUIST List: Vol-37-1271. Mon Mar 30 2026. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 37.1271, Diss: African Deaf Sign Languages; South African Sign Language; Phonology: Andries Van Niekerk: "A Lexical Comparison of South African Sign Language and Potential Lexifier Languages"

Moderator: Steven Moran (linguist at linguistlist.org)
Managing Editor: Valeriia Vyshnevetska
Team: Helen Aristar-Dry, Mara Baccaro, Daniel Swanson
Jobs: jobs at linguistlist.org | Conferences: callconf at linguistlist.org | Pubs: pubs at linguistlist.org

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

Editor for this issue: Daniel Swanson <daniel at linguistlist.org>

================================================================

Date: 30-Mar-2026
From: Chrismi-Rinda Loth [LothC at ufs.ac.za]
Subject: A Lexical Comparison of South African Sign Language and Potential Lexifier Languages

Institution: Stellenbosch University | Masters Degree (General
Linguistics)
Degree Date: 2020

Dissertation Title: A Lexical Comparison of South African Sign
Language and Potential Lexifier Languages

Dissertation URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10019.1/107699

Linguistic Field(s): Phonology

Subject Language(s): South African Sign Language (sfs)

Language Family(ies): African Deaf Sign Languages

Dissertation Director(s): Kate Huddlestone & Anne Baker

Dissertation Abstract:

AUTHOR (STUDENT): ANDRIES VAN NIEKERK
Abstract
ENGLISH ABSTRACT: South Africa’s history of segregation was a large
contributing factor for lexical variation in South African Sign
Language (SASL) to come about. Foreign sign languages certainly had a
presence in the history of deaf education; however, the degree of
influence foreign sign languages has on SASL today is what this study
has aimed to determine. There have been very limited studies on the
presence of loan signs in SASL and none have included extensive
variation. This study investigates signs from 20 different schools for
the deaf and compares them with signs from six other sign languages
and the Paget Gorman Sign System (PGSS).
A list of lemmas was created that included the commonly used list of
lemmas from Woodward (2003). The signs were elicited from informants
and documented based on their phonological properties: handshape,
movement, location, and orientation. SASL lexical variety was
documented. Sign types were identified by comparing the different
signs for a lemma with each other; signs that differed in more than
one phonological parameter were classified as different sign types.
These sign types were then compared with counterparts in six potential
lexifier sign languages, American Sign Language (ASL), British Sign
Language (BSL), Irish Sign Language (ISL), German Sign Language (DGS),
Flemish Sign Language (VGT), and Dutch Sign Language (NGT) and PGSS.
Signs that are heavily influenced by iconic devices were removed from
the final comparison. Loan signs were identified on the basis of
phonological similarity.
The results showed the highest percentage of borrowings from BSL at
15.9%, followed by ASL with 12.6% and VGT at 11.7%. The results
indicated that 65.4% of the sign types were influenced to some degree
by foreign sign languages or PGSS. There is a substratum of signs that
did not match with any of the potential lexifier languages or PGSS and
their origins are uncertain; they possibly emerged naturally or were
borrowed from a language that was not included in this study.
AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die geskiedenis van segregasie in Suid-Afrika
was 'n groot bydraende faktor tot die leksikale variasie in
Suid-Afrikaanse Gebaretaal (SAGT). Buitelandse gebaretale het beslis
'n teenwoordigheid gehad deur die verloop van dowe onderwys; die
invloed wat vreemde gebaretale op SAGT vandag het, is egter waarop
hierdie studie fokus. Daar is beperkte studies oor leen-gebare in
SAGT, en nie een van hulle het die uitgebreide variasie inherent in
SAGT ingesluit nie. Hierdie studie ondersoek gebare van 20
verskillende skole vir dowes en vergelyk dit met gebare uit ses ander
gebaretale asook die Paget Gorman Sign System (PGSS).
'n Lys van lemmas is opgestel wat die algemeen gebruikte lys uit
Woodward (2003) bevat. Die gebare is vanuit informante ontlok en
gedokumenteer op grond van die volgende fonologiese eienskappe:
handvorm, beweging, ligging en oriëntasie. SAGT leksikale variasie is
gedokumenteer. Gebare tipes is geïdentifiseer deur die verskillende
gebare vir 'n lemma met mekaar te vergelyk; gebare wat met meer as een
fonologiese parameter verskil het, is as verskillende gebare
klassifiseer. Hierdie gebare tipes is vervolgens vergelyk met eweknieë
in ses gebaretale, Amerikaanse Gebaretaal (ASL), Britse Gebaretaal
(BSL), Ierse Gebaretaal (ISL), Duitse Gebaretaal (DGS), Vlaamse
Gebaretaal (VGT), en Nederlandse Gebaretaal (NGT) en PGSS. Gebare wat
sterk beïnvloed is deur ikoniese stelsels, is uit die finale
vergelyking verwyder. Leen-gebare is op grond van fonologiese
ooreenkomstes geïdentifiseer.
Die resultate toon dat die hoogste persentasie lenings vanaf BSL is
met 15,9%, gevolg deur ASL met 12,6% en VGT met 11,7%. Die resultate
het aangedui dat 65,4% van die gebare wel tot 'n mate beïnvloed is
deur vreemde gebaretale of PGSS. Daar is 'n substraat van gebare wat
nie ooreenstem met enige van die moontlike gebaretale of PGSS nie, en
die oorsprong daarvan is onseker; hulle het moontlik natuurlik na vore
gekom of is geleen uit 'n taal wat nie by hierdie studie ingesluit is
nie.
KEYWORDS: South African Sign Language -- Study and teaching, UCTD,
South African Sign Language -- Phonology, Comparative, Lemmas, Sign
language -- South Africa

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

********************** LINGUIST List Support ***********************
Please consider donating to the Linguist List, a U.S. 501(c)(3) not for profit organization:

https://www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=87C2AXTVC4PP8

LINGUIST List is supported by the following publishers:

Bloomsbury Publishing http://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/

Cambridge University Press http://www.cambridge.org/linguistics

Cascadilla Press http://www.cascadilla.com/

De Gruyter Brill https://www.degruyterbrill.com/?changeLang=en

Edinburgh University Press http://www.edinburghuniversitypress.com

European Language Resources Association (ELRA) http://www.elra.info

John Benjamins http://www.benjamins.com/

Language Science Press http://langsci-press.org

Lincom GmbH https://lincom-shop.eu/

MIT Press http://mitpress.mit.edu/

Multilingual Matters http://www.multilingual-matters.com/

Narr Francke Attempto Verlag GmbH + Co. KG http://www.narr.de/

Netherlands Graduate School of Linguistics / Landelijke (LOT) http://www.lotpublications.nl/

Peter Lang AG http://www.peterlang.com

SIL International Publications http://www.sil.org/resources/publications

----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-37-1271
----------------------------------------------------------