LL-L "Etymology" 2004.09.05 (06) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 05.SEP.2004 (06) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
http://www.lowlands-l.net * lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net
Rules & Guidelines: http://www.lowlands-l.net/index.php?page=rules
Posting: lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org or lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net
Server Manual: http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html
Archives: http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html
Encoding: Unicode (UTF-8) [Please switch your view mode to it.]
=======================================================================
You have received this because you have been subscribed upon request.
To unsubscribe, please send the command "signoff lowlands-l" as message
text from the same account to listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org or
sign off at http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html.
=======================================================================
A=Afrikaans Ap=Appalachian B=Brabantish D=Dutch E=English F=Frisian
L=Limburgish LS=Lowlands Saxon (Low German) N=Northumbrian
S=Scots Sh=Shetlandic V=(West)Flemish Z=Zeelandic (Zeêuws)
=======================================================================

From: Sandy Fleming <sandy at scotstext.org>
Subject: "Etymology" [E]

A few more observations on the very difficult subject of sign language
etymology...

A long time ago I wrote:

>> In the past the church used to have trained people called
"missioners" who went out into the community to help people
with special needs, such as the deaf or blind. In BSL (British
Sign Language) the sign for "missioner" indicated church
vestments. There are no longer any missioners but the sign is
still used for "social worker" even though they have no vocation
in the church. <<

And Ron replied:

>> English (_nur(i)sh_ >) "nurse" and Scots _nourice_, on the other hand,
etymologically still connote the act of nourishing, going back to the
breastfeeding wetnurses performed.  This is just not as obvious to today's
speakers as the sign for "social worker" in BSL. <<

I wouldn't say the derivation of the sign for 'social worker' is obvious at
all. I read it in a book published by researchers at Bristol university, and
other signers are always surprised when I explain it to them. It's true,
though, that signs in sign languages are sometimes semi-obvious, just as
onomatopoeia in oral languages are semi-obvious.

However, there are many more words for things that are perceived visually
(which oral languages can't express transparently), so words in sign
languages are, on the whole, more transparent, since words in sign languages
are expressed visually.

Signs are classed as 'transparent' (the meaning is immediately obvious on
first seeing the sign), 'translucent' (the similarity between the sign and
the referent is obvious once the definition is known) and 'opaque' (there is
no obvious relationship between the sign and the referent).

This applies only according to the signer's mastery of the language:
virtually nothing in a sign language is transparent to a beginning signer.
They can watch a conversation or interpretation in sign and get no clue as
to what it might be about. At the other end of the scale, when two
experienced signers communicate they make transparent signs that may never
have been made before, and the other understands the meaning perfectly
because, to an experienced signer, it's transparent.

When it comes to translucent signs, it's hard to say if they really exist or
if it's just an effect of the mind. A translucent sign is opaque until
you're told what it means, after which it becomes transparent to you. Often
when you learn one translucent sign you learn a principle which makes many
other translucent signs transparent. For example, once you realise that the
thumb is reserved for surgical incisions you will no longer confuse a
thyroid operation with a slit throat, even if you haven't seen that
particular operation signed before.

I'm not sure how much sense it makes to talk about the etymology of
translucent signs. Different languages and dialects use different signs for
the same thing, so there is the question of why, historically, one dialect
ended up using one sign and another another. There's also the question of
how these signs have changed over time, but with sign languages not being
written until recently it's difficult to make any inroads.

Sometimes a sign has abstract elements and can seem opaque even when it's
translucent. For a long time, for example, I thought the idiomatic BSL sign
for "Long time no see" was opaque, until one day I realised that it was the
sign for "nothing" being moved along the timeline from the distant past to
the present. Timelines being abstractions makes signs less transparent. On
the other hand, I may be wrong - it could also be the sign for "delay" being
signed on that timeline. The first explanation seems more likely, but at
this point a bit of etymology would be useful, though it's probably lost
knowledge.

Soemtimes researchers do discover the history of a sign, perhaps purely from
detective work from historical information, or by interviewing older
signers. The derivation of "social worker" above is an example of this (I
don't know which, though - maybe a bit of both).

Sometimes etymology is just guessed - which as we all know is a dangerous
activity. To make the sign for 'America', for example, we interleave the
open fingers of two flat hands, and move them in a horizontal circle. One
researcher says that this signifies a town or village made from log cabins,
but I don't know what evidence there is for this.

One of the most puzzlingly opaque signs in BSL is 'biscuit'. It's executed
by bending your left arm closed so that the hand is held up near the left
side of your head and tapping on your elbow with the clawed fingers of your
right hand (invert these instructions for left-handers!). I was standing
signing to a friend in a pub a fortnight ago and I was surprised that
someone at the bar found this sign transparent. He explained that in the
past sailors used to tap biscuits on their elbows to knock the weevils out!
It makes me wonder just how much historical information there might be
locked away in some of these opaque (but hopefully, to someone, still
transparent), signs we use.

Sandy
http://scotstext.org/

================================END===================================
* Please submit postings to lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org.
* Postings will be displayed unedited in digest form.
* Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
* Commands for automated functions (including "signoff lowlands-l") are
  to be sent to listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org or at
  http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html.
======================================================================