LL-L "Etymology" 2007.05.03 (05) [E]

[Lowlands-L List]

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

 L O W L A N D S - L * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226

 http://www.lowlands-l.net * lowlands.list at gmail.com

 Rules & Guidelines: http://www.lowlands-l.net/rules.php

 Posting: lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org - lowlands.list at gmail.com

 Commands ("signoff lowlands-l" etc.): listserv at listserv.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.]

 Administration: lowlands.list at gmail.com or sassisch at yahoo.com


 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 (Zeeuws)

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

L O W L A N D S - L  -  03 May 2007 - Volume 05

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

From: Sandy Fleming <sandy at scotstext.org>
Subject: LL-L "Language varieties" 2007.04.26 (01) [E]

> From: Jonny Meibohm <altkehdinger at freenet.de>
> Subject: LL-L 'Sign Language'

> Beste Lowlanners, Sandy in special,
>
> today I watched a short report about a BBC-project called See Hear
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/seehear/ , which deals with TV-matters for deaf
> people.
> The report I saw was made by the German radio- and TV-station
> 'Bayerischer Rundfunk', which obviously has any similar project,
> because the director of the film was deaf, too.
>
> I could watch the communication between the German moderator and his
> British guests (the director Terry Riley in special) which of course
> was completely held in sign language, but for non-deaf spectators
> translated into normal language and subtitled.
>
> I was very surprised and impressed again about the speed of their
> talks.
>
> I'd like to know: how is it possible for a deaf German to communicate
> so fast with a deaf British man in sign language, which, as I presume,
> was the British (BSL) version?
>
> For me for example it would have been impossible to talk so fast in
> normal English.
>
> So, my question: had the German moderator to learn BSL up to any very
> high level or is German sign language (DSL) very similar to BSL so
> there's a basical degree of understanding each other?

Jonny,

To answer your question briefly and directly, I would say that a
reasonably advanced understanding of your own sign language and a very
basic understanding of the other person's is sufficient.

For a description of my own recent encounter with a speaker of German
Sign Language, see
http://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0703A&L=lowlands-l&D=0&P=323

I'd say that this is possible because when you look at Deaf sign
languages in general there are more universals than there are between
oral languages.

Moreover, these universals aren't in the details, they're big, important
features of the language.

For example:

   o    Some oral languages use mainly head marking, others use mainly
pronoun marking (or whatever the opposite of head marking is!), but ALL
Deaf sign languages use head marking;

For example, if I say "She asked me" in English, well, English isn't a
head-marked language and so to show who's asking and who's being asked,
we inflect the pronouns themselves. But in BSL (and any sign language)
we'd inflect the verb "ask" to show this.

   o    These markings (or inflections) often have a simple graphical
interpretation;

For example, to say "I asked her", I'd make the handshape for "ask" and
move it from myself towards her; to say "She asked me", I'd make the
same handshape but move it from her to me.

   o    Similarly a lot of stuff such as indicatives and pronouns is
indicated merely by pointing appropriately or using eye gaze (within
either real or previously-described imaginary space), and this is mostly
universal.

   o    Sign languages all have a similar classifier system for
describing most things in discourse: these may differ considerably but
they're always very graphic in their interpretation;

For example, in British Sign Language the "eye beams" are indicated
using two fingers, while in German Sign Language the same two fingers
are used but in a different orientation, and in Chinese Sign Language it
seems to me as if the eye beams are handled as if they can be held
between the finger and thumb. However, once you've seen the basic
classifier for eye beams, you can understand what the foreign signer
means when they use it, and this covers an awful lot of ground (I see
you, I see her, I looked up, I watched as it went past, we stared at
each other, my eyes popped out of my head and so on).

   o    Sign languages use the face and head as a channel of expression
and facial expression is often easily interpreted between cultures.

For example, BSL facial expressions are generally used as qualifiers to
modify the meaning of verbs and nouns to add ideas like "in a relaxed
manner", "eagerly", "big", "small", "fat", "thin", "precisely",
"unsatisfactory", "disgusting" and so on. While these aren't universals
they're related to facial expressions which often are, and so aren't
very difficult to interpret, as long as you know how this works in one
sign language already (though it's one of the hardest things for
beginners to grasp).

   o    There are very few problems with positives and negatives, since
Deaf people will know that in a dual-language situation, nodding and
shaking the head can be interpreted as affirmatives and negatives
respectively, even though there may be some cultures where this isn't
the case.

   o    A lot of the pleasure and interest of speaking a sign languages
comes from being able to describe things skillfully rather than just
naming them. Indeed Deaf people are used to talking about things that
there's no sign for because the classifier system can be used to
describe aspects of an object such as its general shape, its size, how
it's handled, how it moves, what its distinguishing parts are like.

For example, the standard BSL sign for "duck" uses a classifier to show
the shape and action of a duck's bill. When speaking to a signer who
doesn't know BSL and being concerned that the listener might not be
familiar with this sign, a signer would quite naturally add one or two
further aspects to clarify. He might, say, outline the shape and size
with one classifier, then show its feet waddling with another, then its
bill opening and closing with another, and the listener would think, "It
looks like a duck, it walks like a duck, it talks like a duck. It's a
duck!"  :)

Sandy Fleming
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.

*********************************************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lowlands-l/attachments/20070503/3bc3e60c/attachment.htm>