SV: [SLLING-L] Re: Research on Signed/Spoken Language Code switching

[Sonja Erlenkamp]

Well, when in doubt it helps to check what we actually are talking abbout. :) As acronyms go they are more than abbreviations. They are acronyms = words derived from abbreviations which function as a word of the respective language and tou can even inflect them as words not as abbreviation. Thus acronyms function as names for languages when applied to signed languages as often seen in the scientific litterature and also everyday conversation. 
German Sign Language for example is referred to with the acronym DGS which is used as a name both in spoken German and in DGS. It is not the same as spelling D-G-S with the alphabet anymore as it has derived into a sign with its own movement. I have recently seen the same development for NTS (Norwegian Sign Language).
 
And that should be reason enough to distinguish between a code like the ISO code and the name used to refer to a language. In the case of some signed languages there is an overlap but that is not true for all languages anyway.
 
Sonja
 
PS: Thanks Lorraine for the kind words :)
 
 

________________________________

Fra: slling-l-bounces at majordomo.valenciacc.edu på vegne av GerardM
Sendt: ti 04.09.2007 13:40
Til: A list for linguists interested in signed languages
Emne: Re: [SLLING-L] Re: Research on Signed/Spoken Language Code switching


Hoi,
Only with acronyms there is a need for transparency. When the codes are just codes there is no such need.
Thanks,
    Gerard


On 9/4/07, Lorraine Leeson <leesonl at gmail.com> wrote: 

	But why do the acronyms need to be transparent?? This doesn't seem to 
	be a necessary condition of naming!
	
	Lorraine
	
	
	
	On 04/09/07, Mark A. Mandel <mamandel at ldc.upenn.edu> wrote:
	> The trouble with abbreviations derived from the spoken language of the 
	> country where the SL is used is that they are opaque outside of that country
	> or spoken language. BII, NGT, LSF... They have little or no mnemonic value.
	>
	> I don't see that it's necessary to stick with purely initial three-letter 
	> abbreviations just because three letters were enough to distinguish the
	> first few SLs that were scientifically studied: ASL, BSL (both from
	> English-speaking countries), FSL, and OFSL (abbreviated in English by the 
	> English-speaking linguists).
	>
	> What would be so bad about IndSL, IndonSL, IrSL, IsrSL, and so on?
	>
	> m a m
	> _______________________________________________
	> SLLING-L mailing list 
	> SLLING-L at majordomo.valenciacc.edu
	> http://majordomo.valenciacc.edu/mailman/listinfo/slling-l 
	>
	>
	>
	
	
	--
	Dr. Lorraine Leeson
	Director
	Centre for Deaf Studies
	School of Linguistics, Speech and Communication Sciences
	University of Dublin, Trinity College
	40 Lower Drumcondra Road 
	Drumcondra, Dublin 9
	
	Tel: 01 830 11 66
	GSM: 087 66 700 28
	_______________________________________________
	SLLING-L mailing list
	SLLING-L at majordomo.valenciacc.edu 
	http://majordomo.valenciacc.edu/mailman/listinfo/slling-l
	
	


-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
SLLING-L mailing list
SLLING-L at majordomo.valenciacc.edu
http://majordomo.valenciacc.edu/mailman/listinfo/slling-l