SL and other codes

Thu Sep 6 11:33:27 UTC 2007

I can affirm that it is "not just an ASL thing". In the Flemish Sign Language (VGT) and her community the same thing occurs.

However we do notice a gap between the young Deaf and the elderly Deaf. And what it all comes down to is the increased mobility our society, and of course also the Deaf community, has gained. Especially in Flanders we are experiencing a wave of international contacts. Our young adults leave their home country to go and broaden their visions abroad, bringing back the autochthonous signs for those countries and cities. It is also generally accepted that those signs are the correct ones. It is viewed as a form of respect.

However, the elderly Deaf and the interpreters are receiving these signs either very slowly or not at all. So some members of the community are still using the signs given by the outsiders. 

It is an interesting topic!

Kind regards,

Isabelle Heyerick

________________________________

Van: slling-l-bounces at majordomo.valenciacc.edu [mailto:slling-l-bounces at majordomo.valenciacc.edu] Namens Adam C Schembri
Verzonden: donderdag 6 september 2007 10:14
Aan: Albert Bickford; A list for linguists interested in signed languages
Onderwerp: Re: [SLLING-L] SL and other codes

Both Auslan (Australian Sign Language) and BSL (British Sign Language) have seen traditional signs replaced by autochthonous signs for countries and cities, so it's definitely not just an ASL thing. There is, however, a bit of backlash amongst some BSL teachers here who reject the introduced signs, and continue using the traditional BSL signs for UNITED-STATES-OF-AMERICA, ITALY, GERMANY, IRELAND etc. 

I'm not aware of any empirical research into how widely used traditional or recently borrowed country signs are in BSL, but a little work on Auslan (still being coded) shows that it probably varies according to the sign in question: the introduced sign for UNITED-STATES-OF-AMERICA seems to be used by signers of all age groups across the country , but the newer sign CHINA appears more restricted.

Americans wouldn't be happy to see the traditional sign for USA in Auslan regain much ground - it's identical to a variant of the ASL sign for DIRTY or PIG (folk etymology in Australia for our sign is, however, 'Uncle Sam's beard').

As an excellent guide to how future publications ought to deal with the lack of standardisation in sign language nomenclature, the following new book includes (1) a list of acronyms and initialisms for particular signs language names used by the book's contributors (e.g., HZJ), (2) spoken language equivalents (e.g., Hrvatski Znakovni Jezik), (3) English translations if needed (Croatian Sign Language) and (4) Ethnologue codes (where available, e.g. CSQ). Well done to Pamela, Roland and Markus for leading the way on this.

Perniss, P., Pfau, R. & Steinbach, M. (Eds.), (2007). Visible variation: Comparative studies on sign language structure. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 

Adam

Adam C Schembri, PhD

Senior Research Fellow

Deafness, Cognition and Language (DCAL) Research Centre

University College London

49 Gordon Square

London WC1H 0PD

United Kingdom

Tel: +44 20 7679 8680

http://www.dcal.ucl.ac.uk/team/adam_schembri.html

On 5 Sep 2007, at 22:29, Albert Bickford wrote:

The tendency towards using an internal name as an external one is not limited to Gallaudet or to sign languages.

There is, for example, the tendency to borrow into ASL (and probably other sign languages) the name of a country that is used by Deaf in that country.  Thus, signs for CHINA, JAPAN, AUSTRALIA, RUSSIA, and probably others have changed or are in the process of changing.

Outside the realm of sign linguistics, it has become increasingly common for indigenous groups and their speakers over the past couple decades to reject names given to them by others and to ask/insist/agitate to be called by their own name for themselves.  Often, the etymology behind the name given by outsiders is pejorative, whereas the internal name simply means "people" or "language".  So, for example, I think of the following substitutions that have gained general acceptance in the last couple decades, and I'm sure there are many more.

Auca > Waorani (Ecuador)

Papago > Tohono O'odham (Arizona, USA)

Tlapanec > Me'phaa (Mexico)

Otomi > Hñahñu (Mexico, spelling varies depending on dialect)

Tarascan > Purepecha (Mexico)

I don't feel that etymology determines meaning, but I respect people's concerns and when people want themselves or their languages referred to in certain ways, even when the reference is in another language, I prefer to honor that.  

Ultimately, it boils down to usage: the complex social negotiation that is worked out among users of a language as to what words they want to use.  No one can regulate this, no matter how they try.  

Albert

	----- Original Message ----- 

	From: Dan Parvaz <mailto:dparvaz at gmail.com>  

	To: A list for linguists interested in signed languages <mailto:slling-l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu>  

	Sent: September 5, 2007 11:58 AM

	Subject: Re: [SLLING-L] SL and other codes: in passing: Russian

	Hm. And Arabic "Namsa" means Austria. But doesn't the original point remain? Namely, that No one is bound by the internal name for a language/country/whatever. Using the autochthonous sign for a country seems to be an American -- and specifically, a Gallaudetian -- PC obsession. 

	-Dan.

_______________________________________________

SLLING-L mailing list

SLLING-L at majordomo.valenciacc.edu

http://majordomo.valenciacc.edu/mailman/listinfo/slling-l

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/slling-l/attachments/20070906/97ba26d9/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
SLLING-L mailing list
SLLING-L at majordomo.valenciacc.edu
http://majordomo.valenciacc.edu/mailman/listinfo/slling-l