Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m42fx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-19T01:48:22.189Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

(Sub)lexical changes in iconic signs to realign with community sensibilities and experiences

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 October 2019

Gene Mirus ,
Jami Fisher  and
Donna Jo Napoli
Gene Mirus
Affiliation:
Gallaudet University, USA
Jami Fisher
Affiliation:
University of Pennsylvania, USA
Donna Jo Napoli*
Affiliation:
Swarthmore College, USA
*
Address for correspondence: Donna Jo Napoli Swarthmore College, 500 College Ave., Swarthmore, PA19081, USAdnapoli1@swarthmore.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Sign language lexicons include iconic items, where phonological form is somewhat representative of sense. As experiences of individuals change, the mapping from form to meaning may become inappropriate (as when technological or environmental changes occur) or may be considered incongruous with perceptions of reality (as when culture shifts). Many misalignments of form and sense are tolerated, with the result that a sign's original iconicity is lost. Other misalignments are obliterated; signers make sublexical changes or entire lexical substitutions. We call these (sub)lexical changes ‘corrections’. We argue that misalignments that are regrettable are more likely to be corrected, where regrettable misalignments are those that are not true to realities/experiences of profound importance to deaf individuals.

While the focus here is on American Sign Language, corrections should be apparent in any sign language and might occur in those spoken languages with a high frequency of nonarbitrary relationships between form and sense. (Sign language, variation, taboo terms, euphemism, iconicity, identity)*

Type
Articles
Information
Language in Society , Volume 49 , Issue 2 , April 2020 , pp. 283 - 309
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

We thank Julie Hochgesang, Sally McConnell-Ginet, and Ceil Lucas for discussions of various points in this article. We thank our anonymous reviewers for helping sharpen our arguments.

References

REFERENCES

Allan, Keith (ed.) (2018). The Oxford handbook of taboo words and language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allan, Keith, & Burridge, Kate (1991). Euphemism and dysphemism: Language used as shield and weapon. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Anderman, Gunilla, & Rogers, Margaret (eds.) (2005). In and out of English: For better, for worse. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Back, Lindsey T.; Keys, Christopher B.; McMahon, Susan D.; & O'Neill, Kaney (2016). How we label students with disabilities: A framework of language use in an urban school district in the United States. Disability Studies Quarterly 36(4). Online: http://dsq-sds.org/article/view/4387/4481; accessed August 5, 2018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker-Shenk, Charlotte Lee, & Cokely, Dennis (1991). Transcription symbols. American Sign Language: A teacher's resource text on grammar and culture, 1–29. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Battison, Robbin M. (2013). American Sign Language linguistics 1970–1980: Memoir of a renaissance. In Emmorey, Karen & Lane, Harlan L. (eds.), The signs of language revisited, 17–25. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Bauman, H-Dirksen L. (2004). Audism: Exploring the metaphysics of oppression. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 9(2):239–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bauman, H-Dirksen L. (ed.) (2008). Open your eyes: Deaf studies talking. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Bauman, H-Dirksen L.; Nelson;, Jennifer L. & Rose, Heidi M. (2006). Signing the body poetic: Essays on American Sign Language literature. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Börstell, Carl, & Őstling, Robert (2017). Iconic locations in Swedish Sign Language: Mapping form to meaning with lexical databases. Proceedings of the 21st Nordic Conference on Computational Linguistics 131:221–25. Linköping: Linköping University Electronic Press.Google Scholar
Boyes Braem, Penny; Groeber, Simone; Stocker, Heidi; & Tissi, Katja (2012). Weblexikon für Fachbegriffe in Deutschschweizerischer Gebärdensprache (DSGS) und Deutsch. eDITion 2:8–14.Google Scholar
Burridge, Kate (2012). Euphemism and language change: The sixth and seventh ages. Journal in English Lexicography 7:65–92.Google Scholar
Colville, Martin, & Steward, Colin (1988). Signs of a sexual nature: An introduction to some sexual signs used in British Sign Language. Northwich: Cheshire Society for the Deaf.Google Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan (2011). Impoliteness: Using language to cause offence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, Alan (1996). Ironising the myth of linguicism. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 17(6):485–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DiMarco, Nyle, & Man, Chella (2018). Nyle DiMarco & Chella Man teach us queer sign language [Video file]. Online: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HX0HGa-pok; accessed October 12, 2018.Google Scholar
Dynel, Marta (2012). Swearing methodologically: The (im)politeness of expletives in anonymous commentaries on YouTube. Journal of English Studies 10:25–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, Jami; Mirus, Gene; & Napoli, Donna Jo (2018). Sticky: Taboo topics in deaf communities. In Allan, Keith (ed.), The Oxford handbook of taboo words and language, 182–213. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Flying Words Project (2008). Poetry – Peter Cook – Flying words project [Video file]. Online: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnU3U6qEibU accessed October 10, 2018.Google Scholar
Frishberg, Nancy (1975). Arbitrariness and iconicity: Historical change in American Sign Language. Language 51(3):696–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galvin, Rose (2003). The making of the disabled identity: A linguistic analysis of marginalisation. Disability Studies Quarterly 23(2):149–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gómez, Miguel Casas (2009). Towards a new approach to the linguistic definition of euphemism. Language Sciences 31(6):725–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greene, Daniel (2011). ASL for gay, lesbian, bisexual transgender, questioning [Video file]. Online: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTdCZ9i1WY8; accessed October 12, 2018.Google Scholar
Grondelaers, Stefan, & Geeraerts, Dirk (1998). Vagueness as a euphemistic strategy. In Athanasiadou, Angeliki & Tabakowka, Elzbieta (eds.), Speaking of emotions: Conceptualisation and expression, 357–74. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Halmari, Helena (2011). Political correctness, euphemism, and language change: The case of ‘people first’. Journal of Pragmatics 43(3):828–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haynie, Hannah; Bowern, Claire; & LaPalombara, Hannah (2014). Sound symbolism in the languages of Australia. PLoS One 9(4). doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0092852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendry, Stewart H., & Hsiao, Steven S. (2013a). Fundamentals of sensory systems. In Squire, Larry R., Berg, Darwin K., Bloom, Floyd E., Lac, Sascha du, Ghosh, Anirvan, & Spitzer, Nicholas C. (eds.), Fundamental neuroscience, 4th edn., 499–511. New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendry, Stewart H., & Hsiao, Steven S. (2013b). The somatosensory system. In Squire, Larry R., Berg, Darwin K., Bloom, Floyd E., Lac, Sascha du, Ghosh, Anirvan, & Spitzer, Nicholas C. (eds.), Fundamental neuroscience, 4th edn., 531–51. New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinton, Leanne; Nichols, Johanna; & Ohala, John J. (eds.) (2006). Sound symbolism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hochgesang, Julie A.; Crasborn;, Onno & Lillo-Martin, Diane (2018). ASL Signbank. New Haven, CT: Haskins Lab, Yale University. Online: https://aslsignbank.haskins.yale.edu/; accessed October 12, 2018.Google Scholar
Hochgesang, Julie A., & Miller, Marvin T. (2016). A celebration of the Dictionary of American Sign Language on linguistic principles: Fifty years later. Sign Language Studies 16(4):563–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, Geoffrey (2015). An encyclopedia of swearing: The social history of oaths, profanity, foul language, and ethnic slurs in the English-speaking world. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Humphries, Tom (1975). Audism: The making of a word. San Diego: University of California at San Diego, ms.Google Scholar
Humphries, Tom; Kushalnagar, Poorna; Mathur, Gaurav; Napoli, Donna Jo; Padden, Carol A.; Rathmann, Christian; & Smith, Scott R. (2012). Language acquisition for deaf children: Reducing the harms of zero tolerance to the use of alternative approaches. Harm Reduction Journal 9(1):16. doi: doi.org/10.1186/1477-7517-9-16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Humphries, Tom; Kushalnagar, Raja; Mathur, Gaurav; Napoli, Donna Jo; Padden, Carol A.; Rathmann, Christian; & Smith, Scott R. (2013). The right to language. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 41(4):872–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
James, Susan Donaldson, & Huang, Grace (2006, December 12). Deaf and proud to use sign language. ABC News. Online: https://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=2719254&page=1; accessed August 31, 2015.Google Scholar
Kleinfeld, Mala Silverman, & Warner, Naomi (1996). Variation in the deaf community: Gay, lesbian, and bisexual signs. In Lucas, Ceil (ed.), Multicultural aspects of sociolinguistics in deaf communities, 3–35. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Leigh, Irene W. (2009). A lens on deaf identities. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leigh, Irene W; Andrews;, Jean F. & Harris, Raychelle (2016). Deaf culture: Exploring deaf communities in the United States. San Diego, CA: Plural Publishing.Google Scholar
Liddell, Scott K., & Johnson, Robert E. (1986). American Sign Language compound formation processes, lexicalization, and phonological remnants. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 4(4):445–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linfoot-Ham, Kerry (2005). The linguistics of euphemism: A diachronic study of euphemism formation. Journal of Language and Linguistics 4(2):227–63.Google Scholar
Loos, Cornelia; Cramer, Jens Michael; & Napoli, Donna Jo (2020). Taboo terms in German Sign Language: Exploiting phonology. Cognitive Linguistics, to appear.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lucas, Ceil; Bayley, Robert; Rose, Mary; & Wulf, Alyssa (2002). Location variation in American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies 2(4):407–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mahsain, Fatemah H. M. H. A. (2014). Motivations behind code-switching among Kuwait bilingual schools’ students. Manchester: University of Manchester dissertation. Online: https://www.research.manchester.ac.uk/portal/files/54563783/FULL_TEXT.PDF; accessed August 5, 2018.Google Scholar
McGlone, Matthew S.; Beck;, Gary & Pfiester, Abigail (2006). Contamination and camouflage in euphemisms. Communication Monographs 73(3):261–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meier, Richard P. (1991). Language acquisition by deaf children. American Scientist 79(1):60–70.Google Scholar
Mirus, Gene; Fisher, Jami; & Napoli, Donna Jo (2012). Taboo expressions in American Sign Language. Lingua 122(9):1004–1020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monaghan, Leila Frances; Schmaling, Constanze, Nakamura, Karen; & Turner, Graham H. (eds.) (2003). Many ways to be deaf: International variation in deaf communities. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Moser, Margaret G. (1990). The regularity hypothesis applied to ASL. In Lucas, Ceil (ed.), Sign language research: Theoretical issues, 50–56. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Mühlhäusler, Peter (2002). Linguistic ecology: Language change and linguistic imperialism in the Pacific region. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muredda, Angelo (2012). Fixing language: ‘People-first’ language, taxonomical prescriptivism, and the linguistic location of disability. The English Languages: History, Diaspora, Culture 3(1):1–10.Google Scholar
Napoli, Donna Jo; Fisher;, Jami & Mirus, Gene (2013). Bleached taboo-term predicates in American Sign Language. Lingua 123(1):148–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perlmutter, David (2001). Resolution: Sign languages. Online: https://www.linguisticsociety.org/resource/resolution-sign-languages; accessed October 1, 2018.Google Scholar
Perniss, Pamela; Thompson, Robin L.; & Vigliocco, Gabriella (2010). Iconicity as a general property of language: Evidence from spoken and signed languages. Frontiers in Psychology 1. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00227.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pfau, Roland; Salzmann, Martin; & Steinbach, Markus (2018). The syntax of sign language agreement: Common ingredients, but unusual recipe. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 3(1):107. doi: http://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillipson, Robert (1992). Linguistic imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Phillipson, Robert (2010). Linguistic imperialism continued. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pilotti, Maura; Almand, Jennifer; Mahamane, Salif; & Martinez, Melanie (2012). Taboo words in expressive language: Do sex and primary language matter. American International Journal of Contemporary Research 2(2):17–26.Google Scholar
Pleger, Burkhard, & Villringer, Arno (2013). The human somatosensory system: From perception to decision making. Progress in Neurobiology 103:76–97.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Postma, Gertjan (2001). Negative polarity and the syntax of taboo. In Hoeksema, Jack, Rullmann, Hotze, Sánchez-Valencia, Víctor, & van der Wouden, Ton (eds.), Perspectives on negation and polarity items, 283–330. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pyers, Jennie (2006). Indicating the body: Expression of body part terminology in American Sign Language. Language Sciences 28(2–3):280–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rundblad, Gabriella, & Kronenfeld, David B. (2000). Folk-etymology: Haphazard perversion or shrewd analogy? In Coleman, Julie & Kay, Christian J. (eds.), Lexicology, semantics, and lexicography, 19–34. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sacks, Oliver (1989). Seeing voices: A journey into the world of the deaf. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Sandler, Wendy (2008). The syllable in sign language: Considering the other natural language modality. In Davis, Barbara L. & Zajdó, Krisztina (eds.), The syllable in speech production, 379–408. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Shannon, Rogan (2017). Queer signs [Video file]. Online: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfPAkVGWtMY; accessed October 6, 2018.Google Scholar
Stokoe, William C. (1960). Sign language structure: An outline of the visual communication systems of the American Deaf (Studies in linguistics: Occasional papers 8). Buffalo, NY: Department of Anthropology and Linguistics, University of Buffalo.Google Scholar
Stone, Christopher (2009). Toward a deaf translation norm. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Sutton-Spence, Rachel, & Braem, Penny Boyes (2013). Comparing the products and the processes of creating sign language poetry and pantomimic improvisations. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 37(4):245–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutton-Spence, Rachel, & Woll, Bencie (1999). The linguistics of British Sign Language: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sze, Felix Y. B.; Wei, Monica Xiao; & Leung Wong, Aaron Yiu (2017). Taboos and euphemisms in sex-related signs in Asian sign languages. Linguistics 55(1):153–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Oudenhoven, Jan Pieter; de Raad, Boele; Askevis-Leherpeux, Francoise; Boski, Pawel; Brunborg, Geir; Carmona, Carmen; Barelds, Dick; Hill, Craig; Mlacic, Boris; Motti, Frosso; Rammstedt, Beatrice; & Woods, Stephen (2008). Terms of abuse as expression and reinforcement of cultures. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 32(2):174–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Someren, Maarten W.; Barnard;, Yvonne F. & Sandberg, Jacobijn A. C. (1994). The think aloud method: A practical guide to modeling cognitive processes. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Vigliocco, Gabriella; Perniss, Pamela; & Vinson, David (2014). Language as a multimodal phenomenon: Implications for language learning, processing and evolution. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 369:20130292. Online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2013.0292.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Warren, Beatrice (1992). What euphemisms tell us about the interpretation of words. Studia Linguistica 46(2):128–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Widdowson, Henry G. (2001). The monolingual teaching and bilingual learning of English. In Cooper, Robert L., Shohamy, Elana G., & Walters, Joel (eds.), New perspectives and issues in educational language policy: A festschrift for Bernard Dov Spolsky, 7–18. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodward, James (1979). Signs of sexual behavior: An introduction to some sex-related vocabulary in American Sign Language. Silver Spring, MD: T. J. Publishers.Google Scholar