Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T14:14:24.392Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

12 - Factors that form classifier signs

from II - SHARED CROSSLINGUISTIC CHARACTERISTICS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

Elisabeth Engberg-Pedersen
Affiliation:
University of Connecticut, Storrs
Diane Brentari
Affiliation:
Purdue University, Indiana
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Since the mid 1970s, sign language researchers have debated how to analyze signs that denote an entity's motion or state of being located somewhere, signs with some similarity between the sign form and the sign meaning (for an overview of the discussions, see Schembri2003 and papers in Emmorey 2003). One example is seen in Figure 12.1 from a Swedish signer's description of how a boy falls from a tree to the ground. The signer's hands can be seen as representing the boy and some surface related to the tree, respectively, and the movement of her right hand as representing the motion aspects of the boy's fall. Within the framework of functional linguistics and its interest in motivated relations between linguistic form and linguistic meaning (Jakobson 1971, Haiman 1983, Givón 1991, Engberg-Pedersen 1996), this chapter investigates the factors that shape signs like the one in Figure 12.1 and discusses different approaches to their description in the sign linguistics literature.

In a paper on arbitrariness and iconicity in American Sign Language (ASL), Frishberg (1975) introduced the term “classifier” to describe the hands in signs such as ASL MEET, which is made with two index-handshapes (see Appendix) facing each other (see Figure 12.2): “ASL uses the index finger in a vertical orientation as a sort of classifier for human beings” (Frishberg 1975:715). She claims that

the verb MEET has no “neutral” form; the citation form actually means “one person meets one person”, or perhaps more specifically “one self-moving object with a dominant vertical dimension meets one self-moving object with a dominant vertical dimension”... Many of these classifiers are productive and analyzable, although not strictly transparent. (Frishberg 1975:715)

Type
Chapter
Information
Sign Languages , pp. 252 - 283
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2010

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.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×