Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T03:55:04.987Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Orientation in Inedxical Signs in Norwegian Sign language

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 December 2008

Irene Greftegreff
Irene Greftegreff
Affiliation:
University of Trondheim, AVH, Institute of Linguistics, N-7055 DRAGVOLL, Norway. e-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

This article discusses different transcription systems and models of sign language phonology that fall into two major categories: The innovative work of Stokoe, with later adaptations from different European countries on one hand, and on the other, several autosegmental models. The focus in the discussion is how these different models deal with hand orientation and specification of movement directionality. On the basis of this discussion, features and concepts for a new model are proposed.

Type
Research Article
Information
Nordic Journal of Linguistics , Volume 15 , Issue 2 , December 1992 , pp. 159 - 182
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1992

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.)

References

REFERENCES

Bergman, Brita 1979. Signed Swedish. Stockholm: University of Stockholm.Google Scholar
Brennan, Mary, Colville, Martin D. & Lawson, Lillian K. 1980. Words in Hand: A Structural Analysis of the Signs of British Sign Language, Edinburgh: Moray House College of Education.Google Scholar
Brennan, Mary 1990. Word Formation in BSL. Stockholm: University of Stockholm.Google Scholar
Brentari, Diane 1988. Backwards Verbs in ASL: Agreement Re-opened. Chicago Linguistic Society 24.Google Scholar
Crone, LeinebøBirgit, Oddvei Fevang, Irene Greftegreff, Svein Arne, Peterson & Gøsta, Rougnø 1988. 14 historier fortalt ¨d tegnspr¨k. Bergen: Døves Forlag A/S. Videogram.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, John A. 1990. Autosegmental and Metrical Phonology. Oxford and Cambridge. Mass.: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Greftegreff, Irene 1990. H¨nd-konfigurasjoner i norsk tegnspr¨kfonologi. Unpublished manuscript. Trondheim: University of Trondheim, Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Greftegreff, Irene 1991. H¨ndformer og h¨ndformendringer i norsk tegnspråk. En innledende undersøkelse av foneminventaret. Unpublished manuscript. Trondheim: University of Trondheim, Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Hoek, Karen van 1992. Conceptual Spaces and Pronominal Reference in American Sign Language. Nordic Journal of Linguistics, 15.Google Scholar
Lane, Leonard G. 1987. The Gallaudet survival guide to signing. Washington, D.C: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Liddell, Scott K. 1985. Compound Formation Rules in American Sign Language, Language, 60,2372–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liddell, Scott, K. 1990. Structures for Representing Handshape and Local Movement at the Phonemic Level. In Susan, Fischer, D. and Patricia Siple, : Theoretical issues in sign language research: Volume 1: Linguistics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Liddell, Scott K. & Johnson, R. E. 1984. Structural Diversity in the ASL Lexicon. In Chicago Linguistic Society Parasession 20: Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 173–187.Google Scholar
Liddell, Scott K. & Johnson, Robert E. 1986. American Sign Language Compound Formation Processes, Lexicalization, and Phonological Remnants. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 4, 445–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Padden, Carol A. 1988. Interaction of Morphology and Syntax in American Sign Language. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Padden, Carol A. 1990. The Relation between Space and Grammar in ASL Phonology. In Ceil, Lucas (ed). Sign Language Research: Theoretical Issues. Washington, D.C.: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Padden, Carol, A. & Perlmutter, David, , 1987. American Sign Language and the Architecture of Phonological Theory. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 5, 335–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prillwitz, Siegmund et al. 1989. HamNoSys: Version 2.0: Hamburg Notation System for Sign Languages: An Introductory Guide. Hamburg: Signum Press.Google Scholar
Sandier, Wendy 1989. Phonological Representation of the Sign. Foris Publications in Language Sciences, 32. Dordrecht: Forts.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schröder, Odd-Inge 1983. Fonologien i norsk tegnsprog. In Jon Magne Tellevik, Marit Vogt-Svendsen & Odd-Inge, Schröder (eds).: Tegnspr¨k og undervisning av døve barn. Nordisk seminar i Trondheim juni 1982. Trondheim: Tapir.Google Scholar
Schröder, Odd-Inge 1984. Noen minimale par fra foneminventaret i norsk tegnsprog. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Sparrevohn, B., Albertsen, K. & Pedersen, A. 1989. Tegnskrift. Copenhagen: Døves Center for Total Kommunikation (KC).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. Revised new edition published by Linstok Press, Silver Spring, MD. in 1978.Google Scholar
Stokoe, William C., Casterline, Dorothy C., Croneberg, Carl G. 1965. A Dictionary of American Sign Language on Linguistic Principles. Reissued 1976 by Linstok Press, Silver Spring, MD.Google Scholar
Sutton, Valerie, 1982. Sign writing for everyday use. Newport Beach, CA: Center for Sutton Movement Writing.Google Scholar
Vogt-Svendsen, Marit 1981. Mouth Position & Mouth Movement in Norwegian Sign Language. Sign Language Studies 33, 363–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vogt-Svendsen, Mant 1984. Word pictures in Norwegian Sign Language. Working Papers in Linguistics, 2. Trondheim: University of Trondheim, Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Wilbur, Ronnie B. 1993. Syllables and Segments: Hold the Movement and Move the Holds! In Geoffrey, Coulter (ed.): Phonetics and phonology, vol. 3: Current issues in ASL phonology. New York: Academic Press, to appear.Google Scholar