Cover not available
Article published In:
Macro and micro-social variation in Asia-Pacific sign languages
Edited by Nick Palfreyman
[Asia-Pacific Language Variation 6:1] 2020
► pp. 119–150

Variation in the numeral system of Japanese Sign Language and Taiwan Sign Language

A comparative sociolinguistics study

| National Museum Ethnology, Japan
| University of Central Lancashire

Logo with link to supplementary files

Abstract (Japanese Sign Language)

The numerals 10, 100 and 1,000 are expressed variably in Japanese Sign Language (JSL) and Taiwan Sign Language (TSL), two languages that also have historic links. JSL was used in deaf schools that were established in Taiwan during the Japanese colonial era, leaving a lasting impression on TSL, but complex sociolinguistic situations have led to different outcomes in each case (Fischer, 2014; Sagara, 2014). This comparative sociolinguistic analysis is based on two datasets comprising a total of 1,100 tokens produced by 72 signers from the Kanto and Kansai regions (for JSL) and the cities of Tainan and Taipei (for TSL). Mixed effects modelling reveals that social factors such as the age and region of the signer have a significant influence on how the variable is realised. This investigation shows how careful cross-linguistic comparison can shed light on variation within and between sign languages that have been in contact, and how regional variation in one language may influence regional variation in another.

Keywords: Japanese Sign Language, Taiwan Sign Language, variation, numerals, typology
Article outline
  • 1.JSL and TSL: Two sign languages in East Asia
  • 2.Numeral variables in JSL and TSL
    • 2.1The NI variant
    • 2.2The Z variant
    • 2.3Previous research on variation in JSL
    • 2.4Switching between variants within a production
  • 3.Numeral variation in JSL
    • 3.1Method
    • 3.2Findings
    • 3.3Patterns of variation in JSL
  • 4.Numeral variation in TSL
    • 4.1Method
    • 4.2Findings
  • 5.A comparative sociolinguistic account
    • 5.1Cross-linguistic comparison of findings
    • 5.2Linguistic differences between NI and Z variants
    • 5.3A social meaning for variants?
  • 6.Summary
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 29 July 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/aplv.00009.sag
References
Bailey, Guy, Wikle, Tom, Tillery, Jan, & Sand, Lori
(1991) The apparent time construct. Language Variation and Change, 3(3), 241–264. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Battison, Robin
(1978) Lexical borrowing in American Sign Language. Maryland: Linstok Press.Google Scholar
Brentari, Diane, & Coppola, Marie
(2012) What sign language creation teaches us about language. WIREs Cognitive Science, 4(2), 202–211. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Drager, Katie, & Hay, Jennifer
(2012) Exploiting random intercepts: Two case studies in sociophonetics. Language Variation and Change, 24 (1), 59–78. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fischer, Susan
(2014) Sign languages in their historical context. In Claire Bowern & Bethwyn Evans (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of historical linguistics (pp. 442–465). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Fischer, Susan, & Gong, Qunhu
(2011) Marked hand configurations in Asian Sign Languages. In Rachel Channon & Harry van der Hulst (Eds.), Formational units in sign languages (pp. 19–42). Nijmegen: Ishara Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Frishberg, Nancy
(1975) Arbitrariness and iconicity: Historical change in American Sign Language. Language, 51(3), 696–719. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heinrich, Patrick
(2018) Dialect cosplay: Language use by the younger generation. In Patrick Heinrich & Christian Galan (Eds.), Being young in super-aging Japan: Formative events and cultural reactions (pp. 166–182). London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ito, Masao
(1998) Rekishi nonakano rouasya [Deaf people in history]. Tokyo: Kindai Shuppan.Google Scholar
Japanese Federation of the Deaf
(1969) Watashitachi no shuwa: 1 [Our sign language: 1]. Tokyo: Hokutosya.Google Scholar
Johnson, Daniel Ezra
(2009) Getting off the GoldVarb standard: Introducing Rbrul for mixed-effects variable rule analysis. Language and Linguistics Compass, 3(1), 359–383. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kikusawa, Ritsuko, & Sagara, Keiko
(2019) Nihon shuwa no hougen [Dialect of Japanese Sign Language]. In Yoko Kibe (Ed.), Meikai hougengaku jiten [Dictionary of dialectology] (pp. 114–115). Tokyo: Sanseido.Google Scholar
Leeson, Lorraine, & Grehan, Carmel
(2004) To the lexicon and beyond: The effect of gender on variation in Irish Sign Language. In Mieke Van Herreweghe & Myriam Vermeerbergen (Eds.), To the lexicon and beyond: Sociolinguistics in European deaf communities (pp. 39–73). Washington DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Liddell, Scott K.
(2003) Grammar, gesture, and meaning in American Sign Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matsunaga, Tan
(1937) Roua kai [The deaf-mute world]. A dictionary of deaf-mute gesture (pp. 123–126). Japanese Deaf-Mute Association.Google Scholar
(1964) Shuwa jiten [Sign language dictionary]. Tokyo: Japanese Association of Special Education.Google Scholar
Mish, Ktejik
(2013) Numeral incorporation in Japanese Sign Language. Sign Language Studies, 13(2), 186–210. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mishima, Jiro, & Kaneda, Toyomi
(1963) Nihonshuwa zue: temane no tebiki [Figures and pictures of Japanese Sign Language: Introduction to gesture]. Tokyo: Waseda University.Google Scholar
Oka, Nori, & Akahori, Hitomi
(2011) Nihonshuwa no shikumi [Structure of Japanese Sign Language]. Tokyo: Daisyukan Syoten.Google Scholar
Osugi, Yutaka, Supalla, Ted, & Webb, Rebecca
(1999) The use of word elicitation to identify distinctive gestural systems on Amami Island. Sign Language and Linguistics, 2(1), 87–112. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Osugi, Yutaka
(2010) Japanese Sign Language map (online). Retrieved April 29, 2019, from [URL]
Palfreyman, Nick
(2019) Variation in Indonesian Sign Language: A typological and sociolinguistic analysis. Berlin: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quinn, Gary
(2010) Schoolization: An account of the origins of regional variation in British Sign Language. Sign Language Studies, 10(4), 476–501. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sagara, Keiko
(2014) The numeral system of Japanese Sign Language from a cross-linguistic perspective. MPhil dissertation, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK.Google Scholar
(2020) Changes in two-, three- and four-digit numbers in Japanese Sign Language, Taiwan Sign Language, and Korean Sign Language. Bulletin of the National Museum of Ethnology, 44(3), 557–583. National Museum of Ethnology.Google Scholar
Sagara, Keiko, & Zeshan, Ulrike
(2016) Semantic fields in sign languages – A comparative typological study. In Ulrike Zeshan & Keiko Sagara (Eds.), Semantic fields in sign languages: Colour, kinship and quantification (pp. 3–40). Berlin: de Gruyter and Lancaster: Ishara Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sasaki, Daisuke
(2007) Comparing the lexicons Japanese Sign Language and Taiwan Sign Language: A preliminary study focusing on the difference in the handshape parameter. In David Quinto-Pozos (Ed.), Sign languages in contact (pp. 123–150). Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Sloetjes, Han
(2014) ELAN: Multimedia annotation application. In Jacques Durand, Ulrike Gut, & Gjert Kristoffersen (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of corpus phonology (pp. 305–320). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, Wayne H.
(Ed.) (1987a) Republic of China. In John V. van Cleve (Ed.), Gallaudet encyclopedia of deaf people and deafness, volume 11, (pp. 184–186). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
(1987b) Taiwan Sign Language. In John V. van Cleve (Ed.), Gallaudet encyclopedia of deaf people and deafness (pp. 113–116). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
(1989) The morphological characteristics of verbs in Taiwan Sign Language. Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University.Google Scholar
(2005) Taiwan Sign Language research: An historical overview. Language and Linguistics, 6(2), 187–215.Google Scholar
Stamp, Rose, Schembri, Adam, Fenlon, Jordan, Rentelis, Ramas, Woll, Bencie, & Cormier, Kearsy
(2014) Lexical variation and change in British Sign Language. PLOS ONE 9(4), e94053. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Su, Shiou-fen, & Tai, James H-Y.
(2009) Lexical comparison of signs from Taiwan, Chinese, Japanese, and American Sign Languages: Taking iconicity into account. In James H-Y. Tai & Jane Tsay (Eds.), Taiwan Sign Language and beyond (pp. 149–176). Chia-Yi, Taiwan: National Chung Cheng University.Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A.
(2012) Variationist sociolinguistics: Change, observation, interpretation. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Tai, James H-Y., & Tsay, Jane
(2015a) Taiwan Sign Language. In Julie Bakken Jepsen, Goedele De Clerck, Sam Lutalo-Kiingi, & William B. McGregor (Eds.), Sign languages of the world: A comparative handbook (pp. 771–810). Berlin: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015b) Taiwan Sign Language: History, structure, and adaptation. In William S-Y. Wang & Chaofen Sun (Eds.), Oxford handbook of Chinese linguistics (pp. 729–750). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tsay, Jane, Sagara, Keiko, & Kikusawa, Ritsuko
(2019) Arbitrary signs are more stable than iconic signs: Evidence from Taiwan Sign Language and Japanese Sign Language. The Eighth Meeting of Signed and Spoken Language Linguistics, National Museum of Ethnology, 6–7 December, 2019.
Yano, Uiko, & Matusoka, Kazumi
(2018) Numerals and timelines of a shared sign language in Japan: Miyakubo Sign Language on Ehime-Oshima Island [Special issue on Rural Sign Languages]. Sign Language Studies, 18(4), 640–665. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yonekawa, Akihiko
(1997) Shuwa no tiikisa [Regional variation in sign language]. Ancient Culture, 49 (6), 57–61.Google Scholar
(2009) Shūdan-go no kenkyū [Research on collective languages], volume 11. Tokyo-dou.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Abner, Natasha, Grégoire Clarté, Carlo Geraci, Robin J. Ryder, Justine Mertz, Anah Salgat & Shi Yu
2024. Computational phylogenetics reveal histories of sign languages. Science 383:6682 ► pp. 519 ff. DOI logo
Lutzenberger, Hannah, Katie Mudd, Rose Stamp & Adam Charles Schembri
2023. The social structure of signing communities and lexical variation: A cross-linguistic comparison of three unrelated sign languages. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 8:1 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 march 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

video

Video abstract