Cover not available
Article published In:
The Semiotic Diversity of Language: The Case of Signed Languages
Edited by Alysson Lepeut and Inez Beukeleers
[Belgian Journal of Linguistics 36] 2022
► pp. 16–45

Stance in Flemish Sign Language

A multimodal and polysemiotic phenomenon

| KU Leuven
| KU Leuven
| KU Leuven | Stellenbosch University

In this contribution, we offer a first exploration of stance expressions in Flemish Sign Language (VGT). Biber and Finegan (1989) define stance as the expression of feelings, attitudes, judgments, commitments, and assessments. The few studies focusing on stance in signed languages have shown that stance can be expressed by various structures and mechanisms such as lexical signs, manual gestures (e.g., Palm Up gestures) and embodiment/mental space blends. We will examine if these findings apply to Flemish Sign Language, and we will identify other means of expressing stance in VGT.

In this exploratory study, we focus on the following questions: (1) which articulators and semiotic resources can be used in Flemish Sign Language to express stance?; and (2) How are visible bodily actions through different articulators integrated temporally in stance expressions?

Our study is based on the analysis of about five hours of data from the Corpus Flemish Sign Language. We present examples from our dataset to illustrate that stance can be expressed through a range of structures and mechanisms (such as lexical signs, manual gestures, enactment, and non-manual features), expressed either sequentially or simultaneously by a multitude of articulators. Moreover, we zoom in on the phenomenon of stance-stacking and analyse how multiple stance expressions can be combined in VGT.

Keywords: stance, multimodality, enactment, polysemiotic, stance-stacking, Flemish Sign Language
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Research aims, data and method
  • 3.Analyzing the examples
    • 3.1Articulators used for stance expression
    • 3.2Stance continuum in relation to used articulators
    • 3.3Enacted stance
    • 3.4Use of space and spatial relations
    • 3.5Stacked stance and simultaneous expression of multiple stances
  • 4.Discusssion of the preliminary observations
  • 5.Future research
  • 6.To conclude
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 9 June 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/bjl.00070.and
References
Adami, Elisabetta
2016 “Multimodality.” In Oxford Handbook of Language and Society, ed. by Ofelia Garcia, Nelson Flores, and Massimiliano Spotti, 451–472. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Beukeleers, Inez
2020 “On the Role of Eye Gaze in Flemish Sign Language: A Multifocal Eye-Tracking Study on the Phenomena of Online Turn Processing and Depicting.” PhD dissertation, KU Leuven.
Beukeleers, Inez, and Myriam Vermeerbergen
2017 “Raumnutzung in Der Flämischen Gebärdensprache: Eine Vergleichende Studie Zum Einfluss Des Elizitierungsmaterials [The use of space in Flemish Sign Language: A comparative study on the influence of elicitaion material].” Das Zeichen: Zeitschrift Für Sprache Und Kultur Gehörloser 1071: 468–478.Google Scholar
2022 “Show Me What You Have B/Seen: A Brief History of Depiction.” Frontiers in Psychology 131: 808814. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas, and Edward Finegan
1989 “Styles of Stance in English: Lexical and Grammatical Marking of Evidentiality and Affect.” Text – Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse 9 (1): 93–124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chindamo, Massimo, Jens Allwood, and Elisabeth Ahlsén
2012 “Some Suggestions for the Study of Stance in Communication.” In 2012 International Conference on Privacy, Security, Risk and Trust and 2012 International Conference on Social Computing, 617–622. Amsterdam: IEEE. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cienki, Alan
2013 “Cognitive Linguistics: Spoken Language and Gesture as Expressions of Conceptualization.” In Body – Language – Communication, 38/1, ed. by Cornelia Müller, Alan Cienki, Ellen Fricke, Silva Ladewich, David McNeill, and Sedinha Tessendorf, 182–201. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, Herbert H.
1996 Using Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clift, Rebecca
2021 “Embodiment in Dissent: The Eye Roll as an Interactional Practice.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 54 (3): 261–276. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cormier, Kearsy, Sandra Smith, and Zed Sevcikova-Sehyr
2015 “Rethinking Constructed Action.” Sign Language & Linguistics 18 (2): 167–204. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dancygier, Barbara
2012 “Negation, Stance Verbs, and Intersubjectivity.” In Viewpoint in Language: A Multimodal Perspective, ed. by Barbara Dancygier, and Eve Sweetser, 69–93. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dancygier, Barbara, Sally Rice, and Terry Janzen
2019 Stance-Stacking in Language and Multimodal Communication. Paper presented at the International Cognitive Linguistics conference, 2019, Nishinomiya, Japan.
Debras, Camille, and Alan Cienki
2012 “Some Uses of Head Tilts and Shoulder Shrugs during Human Interaction, and Their Relation to Stancetaking.” In 2012 International Conference on Privacy, Security, Risk and Trust and 2012 International Conference on Social Computing, 932–937. Amsterdam: IEEE. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Du Bois, John W.
2007 “The Stance Triangle.” In Stancetaking in Discourse: Subjectivity, Evaluation, Interaction, ed. by Robert Englebretson, 139–182. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dudis, Paul
2004 “Body Partitioning and Real-Space Blends.” Cognitive Linguistics 151: 223–238. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Engberg-Pedersen, Elisabeth
1993 Space in Danish Sign Language: The Semantics and Morphosyntax of the Use of Space in a Visual Language. Hamburg: Signum.Google Scholar
Englebretson, Robert
ed. 2007 Stancetaking in Discourse: Subjectivity, Evaluation, Interaction. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ferrara, Lindsay, and Gabrielle Hodge
2018 “Language as Description, Indication, and Depiction.” Frontiers in Psychology 91: 716. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fischer, Renate, and Simon Kollien
2016 “Pejorative Aspects Attributed to Hearing People in Signed Constructed Dialogue.” In Pejoration, ed. by Rita Finkbeiner, Jörg Meibauer, and Heike Wiese, 325–354. Linguistik Aktuell / Linguistics Today, Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fischer, Susan, and Wynne Janis
1990 “Verb Sandwiches in American Sign Language.” In Current Trends in European Sign Language Research, ed. by Sigmund Prillwitz, and Tomas Vollhaber, 279–293. Hamburg: SIGNUM Verlag.Google Scholar
Hinnell, Jennifer, and Sally Rice
2019 The Embodied Marking of Stance in North American English: Stacked and Idiomatic. Paper presented at the 15th International Cognitive Linguistics Conference, Nishinomiya, Japan, August 7. [URL]
Hodge, Gabrielle, and Lindsay Ferrara
2014 “Showing the Story : Enactment as Performance in Auslan Narratives.” In Selected Papers from the 44th Conference of the Australian Linguistic Society (2014), ed. by Lauren Gawne and Jill Vaughan, 372–397.Google Scholar
2022 “Iconicity as Multimodal, Polysemiotic, and Plurifunctional.” Frontiers in Psychology 131:808896. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Iwasaki, Shoichi
2022 “Stancetaking in Motion: Stance Triangle and Double Dialogicality.” Text & Talk 32(4): 1–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Janzen, Terry
2019 “Shared Spaces, Shared Mind: Connecting Past and Present Viewpoints in American Sign Language Narratives.” Cognitive Linguistics 30 (2): 253–279. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2022 “Embodied Cognition: ASL Signers’ and English Speakers’ Use of Viewpointed Space” Languages in Contrast 22 (2): 227–258. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Janzen, Terry, and Barbara Shaffer
2013 “The Interpreter’s Stance in Intersubjective Discourse.” In Sign Language Research, Uses and Practices, ed. by Laurence Meurant, Aurélie Sinte, Mieke Van Herreweghe and Myriam Vermeerbergen, 63–84. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kärkkäinen, Elise
2006 “Stance Taking in Conversation: From Subjectivity to Intersubjectivity.” Text & Talk 26 (6): 699–731. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaukomaa, Timo, Anssi Peräkylä, and Johanna Ruusuvuori
2015 “How Listeners Use Facial Expression to Shift the Emotional Stance of the Speaker’s Utterance.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 48 (3): 319–341. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kress, Gunther
2009 Multimodality: A Social Semiotic Approach to Contemporary Communication. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kusters, Annelies, Massimiliano Spotti, Ruth Swanwick, and Elina Tapio
2017 “Beyond Languages, beyond Modalities: Transforming the Study of Semiotic Repertoires.” International Journal of Multilingualism 14 (3): 219–232. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Louhema, Karoliina
2018 “From Unisemiotic to Polysemiotic Narratives: Translating across Semiotic Systems.” MA dissertation, Lund University.
Martin, J., and Peter R. R. White
2007 The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Martínez, Rocío, Sara Siyavoshi, and Sherman Wilcox
2020 “Advances in the Study of Signed Languages within a Cognitive Perspective.” Hesperia: Anuario de Filología Hispánica 231: 29–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mondada, Lorenza
2019 “Contemporary Issues in Conversation Analysis: Embodiment and Materiality, Multimodality and Multisensoriality in Social Interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics 1451: 47–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Müller, Cornelia, Alan Cienki, Ellen Fricke, Silva Ladewig, David McNeill, and Jana Bressem
eds. 2014 Body – Language – Communication: An International Handbook on Multimodality in Human Interaction. Berlin/München/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Palfreyman, Nick
2020 “Social Meanings of Linguistic Variation in BISINDO (Indonesian Sign Language).” Asia-Pacific Language Variation 6 (1): 89–118. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peräkylä, Anssi, Pentti Henttonen, Liisa Voutilainen, Mikko Kahri, Melisa Stevanovic, Mikko Sams, and Niklas Ravaja
2015 “Sharing the Emotional Load: Recipient Affiliation Calms Down the Storyteller.” Social Psychology Quarterly 781: 301–323. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sandler, Wendy
2022 “Redefining Multimodality.” Frontiers in Communication 61: 758993. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shaffer, Barbara
2004 “Information Ordering and Speaker Subjectivity: Modality in ASL.” Cognitive Linguistics 15(2): 175–195. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012 “Reported Speech as an Evidentiality Strategy in American Sign Language.” In Viewpoint in Language, ed. by Barbara Dancygier, and Eve Sweetser, 139–155. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shaffer, Barbara, Lorraine Leeson, and Terry Janzen
2017 What I Know Is Here; What I Don’t Know Is Somewhere Else: Deixis and Gesture Spaces in American Sign Language and Irish Sign Language. Paper presented at the International Cognitive Linguistics Conference 14, Tartu, Estonia, July 10–14, 2017.
Shaw, Emily
2019 Gesture in Multiparty Interaction. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Stampoulidis, Georgios
2020 “Polysemiotic Communication vs. Multimodality.” SAUC – Street Art and Urban Creativity 5 (2): 26–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stevanovic, Melisa, and Anssi Peräkylä
2014 “Three Orders in the Organization of Human Action: On the Interface between Knowledge, Power, and Emotion in Interaction and Social Relations.” Language in Society 43 (2): 185–207. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sutton-Spence, Rachel
2007 “Mouthings and Simultaneity in British Sign Language.” In Simultaneity in Signed Languages: Form and Function, ed. by Myriam Vermeerbergen, Lorraine Leeson, and Onno Crasborn, 147–162. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tannen, Deborah
1989 Talking Voices: Repetition, Dialogue and Imagery in Conversational Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2011 “Introducing Constructed Dialogue in Greek and American Conversational and Literary Narrative.” In Introducing Constructed Dialogue in Greek and American Conversational and Literary Narrative, ed. by Florian Coulmas, 311–360. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Herreweghe, Mieke, Myriam Vermeerbergen, Eline Demey, Hannes De Durpel, Hilde Nyffels, and Sam Verstraete
2015 Het Corpus VGT. Een digitaal open access corpus van videos and annotaties van Vlaamse Gebarentaal, ontwikkeld aan de Universiteit Gent ism KU Leuven. [The Corpus VGT. An open access corpus of videos and annotations in Flemish Sign Language, developed at the University of Ghent in cooperation with KU Leuven.] [URL]>.” [URL]
Van Herreweghe, Mieke, and Myriam Vermeerbergen
2012 “Verbal Predicates in Flemish Sign Language (VGT) and South African Sign Language (SASL).” In Le Verbe En Verve: Réflexions Sur La Syntaxe et La Sémantique Verbale, ed. by Marleen Van Peteghem, Peter Lauwers, Els Tobback, Annemie Demol, and Laurence De Wilde, 401–420. Ghent: Academia Press.Google Scholar
Vermeerbergen, Myriam
1996 “ROOD KOOL TIEN PERSOON IN. Morfo-Syntactische Aspecten van de Vlaams-Belgische Gebarentaal [RED CABBAGE TEN PERSON IN. Morpho-syntactic aspects of Flemish-Belgian Sign Language].” PhD dissertation, Vrije Universiteit Brussel.
Vermeerbergen, Myriam, and Eline Demey
2007 “Sign + Gesture = Speech + Gesture?: Comparing Aspects of Simultaneity in Flemish Sign Language to Instances of Concurrent Speech and Gesture.” In Simultaneity in Signed Languages: Form and Function, ed. by Myriam Vermeerbergen, Lorraine Leeson, and Onno A. Crasborn, 257–282. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vermeerbergen, Myriam, Lorraine Leeson, and Onno A. Crasborn
Eds. 2007 Simultaneity in Signed Languages: Form and Function. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilkinson, Erin
2022 Changes in Language Ecology, Discourse and Grammar: A Typological-Functional Analysis of Embodied Intersubjectivity in LIS. Presented at the Sign Café 2, Ragusa, October 2022.
Wittenburg, Peter, Henie Brugman, Albert Russel, Alex Klassmann, and Han Sloetjes
2006 “ELAN: A Professional Framework for Multimodality Research.” In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2006), ed. by Nicoletta Calzolari, Khalid Choukri, Aldo Gangemi, Bente Maegaard, Joseph Mariani, Jan Odijk, and Daniel Tapias, 1556–1559. Genoa: European Language Resources Association (ELRA).Google Scholar
Zeshan, Ulrike
2006 Interrogative and Negative Constructions in Sign Language. Nijmegen: Ishara Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar