Cover not available
Part of
Perception Metaphors
Edited by Laura J. Speed, Carolyn O'Meara, Lila San Roque and Asifa Majid
[Converging Evidence in Language and Communication Research 19] 2019
► pp. 303–326

Chapter 15
Metaphors of perception in Japanese Sign Language

Perception metaphors have been examined by analysing the polysemy of perception verbs in spoken languages. This chapter explores instantiations of metaphors of perception in Japanese Sign Language (JSL). Here I propose that the locations of articulation of signs be considered meaningful units and analyse signs articulated on or near to the signer’s eyes, ears, and nose in JSL. There are some potentially polysemous signs that illustrate meaning extensions from vision to intellection, where signs articulated on the perceptual organs are understood through metaphor. These conceptual metaphors in JSL are compared to the polysemy of perception expressions in the dominant spoken language, Japanese.

Keywords: perception verbs, sign languages, Japanese Sign Language, conceptual metaphor, polysemy, iconicity, Deaf culture
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1Conceptual metaphors of perception
    • 1.2Iconic and metaphorical mapping in sign languages
    • 1.3Sign language phonology and location of articulation
  • 2.Data and methodology
    • 2.1Language profiles
      • 2.1.1The language profile of JSL
      • 2.1.2The language profile of Spoken Japanese
    • 2.2Data collection
      • 2.2.1Collection of JSL signs
      • 2.2.2Conceptual metaphors in spoken Japanese
  • 3.Vision verbs and signs articulated around the eyes
    • 3.1Basic vision verbs
      • 3.1.1SEE as movement of the eyeball and line of eye gaze
      • 3.1.2Transfield mapping from vision
      • 3.1.3Modification
    • 3.2Vision to cognition
      • 3.2.1Examine and find
      • 3.2.2Try
      • 3.2.3LEARN, BE_INTERESTED, CONCENTRATED ON
    • 3.3Semantic networks of meaning extension of vision verbs in spoken japanese and signs around eyes
  • 4.Audition and signs around the ears
    • 4.1The basic auditory signs
    • 4.2Young Deaf people change the location of articulation of idiomatic phrases from the ears to the eyes
  • 5.Smelling and signs on the nose showing negative evaluation
    • 5.1The basic verbs for smelling
    • 5.2Is the nose the location of evaluation?
  • 6.Discussion and conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 21 February 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.19.15tak
References
Cates, D., Gutiérrez, E., Hafer, S., Barrett, R., & Corina, D.
(2013) Location, location, location. Sign Language Studies, 13(4), 433–461.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dancygier, B., & Sweetser, E.
(2014) Figurative language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ichida, Y.
(2010) Introduction to Japanese Sign Language iconicity in language. Studies in Language Sciences, 9, 3–32.Google Scholar
Jarque, M.
(2005) Double mapping in metaphorical expressions of thought and communication in Catalan Sign Language. Sign Language Studies, 5(3), 292–316.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Johnston, T. A., & Schembri, A. C.
(2007) Australian Sign Language (Auslan): An introduction to sign language linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kimura, H., & Ichida, Y.
(1995) Rou bunka sengen: gengoteki shosusha to shite no rousha [A declaration of deaf culture: Deaf people as a linguistic minority], Gendai Shiso 23(3), 354–399.Google Scholar
Kövecses, Z.
(2011) Recent developments in metaphor theory. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 9(1), 11–25.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kusumi, T.
(Ed.) (2007) Metaphor kenkyu no saizensen [Frontier of research on Metaphor]. Tokyo: Hitsuji-shobo.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G.
(1993a) The contemporary theory of metapor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 202–251). Cambridge University Press.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1993b) The metaphor system and its role in grammar. In K. Beals, G. Cooke, D. Kathman, S. Kita, K.-E. McCullough, & David Testen (Eds.), CLS29: Volume 2 (pp. 217–241).Google Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M.
(1980) Metaphors we live by. The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lane, H., Pillard, R. C., & Hedberg, U.
(2011) The people of the eye: Deaf ethnicity and ancestry. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lucas, C.
(2003) The role of variation in lexicography. Sign Language Studies, 3(3), 322–340.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meir, I.
(2010) Iconicity and metaphor: Constraints on metaphorical extension of iconic forms. Language, 86(4), 865–896.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nabeshima, K.
(2011) Nihongo no metaphor [Metaphor in Japanese]. Tokyo: Kuroshio-shuppan.Google Scholar
Nakamura, K.
(2006) Deaf in Japan: Signing and the politics of identity. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Nihon-Shuwa-Kenkyuujo (Social Welfare Corporation National Sign Language Training Center)
(Ed.) (2011) Shin Nihongo-Shuwa Jiten [New Japanese-Japanese Sign Language dictionary]. Tokyo: Chuo Houki Shuppan.Google Scholar
Padden, C., & Humphries, T.
(1988) Deaf in America: Voices from a culture. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Penner, M.
(2013) The mouthing of verbs in Japanese Sign Language. M.A. thesis, University of North Dakota, Grand Forks.Google Scholar
Pietrandrea, P.
(2002) Iconicity and arbitrariness in Italian Sign Language. Sign Language Studies, 2(3), 296–321.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
San Roque, L. S., Kendrick, K. H., Norcliffe, E., Brown, P., Defina, R., Dingemanse, M., Dirksmeyer, T., Enfield, N. J., Floyd, S., Hammond, J., Rossi, G., Tufvesson, S., Van Putten, & Majid, A.
(2015) Vision verbs dominate in conversation across cultures, but the ranking of non-visual verbs varies. Cognitive Linguistics, 26(1), 31–60.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sandler, W., & Lillo-Martin, D.
(2006) Sign language and linguistic universals. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Seto, K.
(1995) Metaphor shikou [Metaphorical thought]. Tokyo: Kodansha.Google Scholar
Shaffer, B.
(2012) Reported speech as an evidentiality strategy in American Sign Language. In B. Dancygier & E. Sweetser (Eds.), Viewpoint in language (pp. 139–155). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Speed, L. J., & Majid, A.
(2017) Dutch modality exclusivity norms: Simulating perceptual modality in space. Behavior Research Methods.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stokoe, W. C.
(1980) Sign language structure. Annual Review of Anthropology, 9, 365–390.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sweetser, E.
(1990) From etymology to pragmatics: The mind-body metaphor in semantic structure and semantic change. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Takashima, Y.
(2013) Gengo no Shintai-sei to Shukan-sei ni kansuru Kankaku-Chikaku Hyougen no Ninchi-teki Kenkyuu [A cognitive approach to sensory-perception expressions from embodiment and subjectivity of natural language]. PhD dissertation, Kyoto University, Kyoto.Google Scholar
Tanaka, S.
(1996) The polysemic structure of “miru (see)”. Gengo Kenkyu, 110, 120–142.Google Scholar
Taub, S. F.
(2001) Language from the body: Iconicity and metaphor in American Sign Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vanhove, M.
(2008) Semantic associations between sensory modalities, prehension and mental perceptions. A cross-linguistic perspective. In M. Vanhove (ed.), From polysemy to semantic change: Towards a typology of lexical semantic associations (pp. 163–215). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilcox, P. P.
(2000) Metaphor in American Sign Language. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Wilcox, P. P.
(2004) A cognitive key: Metonymic and metaphorical mappings in ASL. Cognitive Linguistics, 15(2), 197–222.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilcox, S.
(2004) Cognitive iconicity: Conceptual spaces, meaning, and gesture in signed language. Cognitive Linguistics, 15(2), 119–147.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilcox, S., & Wilcox, P. P.
(2013) Cognitive linguistics and signed languages. International Journal of Cognitive Linguistics, 3(2), 127–151.Google Scholar
Yamanashi, M.
(1988) Hiyu to rikai [Metaphor and understanding]. Tokyo: Tokyo Daigaku Shuppankai.Google Scholar
Yeshurun, Y., & Sobel, N.
(2009) An odor is not worth a thousand words: From multidimensional odors to unidimensional odor objects. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 219–241.DOI logoGoogle Scholar