Cover not available
Article published In:
Gesture
Vol. 16:2 (2017) ► pp.305–328

Sign-creation in the Seattle DeafBlind community

A triumphant story about the regeneration of obviousness

| Saint Louis University
This article examines the social and interactional foundations of sign-creation among DeafBlind people in Seattle, Washington. Linguists studying signed languages have proposed models of sign-creation that involve the selection of an iconic gestural representation of the referent which is subjected to grammatical constraints and is thereby incorporated into the linguistic system. Drawing on 18 months of ethnographic fieldwork and more than 190 hours of video recordings of interaction and language use, I argue that a key interactional mechanism driving processes of sign-creation among DeafBlind people in Seattle is deictic integration. Deictic integration restricts the range of contextual values that the grammar can retrieve by coordinating systems of reference with patterns in activity. This process brings language into alignment with the world as it is perceived by the users of that language, making a range of potentially iconic relations available for selection in the creation of new signs.
Keywords: DeafBlind, protactile, Protactile American Sign Language, language and embodiment, deictic integration, sign-creation
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Sign-creation
  • The deictic system and the deictic field
    • Deictic integration
  • Reconfiguration of orientation schemes among DeafBlind people
    • Convergence of orientation schemes in interaction
  • Pointing in VASL and PTASL
  • Sign-creation in the Seattle DeafBlind community
  • Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 12 January 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.16.2.06edw
References (23)
References
Aronoff, Mark, Irit Meir, Carol Padden, & Wendy Sandler (2008). The roots of linguistic organization in a new language. Interaction Studies, 9 (1), 133–153. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boyes-Braem, Penny Kaye (1981). Features of the handshape in American Sign Language. PhD Dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Brennan, Mary (1990). Word formation in BSL. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Stockholm.Google Scholar
Bühler, Karl (2001 [1934]). Theory of language: The representational function of language. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Edwards, Terra (2014). Language emergence in the Seattle DeafBlind community. PhD Dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving (1964). The neglected situation. American Anthropologist, 661, 133–136. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, Charles & John Heritage (1990). Conversation analysis. The Annual Review of Anthropology, 191, 283–307. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hanks, William F. (1990). Referential practice: Language and lived space among the Maya. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
(2005a). Pierre Bourdieu and the practices of language. Annual Review of Anthropology, 341, 67–83. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2005b). Explorations in the deictic field. Current Anthropology, 461, 191–220. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kegl, Judy, Ann Senghas, & Marie Coppola (1999). Creation through contact: Sign language emergence and sign language change in Nicaragua. In Michel DeGraff (Ed.), Language creation and Language change: Creolization, diachrony, and development (pp. 179–237). Cambridge, MA & London: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C. (2006). On the human interaction engine. In Stephen C. Levinson & Nicholas J. Enfield (Eds.), The roots of human sociality: Culture, cognition, and interaction. London: Berg.Google Scholar
Mandel, Mark Alan (1981). Phonotactics and morphophonology in American Sign Language. PhD Dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Meier, Richard P. (1990). Person deixis in American Sign Language. In Susan D. Fischer & Patricia Siple (Eds.), Theoretical issues in sign language research, Vol. 1: Linguistics (pp. 175–190). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Meier, Richard P. & Diane Lillo-Martin (2012). Response: The apparent reorganization of gesture in the evolution of verb agreement in signed languages. Theoretical Linguistics, 381, 153–157. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rathmann, Christian & Gaurav Mathur (2002). Is verb agreement the same crossmodally? In Richard P. Meier, Kearsy Cormier, & David Quinto-Pozos (Eds.), Modality and structure in signed and spoken languages (pp. 370–404). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sacks, Oliver (2003). The mind’s eye: What the Blind see. The New Yorker, July 28, 48–59.Google Scholar
Sandler, Wendy, Mark Aronoff, Irit Meier, & Carol Padden (2011). The gradual emergence of phonological form in a new language. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 291, 503–543. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schutz, Alfred (1970). On phenomenology and social relations. Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Senghas, Ann (2000). The development of early spatial morphology in Nicaraguan Sign Language. In S. C. Howell, S. A. Fish and T. Keith-Lucas (Eds.), Proceedings of the 24th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, Vol. 21 (pp. 696–707). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Senghas, Ann & Marie Coppola (2001). Children creating language: How Nicaraguan Sign Language acquired a spatial grammar. Psychological Science, 121, 323–328. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stokoe, William C. (2005 [1960]). Sign language structure: An outline of the visual communication systems of the American Deaf. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 101, 3–37. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taub, Sarah F. (2001). Language from the body: Metaphor and iconicity in American Sign Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (10)

Cited by ten other publications

Moriarty, Erin & Lynn Hou
2023. Deaf Communities. In A New Companion to Linguistic Anthropology, ► pp. 122 ff. DOI logo
Napoli, Donna Jo & Lorraine Leeson
2020. Visuo-spatial construals that aid in understanding activity in visual-centred narrative. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 35:4 ► pp. 440 ff. DOI logo
Raanes, Eli
2020. Access to Interaction and Context Through Situated Descriptions: A Study of Interpreting for Deafblind Persons. Frontiers in Psychology 11 DOI logo
Gawne, Lauren, Chelsea Krajcik, Helene N. Andreassen, Andrea L. Berez-Kroeker & Barbara F. Kelly
2019. Data transparency and citation in the journal Gesture . Gesture 18:1 ► pp. 83 ff. DOI logo
Willoughby, Louisa, Howard Manns, Shimako Iwasaki & Meredith Bartlett
2019. Are you trying to be funny? Communicating humour in deafblind conversations. Discourse Studies 21:5 ► pp. 584 ff. DOI logo
Willoughby, Louisa, Howard Manns, Shimako Iwasaki & Meredith Bartlett
2020. From Seeing to Feeling: How Do Deafblind People Adapt Visual Sign Languages?. In Dynamics of Language Changes, ► pp. 235 ff. DOI logo
Edwards, Terra
2018. Re‐Channeling Language: The Mutual Restructuring of Language and Infrastructure among DeafBlind People at Gallaudet University. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 28:3 ► pp. 273 ff. DOI logo
Edwards, Terra
2022. The difference intersubjective grammar makes in protactile DeafBlind communities. Lingua 273 ► pp. 103303 ff. DOI logo
Edwards, Terra
2023. The Hands as Reflex Republic. Signs and Society 11:2 ► pp. 223 ff. DOI logo
Edwards, Terra
2024. The medium of intersubjectivity. Anthropological Theory 24:2 ► pp. 136 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 2 july 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.