Cover not available
Article published In:
Signed and spoken language contrastive research: A multimodal approach
Edited by Sílvia Gabarró-López and Laurence Meurant
[Languages in Contrast 22:2] 2022
► pp. 322–360

A multimodal approach to reformulation

Contrastive study of French and French Belgian Sign Language through the productions of speakers, signers and interpreters

ORCID logo | University of Namur, Belgium
 | University of Namur, Belgium
ORCID logo | University of Namur, Belgium | Stockholm University, Sweden
Reformulation is remarkably frequent in discourse and has been the subject of much work in spoken languages, both on written and oral data. Because of its metalinguistic nature, combined with its general aim of clarifying an expression, the act of reformulation offers a window to the way speakers process and adjust their expression in discourse. However, to date, the study of reformulation has hardly taken into account the now increasingly recognized multimodal and semiotically composite nature of language. This study aims to revisit the notion of reformulation from a multimodal perspective by comparing the use and semiotic composition of reformulations in the discourse of speakers and signers, as well as in the productions of interpreters. In doing so, we lay the foundations for a comparative study of discourse in signed and spoken language that accounts for the multimodality and semiotic complexity of language practices in different human ecologies.
Keywords: reformulation, multimodality, signed language, spoken language, interpreters, reformulation markers, depiction, French/French Belgian Sign Language (LSFB)
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Reformulation
    • 2.1Reformulation, paraphrase and markers
    • 2.2Reformulation, description and depiction
  • 3.Methodology
    • 3.1Data
    • 3.2Working definition of reformulation
    • 3.3Annotation scheme
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1Use of reformulations in French, in LSFB and in interpreted data
    • 4.2Reformulation markers
      • 4.2.1LSFB
      • 4.2.2French
      • 4.2.3Interpreters
    • 4.3Types of reformulations: Source and responsibility
      • 4.3.1Self- and other-reformulations
      • 4.3.2Interlingual and intralingual reformulations
    • 4.4Semiotic modes and articulators used in reformulation structures
      • 4.4.1LSFB
      • 4.4.2French
      • 4.4.3Interpreters
  • 5.Discussion
  • 6.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.

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

Published online: 1 July 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.00025.meu
References (39)
References
Blakemore, D. 1993. The Relevance of Reformulations. Language and Literature 2(2): 101–120. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Briz, A. 2001. El uso de o sea en la conversacion. In Lingüística con Corpus. Catorce aplicaciones sobre el español, J. De Kock (ed.), 287–318. Salamanca: Ediciones de la Universidad de Salamanca.Google Scholar
Capirci, O., Bonsignori, C. and Di Renzo, A. 2022. Signed Languages: A Triangular Semiotic Dimension. Frontiers in Psychology 12(802911): 1–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, H. H. 1996. Using Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cuenca, M. J. 2003. Two Ways to Reformulate: A Contrastive Analysis of Reformulation Markers. Journal of Pragmatics 341: 1069–1093. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cuenca, M. J. and Bach, C. 2007. Contrasting the Form and Use of Reformulation Markers. Discourse Studies 9(2): 149–175. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cuxac, C. 2007. Une manière de reformuler en langue des signes française. La linguistique 431: 117–128. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Enfield, N. J. 2009. The Anatomy of Meaning: Speech, Gesture, and Composite Utterances. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eshkol-Taravella, I. and Grabar, N. 2018. Reformulations: de l’étude outillée dans les corpus disponibles vers leur détection automatique. Langages (4): 5–16. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ferrara, L. and Hodge, G. 2018. Language as Description, Indication, and Depiction. Frontiers in Psychology 9(716):1–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gabarró-López, S. 2018. CorMILS: Pilot Multimodal Corpus of French ― French Belgian Sign Language (LSFB) Interpreters. Institutionen för lingvistik, Stockholms universitet, Sweden, and LSFB-Lab, Université de Namur, Belgium.Google Scholar
Gonçalves, M. A. and Valentim, H. 2017. Marqueurs discursifs et reformulation en portugais. Pragmalingüística 11: 18–33.Google Scholar
Gülich, E. and Kotschi, T. 1983. Les marqueurs de la reformulation paraphrastique. In Cahiers de linguistique française: Vol. 5. Connecteurs pragmatiques et structure du discours; actes du 2ème Colloque de Pragmatique de Genève (7–9 mars 1983), J. Moeschler (ed.), 305–351. Genève: Université de Genève.Google Scholar
Hodge, G. and Ferrara, L. 2014. Showing the Story: Enactment as Performance in Auslan Narratives. In Selected Papers from the 44th conference of the Australian Linguistic Society, L. Gawne and J. Vaughan (eds), 372–397. Melbourne: University of Melbourne.Google Scholar
Holmström, I. and Schönström, K. 2018. Deaf Lecturers’ Translanguaging in a Higher Education Setting. A Multimodal Multilingual Perspective. Applied Linguistics Review 9(1): 90–111. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kendon, A. 2014. Gesture. Visible Action as Utterance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ladd, P. 2003. Understanding Deaf Culture: In Search of Deafhood. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martinot, C. 2010. Reformulation et acquisition de la complexité linguistique. Travaux de linguistique (2): 63–96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Metzger, M. 1995. Constructed Dialogue and Constructed Action in American Sign Language. In Sociolinguistics in Deaf Communities, C. Lucas (ed.), 255–271. Washington: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Meurant, L. 2015. Corpus LSFB. First Digital Open Access Corpus of Movies and Annotations of French Belgian Sign Language (LSFB). University of Namur, LSFB-Lab. Available at [URL]
Meurant, L. and Sinte, A. 2016. La reformulation en langue des signes de Belgique francophone (LSFB). Narration, explication, conversation. L’Information grammaticale 1491: 32–44.Google Scholar
Meurant, L., Lepeut, A., Tavier, A., Gabarró-López, S. and Sinte, A. ongoing. The Multimodal FRAPé Corpus: Towards Building a Comparable LSFB and Belgian French Corpus. University of Namur: Laboratory of French Belgian Sign Language (LSFB-Lab).
Murillo, S. 2016. Sobre la reformulación y sus marcadores. Cuadernos AISPI: Estudios de lenguas y literaturas hispánicas 81: 237–258.Google Scholar
Notarrigo, I. 2017. Marqueurs de (dis)fluence en langue des signes de Belgique francophone. PhD Thesis, University of Namur.
Pierce, C. S. 1955. Philosophical Writings of Peirce. Dover: Justus Buchler.Google Scholar
Pons Bordería, S. 2013. Un solo tipo de reformulación. Cuadernos AISPI: Estudios de lenguas y literaturas hispánicas 21: 151–169.Google Scholar
Quinto-Pozos, D. and Reynolds, W. 2012. ASL Discourse Strategies: Chaining and Connecting-Explaining across Audiences. Sign Language Studies 12(2): 41–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rabatel, A. 2007. Répétitions et reformulations dans L’Exode: coénonciation entre Dieu, ses représentants et le narrateur. In Usages et analyses de la reformulation. Recherches linguistiques, M. Kara (ed.), 75–96. Metz: Université de Metz.Google Scholar
2010. Les reformulations pluri-sémiotiques en contexte de formation. Besançon: Presses universitaires de Franche-Comté.Google Scholar
Rossari, C. 1994. Les opérations de reformulation: analyse du processus et des marques dans une perspective contrastive français-italien. Berne: Lang.Google Scholar
Roulet, E. 1987. Complétude interactive et connecteurs reformulatifs. Cahiers de linguistique française 81: 111–140.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E., Jefferson, G. and Sacks, H. 1977. The Preference for Self-Correction in the Organization of Repair in Conversation. Language 53(2): 361–382. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Steuckardt, A. 2009. Décrire la reformulation: le paramètre rhétorique. Cahiers de praxématique 521: 159–172. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tannen, D. 1989. Talking Voices: Repetition, Dialogue, and Imagery in Conversational Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tsuchiya, K. and Handford, M. 2014. A Corpus-Driven Analysis of Repair in a Professional ELF Meeting: Not ‘letting it pass’. Journal of Pragmatics 641: 117–131. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ursi, B., Etienne, C., Oloff, F., Mondada, L. and Traverso, V. 2018. Diversité des répétitions et des reformulations dans les interactions orales : défis analytiques et conception d’un outil de détection automatique. Langages 2121: 87–104. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vandenitte, S. 2021. Construire l’action pour rendre les référents visibles en LSFB. Une étude pilote des mouvemets corporels dépictifs. Travaux du Cercle belge de linguistique. Available at [URL]
Wittenburg, P., Brugman, H., Russel, A., Klassmann, A. and Sloetjes, H. 2006. ELAN: A Professional Framework for Multimodality Research. Proceedings of Fifth International Language Resources and Evaluation Conference (LREC 2006). Genoa, Italy, 24–26 May 2006. European Language Resources Association. 1556–1559.Google Scholar
Woroch, J. 2010. La reformulation comme fondement de l’interprétation de conference. PhD Thesis, Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu.
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Meurant, Laurence
2022. Put another way. Belgian Journal of Linguistics 36 ► pp. 145 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 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.