Chapter published in:
Reference: From conventions to pragmatics
Edited by Laure Gardelle, Laurence Vincent-Durroux and Hélène Vinckel-Roisin
[Studies in Language Companion Series 228] 2023
► pp. 127–149

When referents are seen and heard

A comparative study of constructed action in the discourse of LSFB (French Belgian Sign Language) signers and Belgian French speakers

| Laboratoire de Langue des signes de Belgique francophone (LSFB-Lab), Namur Institute of Language, Text and Transmediality (NaLTT), University of Namur

Constructed action is a referential strategy whereby signers and speakers use their bodies and/or voices to depict referents and their actions. Using a corpus-based study, this chapter compares constructed action in LSFB and Belgian French. It shows both that LSFB signers use constructed action to denote referents more frequently than Belgian French speakers do and that the two language communities use an overlapping set of articulators to enact referents. However, it also sheds light on differences in the use of these articulators, notably facial expression and the use of hand and arm movements, across LSFB and Belgian French. By documenting this referential strategy in a signed and a spoken language, this study informs the field of comparative semiotics.

Keywords: signed language, gesture, corpus linguistics, multimodal, comparative semiotics
Article outline
  • 1.Reference in signed and spoken languages
    • 1.1Referring in a signed language and its ambient spoken language: An illustration
    • 1.2Reference, a multimodal and semiotically composite phenomenon
    • 1.3Referring with constructed action across signed and spoken languages
      • 1.3.1Frequency of use
      • 1.3.2Orchestrating different articulators to enact referents
  • 2.Method
    • 2.1Corpus selection
    • 2.2Annotation procedure
  • 3.Results
    • 3.1Frequency of CA
    • 3.2Frequency of articulator activation
  • 4.Discussion
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.228.07van
References
Clark, Herbert H.
1996 Using Language. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. & Bangerter, Adrian
2004 Changing ideas about reference. In Experimental Pragmatics, Ira Noveck & Dan Sperber (eds), 25–49. London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coombs Fine, Julia
2019 ‘They just had such a sweet way of speaking’: Constructed voices and prosodic styles in Kodiak Alutiiq. Language and Communication 67: 1–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cormier, Kearsy, Smith, Sandra & Sevcikova-Sehyr, Zed
2015 Rethinking constructed action. Sign Language & Linguistics 18(2): 167–204. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crasborn, Onno & Sloetjes, Han
2008 Enhanced ELAN functionality for sign language corpora. In Proceedings of LREC 2008, Sixth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation.Google Scholar
Cuxac, Christian
2000 La langue des signes française (LSF): Les voies de l’iconicité. Paris-Gap: Ophrys.Google Scholar
Dingemanse, Mark
2015 Ideophones and reduplication: Depiction, description, and the interpretation of repeated talk in discourse. Studies in Language 39(4): 946–970. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2018 Redrawing the margins of language: Lessons from research on ideophones. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 3(1): 1–30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Earis, Helen & Cormier, Kearsy
2013 Point of view in British Sign Language and spoken English narrative discourse: The example of “The Tortoise and the Hare”. Language and Cognition 5(4): 313–343. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Enfield, Nick J.
2009 The Anatomy of Meaning: Speech, Gesture, and Composite Utterances. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014 Natural causes of language: Frames, biases, and cultural transmission. Berlin: Language Science Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ferrara, Lindsay & Halvorsen, Rolf P.
2017 Depicting and describing meanings with iconic signs in Norwegian Sign Language. Gesture 16(3): 371–395. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ferrara, Lindsay, Anible, Benjamin, Hodge, Gabrielle, Jantunen, Tommi, Leeson, Lorraine, Mesch, Johanna & Nilsson, Anna-Lena
2022 A cross-linguistic comparison of reference across five signed languages. Linguistic Typology. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ferrara, Lindsay & Hodge, Gabrielle
2018 Language as description, indication, and depiction. Frontiers in Psychology 9: 716. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Garcia, Brigitte & Sallandre, Marie-Anne
2020 Contribution of the semiological approach to deixis–anaphora in sign language: The key role of eye-gaze. Frontiers in Psychology 11: 583763. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Herrmann, Annika & Pendzich, Nina-Kristin
2018 Between narrator and protagonist in fables of German Sign Language. In Linguistic Foundations of Narration in Spoken and Sign Languages [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 247], Annika Hübl & Markus Steinbach (eds), 275–308. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hodge, Gabrielle & Ferrara, Lindsay
2014 Showing the story: Enactment as performance in Auslan narratives. In Selected Papers from the 44th Conference of the Australian Linguistic Society, 2013, Lauren Gawne & Jill Vaughan (eds), 372–397. Melbourne: University of Melbourne.Google Scholar
Hodge, Gabrielle, Ferrara, Lindsay & Anible, Benjamin. D.
2019b The semiotic diversity of doing reference in a deaf signed language. Journal of Pragmatics 143: 33–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hodge, Gabrielle, Sekine, Kazuki, Schembri, Adam & Johnston, Trevor
2019a Comparing signers and speakers: Building a directly comparable corpus of Auslan and Australian English. Corpora 14(1): 63–76. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jantunen, Tommi, De Weerdt, Danny, Burger, Birgitta & Puupponen, Anna
2020 The more you move, the more action you construct: A motion capture study on head and upper-torso movements in constructed action in Finnish Sign Language narratives. Gesture 19(1): 72–96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kendon, Adam
1984 Did gesture have the happiness to escape the curse at the confusion of Babel? In Nonverbal Behavior: Perspectives, Applications, Intercultural Insights, Aaron Wolfgang (ed.), 75–114. New York NY: C.J. Hogrefe.Google Scholar
2014 Semiotic diversity in utterance production and the concept of ‘language’. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 369(1651). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kusters, Annelies, Green, Mara, Moriarty, Erin & Snoddon, Kristin
2020 Sign language ideologies: Practices and politics. In Sign Language Ideologies in Practice, Annelies Kusters, Mara Green, Erin Moriarty & Kristin Snoddon (eds), 3–22. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liddell, Scott. K.
2003 Grammar, Gesture, and Meaning in American Sign Language. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mayer, Mercer
1969 Frog, Where Are You? New York NY: Dial Press.Google Scholar
McNeill, David
1985 So you think gestures are nonverbal? Psychological Review 92(3): 350–371. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1992 Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought. Chicago IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Metzger, M.
1995 Constructed dialogue and constructed action in ASL. In Sociolinguistics in Deaf Communities, Ceil Lucas (ed.), 255–271. Washington DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Meurant, Laurence
2015 Corpus LSFB. First digital open access corpus of movies and annotations of French Belgian Sign Language (LSFB). LSFB-Lab, University of Namur; Corpus LSFB.Google Scholar
Müller, Cornelia
2014 Gestural modes of representation as techniques of depiction. In Body – Language – Communication, Cornelia Müller, Alan Cienki, Ellen Fricke, Silvia Ladewig, David McNeill & Jana Bressem (eds), 1687–1702. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Parrill, Fey
2010 Viewpoint in speech–gesture integration: Linguistic structure, discourse structure, and event structure. Language and Cognitive Processes 25(5): 650–668. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peirce, Charles S.
1955 Philosophical Writings of Peirce. New York NY: Dover Publications.Google Scholar
Quer, Josep
2011 Reporting and quoting in signed discourse. In Understanding Quotation, Elke Brendel, Jörg Meibauer & Markus Steinbach (eds), 277–302. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2019 Delimiting reported discourse: Cross-modal criteria. Linguistic Typology 23(1): 221–228. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quinto-Pozos, David & Mehta, Sarika
2010 Register variation in mimetic gestural complements to signed language. Journal of Pragmatics 42(3): 557–584. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quinto-Pozos, David & Parrill, Fey
2015 Signers and co-speech gesturers adopt similar strategies for portraying viewpoint in narratives. Topics in Cognitive Science 7(1): 12–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
R Core Team
(2021) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Google Scholar
Rayman, Jennifer
1999 Storytelling in the visual mode: A comparison of ASL and English. In Storytelling and Conversation Discourse in Deaf Communities, Elizabeth Winston (ed.), 59–82. Washington DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Schembri, Adam, Fenlon Jordan, Cormier Kearsy & Johnston Trevor
2018 Sociolinguistic typology and sign languages. Frontiers in Psychology 9: 200. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stec, Kashmiri, Huiskes, Mike & Redeker, Gisela
2016 Multimodal quotation: Role shift practices in spoken narratives. Journal of Pragmatics 104: 1–17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stokoe, William C.
1960 Sign language structure: An outline of the visual communication systems of the American deaf. Stud. Linguist. Occasion. Pap. 8: 1–78.Google Scholar
Thompson, Sandra A. & Suzuki, Ryoko
2014 Reenactments in conversation: Gaze and recipiency. Discourse Studies 16(6): 816–846. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vandenitte, Sébastien
2021 Construire l’action pour rendre les référents visibles en LSFB: Une étude pilote des mouvements corporels dépictifs. In Travaux du Cercle belge de Linguistique 15, Sébastien Vandenitte, Alysson Lepeut & Laurence Meurant (eds). Bruxelles: Linguistic Society of Belgium. https://​sites​.uclouvain​.be​/bkl​-cbl​/fr​/publications​/travaux​-du​-cbl​/volume​-15​-2021/Google Scholar
(2022) Making referents seen and heard across signed and spoken languages: Documenting and interpreting cross-modal differences in the use of enactment. Frontiers in Psychology. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vermeerbergen, Myriam & Demey, Eline
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 [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 281], Myriam Vermeerbergen, Lorraine Leeson & Onno A. Crasborn (eds), 257–282. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vigliocco, Gabriella, Perniss, Pamela & Vinson, David
2014 Language as a multimodal phenomenon: Implications for language learning, processing and evolution. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 369(1651). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wickam, Hadley
2016 ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. New York NY: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar