|
See also:
"Warlpiri Sign Language and Auslan - A Comparison"© 1998 Samantha Madell
Master of Arts (Applied Anthropology and Development)
Comments? Email me (Sam Madell) What Constitutes a Sign Language? Some important terms for understanding sign language A Brief History of Sign Language in Academia What is �Auslan� and How Does it Relate to English? What is �Warlpiri Hand Talk� and How Does it Relate to Spoken Warlpiri? A Comparison of Some Warlpiri and Auslan Sign Parameters Warlpiri and Auslan Kin Signs Compared �But how to write of those things here? How to pin a pair of fluttering hands - the wings of a butterfly, a bird - to a flat page? (Goldsworthy, 1995) IntroductionMost Australians have heard of, and at some time seen Auslan - the sign language of Australia�s deaf people - in full flight. At the same time, most Australians seem not to know of the existence of a complete system of sign language used by Aboriginal people. The nature of sign language, and its ability to visually represent real objects with the hands, means that different sign languages would almost certainly have more in common with each other than different spoken languages. So what might those similarities be? At the same time, however, non-signers have a tendency to dismiss sign languages as not being real languages at all, but only mimes and gestures. So what makes a sign language a language? What can sign language tell us about the history of speech; or about the culture of its signers? What is a �sign� anyway? Does literacy and cultural sophistication necessarily go hand in hand? The following essay aims to set out a basic overview of the Auslan and Warlpiri sign languages, and at the same time aims to challenge some culturally biased beliefs - particularly those concerning the spoken and written word. What Constitutes a Sign Language?Before discussing what makes a sign language a sign language (as distinct from, say, speech or gesture), it may be useful to first explore the conventional definitions of �language�. For example, The Australian Pocket Oxford Dictionary (1984) defines language as a �system of arbitrary but institutionalized sounds (and their written representation) used as means of human communication�. The Collins English Dictionary (1991), similarly, defines language as �a system for the expression of thoughts, feelings, etc., by the use of spoken sounds or conventional symbols.� Both these dictionary definitions mention sound as being a primary constituent of language. This explicit (and mistaken) bias, equating language directly with speech, is almost certainly present in the vast majority of the 99.9% of European-Australians born with hearing, to whom speech came �naturally� and who might have trouble separating, for example, the spoken word dog from the animal which those three letters in that particular order represent in English. As Stokoe (1996: 364) points out, �nothing about a dog could account for the word, and nothing about the word can look or act like a dog�. It is important to remember, then, that the words we use every day, either in their spoken or written forms, are, themselves, signs. Clearly, signs can be audible or visible, depending on the medium used to express them. Language, then, might more usefully be defined by simply leaving out reference to sound. Consequently, language might be defined as a codified system of expression amongst humans, using conventional symbols. Sign language is an extensive, codified system of gestures (or visible symbols) which can be used in place of speech. It is important to realise, however, that sign languages are significantly more complex than a mixture of common gestures (such as shrugging the shoulders, and nodding or shaking the head) and mime. Everyday gestures, although culturally specific, are used by most people (hearing and deaf alike) as an almost involuntary accompaniment to language, usually as a means of emphasising particular words. Sign language Signs, on the other hand, have quite specific meanings. Some Signs do clearly resemble gestures, or the objects to which they refer, but many bear no obvious relationship to their meaning (Johnston, 1987). An important distinction also needs to be made between primary sign languages and alternate sign languages. Auslan, the Australian sign language used by deaf people as their primary, and often only, means of communication, is a primary sign language. In contrast �Warlpiri hand talk�, an alternate sign language, was developed by native speakers of Warlpiri as an alternative to speech, for use particularly during times of mourning or in connection with male initiation ceremonies, where silence must be observed (Kendon, 1988). Some important terms for understanding sign languageBefore a useful comparison of any sign languages can take place, there are several terms with which it is important to be familiar in order to more fully understand descriptions and explanations of Signs. These terms, with basic definitions, are set out below: Semiotics, (or semiology, as originally coined by Saussure) is the study of signs within society - what constitutes signs and what governs them; Two branches of semiotics are:
An important point to be aware of when discussing signs is that nothing can be a sign unless it is interpreted as one. As mentioned above, some Signs in sign languages bear resemblance to that which they denote (in other words, their meanings are transparent) while other Signs are arbitrary or conventional in that they do not visibly relate to what they mean at all. Hence, a sign can be: Symbolic, meaning it does not resemble that which it signifies, but is, rather, arbitrary or conventional (some examples include using a red light to signify "stop"; the English word �father� to represent a male parent; or the Auslan Sign for father, which is literally translated as �FF�); or Indexical, meaning the sign is directly connected by a physical or causal link to the signified (for example, smoke is an indexical sign of a fire, while a medical symptom such as a rash is an indexical sign of illness); or Iconic, meaning the sign bears a direct resemblance to the signified (for example, a photograph, onomatopoeic words, and the mime-like Warlpiri and Auslan Signs for chopping with an axe are all iconic signs). Furthermore, iconic signs are said to be highly motivated (where the sign�s form is �motivated� by what it signifies), while symbolic signs are unmotivated. - (Chandler, 1997). Finally, in specific relation to sign language are the five major features present in producing a Sign. They are called a Sign�s parameters, and include:
A Brief History of Sign Language in AcademiaSign languages have apparently not been a very popular subject of study through the course of the twentieth century - a situation commented on by a number of authors who have undertaken studies, and published findings, on various sign languages. Alternate sign languages have been commonly described as �becoming forgotten� (Wright, 1978: v), �thoroughly neglected...by both linguists and anthropologists� (Kroeber, 1972: ix) and �not regarded to be of sufficient interest or importance to be studied� (Kendon, 1988: 13). Conversely, the study of Australian sign language �has only just begun� according to Johnston (1987: v), the man who coined the term Auslan. The lack of interest in sign languages is no doubt due, at least in part, to the fact that, in Western cultures, �999 people speak language for every one who signs it, and so there is a tendency to think that language must be speech and that sign or gesturing cannot really be language� (Stokoe, 1996: 362). Furthermore, the task of comprehensively documenting on paper any three-dimensional language which moves through space, would be a daunting and difficult task. Historically, the widespread use of sign language and gesture within particular societies appears to have been associated with backwardness on the evolutionary scale. For instance, Mallery (1972: 279 - first published in 1881) correlates �the gestures of the lower tribes of men [including Australian aboriginals]...with those of the lower animals� and goes on to draw attention to �the ungesturing English, long insular, and now rulers when spread over continents, [who] may be compared with the profusely gesticulating Italians dwelling in a maze of dialects and subject for centuries to foreign rule�! (p.294). Mallery, in fact, drew some inspiration for his theories from �Mr Darwin�, the pioneering author of Descent of Man (1871), who himself classed the �violent gestures� used by the natives of Tierra del Fuego with their �filthy and greasy skins, discordant voices, and hideous faces bedaubed with paint� (p.293) More modern thought on the topic of sign languages has swung the pendulum back in defence of �these tribally organized people [including the Warlpiri]...who seem very tolerant, very broad minded, as well as very wise in the way they see themselves and the physical universe� (Stokoe, 1996: 361). Nevertheless, however, Stokoe agrees with the nineteenth century Darwinian notion that the roots of speech as we know it can be found in visible (and no doubt motivated, or iconic) signs and gestures, which would have, at first, been accentuated with vocalisations - rather than the other way around. Stokoe believes, for example, that the upward inflection at the end of a spoken question is descended from the originally meaningless vocal emphasis accompanying the more �natural� upward movement of a querying shoulder shrug. What is �Auslan� and How Does it Relate to English?Auslan, as previously explained, is a primary sign language used for communication by deaf Australians. Auslan consists of about 4,000 basic signs - many of which can be modified to slightly alter meaning, or combined to create new meanings. Other useful aids to manual communication, although not strictly defined as belonging to Auslan, are the fingerspelt alphabet and mime. In understanding Auslan, it is important to realise that, while Auslan bears close resemblance to British Sign Language, it is quite distinct from signed English (whereby each word is signed individually, following English syntax). Indeed, it may be useful to keep in mind that Auslan is learnt (usually) as the first language of deaf children who will never hear a spoken sentence. Consequently, deaf children who go on to learn English (that is, to read and write, and less frequently to speak) are classified as bilingual. However, while functional literacy is considered to be the level of literacy attained by an average (hearing) ten year old, the average level of literacy attained by deaf Australians currently stands at eight years (Young, 1998). It stands to reason, then, that the syntax of Auslan exists to facilitate Signing, and differs markedly from English syntax. Perhaps one of the most obvious and remarkable differences between (any) signed language and written or spoken language is that Sign is kinetic and three dimensional, and so enables the simultaneous representation of, for example, more than one noun, or a noun and a verb, in space. This aspect of Auslan, which lends to its concision, necessarily makes literal translation into English impossible. An obvious relationship that Auslan does have with English, however, is its widespread use of initialisation in Signs. This simply means that many words are indicated by fingerspelling that word�s first letter, often accompanied by a clarifying sign movement or location. For example, the Auslan sign for �west� is created by forming the letter W, and then moving that handshape in a �westerly� direction (that is, not necessarily true west, but rather to the left, as if the signer was facing a map). Similarly, the Signs for mother, metre, month, mile and minute are all variations on the Sign for �M�. What is �Warlpiri Hand Talk� and How Does it Relate to Spoken Warlpiri?The most fundamental difference between Warlpiri hand talk (or any alternate sign language) and Auslan (or any primary sign language) is that in the Warlpiri context, Signs are learnt after speech. Stokoe (1996: 359) argues that �language is a system of thinking, of interacting, of being human�. If we accept this argument, then we surely accept that we understand the world in terms of, and as being inseparable from, the language or languages that we know and use. So, it stands to reason that Warlpiri speakers come to understand the world as it is described and explained through Warlpiri speech, and it follows that an alternate language within that culture - one learnt after speech - would follow those speech patterns that seem natural to native speakers. Indeed, this seems to be the case, as documented by Kendon who observes that �on the whole the signed versions and the spoken versions [of Warlpiri] are much more like one another than different� (1988: 272). On the other hand, while Warlpiri hand talk apparently (generally) follows the syntax of spoken Warlpiri, this hand talk, for similar reasons to Auslan - namely that more than one object, idea or action can be represented at any given point in time - has been observed to be more concise than its spoken equivalent. It was also noted by Kendon that, when a Warlpiri woman told the same traditional story twice for the purpose of study (once orally, once in Sign), she was found to use less repetition as a means of enhancing the story in the Signed version, which also had the overall effect of making the Signed version of the story shorter. Other important considerations to take into account when looking at Warlpiri hand talk are the purposes for which this sign language is used, namely to completely replace speech in culturally dictated situations where silence must be observed. Contrary to the sweeping opinions espoused by authors such as Mallery, Australian Aboriginals have not been found to use sign language as a supplement to forms of speech which are otherwise in any way inadequate for purposes of communication. Similarly, the purpose and development of Australian Aboriginal sign languages cannot be likened to those used by the North American Indians for communication between tribes which did not share a spoken language (Fronval and Dubois, 1978). It is interesting to note that the sign language of the Amer-Indians, an �ingenious key to inter-tribal relations� utilised Signs with clear connections to the things they stood for, that is, they tended to suggest the forms of objects or the movements of actions (p.5). In contrast, Warlpiri hand talk could not easily be understood by a non-Aboriginal observer. Obviously, being a non-literate society, no alphabetised or initialised Signs are used in Warlpiri. While the written (or fingerspelt) word may represent the ultimate departure from iconism, it does not follow that Warlpiri Signs are indicative of primitive cultural or cognitive practices. Many Warlpiri Signs are motivated or iconic, but as Kendon points out, the relationship between these Signs and the actual objects they represent are often culturally motivated - rather than being motivated by form or movement - and are far from straightforward. One example of this is the Sign for �man�, which is executed by moving the flat hand (palm facing body) across the chest. This action represents the scars, obtained through initiation, across a Warlpiri man�s chest. In its cultural context, the symbolism of the Sign is obvious, and yet the Sign in no way actually resembles a man. A Comparison of Some Warlpiri and Auslan Sign Parameters
|
