Abstract
This article investigates the articulation of the thumb in flat handshapes (B handshapes) in Sign Language of the Netherlands. On the basis of phonological models of handshape, the hypothesis was generated that the thumb state is variable and will undergo coarticulatory influences of neighboring signs. This hypothesis was tested by investigating thumb articulation in signs with B handshapes that occur frequently in the Corpus NGT. Manual transcriptions were made of the thumb state in two dimensions and of the spreading of the fingers in a total of 728 tokens of 14 sign types, and likewise for the signs on the left and right of these targets, as produced by 61 signers. Linear mixed-effects regression (LME4) analyses showed a significant prediction of the thumb state in the target sign based on the thumb state in the preceding as well as following neighboring sign. Moreover, the degree of spreading of the other fingers in the target sign also influenced the position of the thumb. We conclude that there is evidence for phonological models of handshapes in sign languages that argue that not all fingers are relevant in all signs. Phonological feature specifications can single out specific fingers as the articulators, leaving other fingers unspecified. We thus argue that the standard term ‘handshape’ is in fact a misnomer, as it is typically not the shape of the whole hand that is specified in the lexicon.
Highlights
IntroductionBackground Several phonological models have been developed for sign languages since Stokoe’s (1960) seminal finding that the form of signs can be analyzed in terms of meaningless components, often called parameters (e.g., Liddell & Johnson, 1989; Sandler, 1989; Brentari, 1998; van der Kooij, 2002)
The second sub-question is: How often is the B handshape of the target sign articulated with some or a large degree of spreading of the fingers? This is reported in Table 3, which provides an overview of the various degrees of spreading at each of the 14 target signs
The main effects indicate that a higher degree of flexion in the preceding and/or following sign leads to a higher degree of flexion in the target sign
Summary
Background Several phonological models have been developed for sign languages since Stokoe’s (1960) seminal finding that the form of signs can be analyzed in terms of meaningless components, often called parameters (e.g., Liddell & Johnson, 1989; Sandler, 1989; Brentari, 1998; van der Kooij, 2002). The number and choice of selected fingers is phonologically distinctive and phonologically specified in the lexicon. All the other fingers are unselected and redundant, and try to be out of the way (Corina & Sagey, 1989; Corina, 1990; van der Kooij, 1998). Little effort has been invested in relating these phonological specifications to phonetic variability of selected and unselected fingers (see Crasborn, 2001, for discussion)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
