Iconicity in Signed and Spoken Vocabulary: A Comparison Between American Sign Language, British Sign Language, English, and Spanish.

Hannah Little,Bill Thompson,Marcus Perlman,Robin L Thompson

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01433

Abstract

Considerable evidence now shows that all languages, signed and spoken, exhibit a significant amount of iconicity. We examined how the visual-gestural modality of signed languages facilitates iconicity for different kinds of lexical meanings compared to the auditory-vocal modality of spoken languages. We used iconicity ratings of hundreds of signs and words to compare iconicity across the vocabularies of two signed languages – American Sign Language and British Sign Language, and two spoken languages – English and Spanish. We examined (1) the correlation in iconicity ratings between the languages; (2) the relationship between iconicity and an array of semantic variables (ratings of concreteness, sensory experience, imageability, perceptual strength of vision, audition, touch, smell and taste); (3) how iconicity varies between broad lexical classes (nouns, verbs, adjectives, grammatical words and adverbs); and (4) between more specific semantic categories (e.g., manual actions, clothes, colors). The results show several notable patterns that characterize how iconicity is spread across the four vocabularies. There were significant correlations in the iconicity ratings between the four languages, including English with ASL, BSL, and Spanish. The highest correlation was between ASL and BSL, suggesting iconicity may be more transparent in signs than words. In each language, iconicity was distributed according to the semantic variables in ways that reflect the semiotic affordances of the modality (e.g., more concrete meanings more iconic in signs, not words; more auditory meanings more iconic in words, not signs; more tactile meanings more iconic in both signs and words). Analysis of the 220 meanings with ratings in all four languages further showed characteristic patterns of iconicity across broad and specific semantic domains, including those that distinguished between signed and spoken languages (e.g., verbs more iconic in ASL, BSL, and English, but not Spanish; manual actions especially iconic in ASL and BSL; adjectives more iconic in English and Spanish; color words especially low in iconicity in ASL and BSL). These findings provide the first quantitative account of how iconicity is spread across the lexicons of signed languages in comparison to spoken languages.

Highlights

Language scientists recognize that iconicity – in complement to arbitrariness – is a fundamental feature of human languages (Perniss et al, 2010)
Spanish ratings did not significantly correlate with British Sign Language (BSL), t(323) = 0.2, p = 0.83, and showed a weak, negative correlation with American Sign Language (ASL), r = −0.12, t(275) = −2.02, p = 0.04. These results suggest that signs for particular meanings are fairly consistent in their level of iconicity in ASL and BSL, while there is greater variability between English and Spanish words
This idea figures prominently in many theories of language evolution that argue that the first symbolic forms must have been built from gestures (e.g., Corballis, 2003; Armstrong and Wilcox, 2007; Tomasello, 2008; Arbib, 2012; Fay et al, 2014). These gesture-first theories depend critically on the premise that signs afford much more iconicity than words. Such an important claim begs for empirical evidence, and the high correlation we found here between iconicity ratings of ASL and BSL compared to English and Spanish gives it some initial quantitative support

Summary

Introduction

Language scientists recognize that iconicity – in complement to arbitrariness – is a fundamental feature of human languages (Perniss et al, 2010). On this theory, many of the forms of languages, from phonology to morphology to syntax, are motivated by a resemblance to the meaning they are used to express. Most previous research has focused separately on signed or spoken languages, a comparative approach raises fundamental questions related to the modality of language. How is iconicity manifested in languages that are signed, compared to those that are spoken? Is it true that signed languages are categorically more iconic than spoken languages, as it is often assumed? Or might there be more interesting, richer differences – as well as similarities – in the patterns of iconicity found in signed and spoken languages?

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion