FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2061033420> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2061033420 endingPage "894" @default.
• W2061033420 startingPage "890" @default.
• W2061033420 abstract "Reviewed by: Sign languages Donna Jo Napoli Sign languages. Ed. by Diane Brentari. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. Pp. xxi, 691. ISBN 9780521883702. $160 (Hb). Twenty-five chapters (including an instructive introduction) by fifty-two scholars offer information about over forty sign languages. Assessing how many sign languages there are in the world is difficult both because countries rarely include information about sign in censuses and because the determination of what counts as a language versus a less-developed gestural system is tricky. Still, the number of sign languages studied here is impressive, particularly since most here are genetically unrelated. This book is a treasure trove. Many early studies of sign languages aimed to establish their status as bona fide natural languages and, thus, focused on properties in common with spoken languages. Once that basic issue was confirmed, attention turned to how modality differences affect grammar and the behavior of language communities, thus allowing us to advance our knowledge both of cognitive aspects of language and psychosocial factors pertinent to language use. The introduction to this volume beautifully lays out three advantages of considering sign languages in this regard. First, analysis [End Page 890] of a sign language can make clear what visual properties of the phonetic system motivate structural linguistic properties, opening the door for linguists to seek out what auditory properties of the phonetic system do the same in spoken languages. Second, iconicity in sign languages is readily accessible and apparent in a much wider range of data than generally found in spoken language, so its role can be examined closely. I would add that studying the ways in which sign iconicity yields to grammatical properties over time and the ways in which it yields to randomness over time (due to the inherent limitations of iconicity with respect to conveying isolated lexical items) can help us better understand the ways in which spoken language iconicity changes over time, as well as offer a perspective on the development and evolution of writing systems. Third, since new sign languages are emerging around the globe, study of sign languages offers data about the emergence of language that are otherwise unavailable. Already, study of sign languages (e.g. Nicaraguan Sign Language) has taught us that language evolution can proceed far more rapidly than had previously been hypothesized. To all these, one could add the advantage that studying sign languages offers us information on typology of language. Since sign languages use different articulators with different capabilities from those of spoken language and since their organization involves visual parameters as opposed to auditory parameters, possibilities for variation among sign languages come up that do not arise in spoken language. By looking at the ways that sign languages group together, we can enrich our inventory of the factors around which languages typologize in general and thus enhance our knowledge of language in general. In sum, if you are not already convinced that we no longer have to let the lingu(a) of linguistics limit our vision of our field, this volume will help remove remaining blinders, with articles written by renowned scholars (the contributors list is almost a who’s who of sign linguistics) and touching on so many issues that linguists of any ilk can find something to dig into here. Part 1 is on the history of sign languages and their generational transmission. From around World War I until the 1950s, Switzerland practiced sterilization of deaf people, forbade marriage among the deaf, and put deaf women in institutions, all in an effort to eradicate deafness. Today, eighty percent of deaf children get cochlear implants (CI), and typically do not sign. While deaf groups advocate use of sign, oral-only deaf people contradict them. Schools for the deaf have produced few graduates who qualify to enter universities. No universities have faculty positions specializing in sign language so little research has been done on Swiss sign languages. While sign languages are not officially oppressed, they are not officially recognized, and deafness is still considered a malady in need of cure. All this information is just part of the first article, by Penny Boyes Braem and Christian Rathmann, which goes on..." @default.
• W2061033420 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2061033420 creator A5079017862 @default.
• W2061033420 date "2011-01-01" @default.
• W2061033420 modified "2023-10-17" @default.
• W2061033420 title "<i>Sign languages</i> (review)" @default.
• W2061033420 cites W2054403722 @default.
• W2061033420 cites W2489310068 @default.
• W2061033420 doi "https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2011.0078" @default.
• W2061033420 hasPublicationYear "2011" @default.
• W2061033420 type Work @default.
• W2061033420 sameAs 2061033420 @default.
• W2061033420 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2061033420 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2061033420 hasAuthorship W2061033420A5079017862 @default.
• W2061033420 hasConcept C125893350 @default.
• W2061033420 hasConcept C12761454 @default.
• W2061033420 hasConcept C134306372 @default.
• W2061033420 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W2061033420 hasConcept C139676723 @default.
• W2061033420 hasConcept C175475021 @default.
• W2061033420 hasConcept C26022165 @default.
• W2061033420 hasConcept C2776737515 @default.
• W2061033420 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W2061033420 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W2061033420 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W2061033420 hasConcept C522192633 @default.
• W2061033420 hasConcept C72280650 @default.
• W2061033420 hasConcept C95232854 @default.
• W2061033420 hasConceptScore W2061033420C125893350 @default.
• W2061033420 hasConceptScore W2061033420C12761454 @default.
• W2061033420 hasConceptScore W2061033420C134306372 @default.
• W2061033420 hasConceptScore W2061033420C138885662 @default.
• W2061033420 hasConceptScore W2061033420C139676723 @default.
• W2061033420 hasConceptScore W2061033420C175475021 @default.
• W2061033420 hasConceptScore W2061033420C26022165 @default.
• W2061033420 hasConceptScore W2061033420C2776737515 @default.
• W2061033420 hasConceptScore W2061033420C33923547 @default.
• W2061033420 hasConceptScore W2061033420C41008148 @default.
• W2061033420 hasConceptScore W2061033420C41895202 @default.
• W2061033420 hasConceptScore W2061033420C522192633 @default.
• W2061033420 hasConceptScore W2061033420C72280650 @default.
• W2061033420 hasConceptScore W2061033420C95232854 @default.
• W2061033420 hasIssue "4" @default.
• W2061033420 hasLocation W20610334201 @default.
• W2061033420 hasOpenAccess W2061033420 @default.
• W2061033420 hasPrimaryLocation W20610334201 @default.
• W2061033420 hasRelatedWork W1579827293 @default.
• W2061033420 hasRelatedWork W189855193 @default.
• W2061033420 hasRelatedWork W1970382085 @default.
• W2061033420 hasRelatedWork W2054289114 @default.
• W2061033420 hasRelatedWork W2061033420 @default.
• W2061033420 hasRelatedWork W2111792095 @default.
• W2061033420 hasRelatedWork W2374519205 @default.
• W2061033420 hasRelatedWork W2565431528 @default.
• W2061033420 hasRelatedWork W4252111416 @default.
• W2061033420 hasRelatedWork W139472467 @default.
• W2061033420 hasVolume "87" @default.
• W2061033420 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2061033420 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2061033420 magId "2061033420" @default.
• W2061033420 workType "article" @default.