LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:

OpenAIRE is about to release its new face with lots of new content and services.
During September, you may notice downtime in services, while some functionalities (e.g. user registration, login, validation, claiming) will be temporarily disabled.
We apologize for the inconvenience, please stay tuned!
For further information please contact helpdesk[at]openaire.eu

fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Zeshan, Ulrike (2015)
Publisher: De Gruyter
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects:
In a small group of deaf sign language users from different countries and with no shared language, the signers’ initial conversational interactions are investigated as they meet in pairs for the very first time. This case study allows for a unique insight into the initial stages of pidginisation and the conceptual processes involved. The participants use a wide range of linguistic and communicative resources, and it can be argued that they construct shared multilingual-multimodal cognitive spaces for the purpose of these conversations. This research explores the nature of these shared multilingual-multimodal spaces, how they are shaped by the signers in interaction, and how they can be understood in terms of conceptual blending. The research also focuses on the meta-linguistic skills that signers use in these multilingual-multimodal interactions to “make meaning”.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Baker, Philip. 1996. Australian and Melanesian Pidgin English and the fellows in between. In Phillip Baker & Anand Syea (eds.), Changing meanings, changing functions: Papers relating to grammaticalization in contact languages (Westminster Creolistics series 2), 243-258. London: Westminster Press.
    • Bakker, Philip. 2008. Pidgins versus creoles and pidgincreoles. In Silvia Kouwenberg & John Victor Singler (eds.), Handbook of pidgin and creole studies, 130-157. Oxford: WileyBlackwell.
    • Bauman, Dirksen & Joseph Murray. 2010. Deaf studies in the 21st century: Deaf-gain and the future of human diversity. In Marc Marschark & Patricia Spencer (eds.), Oxford handbook of deaf studies, language, and education, Vol. 2, 210-225. New York: Oxford University Press.
    • Bauman, Dirksen & Joseph Murray (eds.). 2014. Deaf gain: Raising the stakes for human diversity. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
    • Boyes Braem, Penny &, Rachel Sutton-Spence. 2001. The hands are the head of the mouth: The mouth as articulator in sign languages. Hamburg: Signum Press.
    • Bradford, Anastasia, Keiko Sagara & Ulrike Zeshan. 2013. Multilingual and multimodal aspects of “cross-signing” - A study of emerging communication in the domain of numerals. Paper presented at the 11th Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research conference (TISLR11), University College London, 13-15 July.
    • Brennan, Susan E. & Herbert H. Clark. 1996. Conceptual pacts and lexical choice in conversation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 22(6). 1482-1493.
    • Clark, Herbert H. & Susan E. Brennan. 1991. Grounding in communication. In Lauren B. Resnick, John M. Levine & Stephanie D. Teasley (eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition, 127-149. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
    • de Vos, Connie. 2012. Sign-spatiality in Kata Kolok: How a village sign language inscribes its signing space. Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics PhD thesis.
    • Dingemanse, Mark, Francisco Torreira & N.J. Enfield. 2013. Is “Huh?” a universal word? Conversational infrastructure and the convergent evolution of linguistic items. PLoS One 8(11). e78273.
    • Eggins, Suzanne & Diana Slade. 1997. Analysing casual conversation. London: Cassell.
    • Enfield, Nick 2003. Demonstratives in space and interaction: Data from Lao speakers and implications for semantic analysis. Language 79(1). 82-117.
    • Enfield, Nick & Stephen C. Levinson (eds.). 2006. Roots of human sociality: Culture, cognition and interaction. Oxford: Berg.
    • Fauconnier, Gilles & Mark Turner. 2002. The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind's hidden complexities. New York: Basic Books.
    • Gries, Stefan 2005. Syntactic priming: A corpus-based perspective. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 34(4). 365-399.
    • Gullberg, Marianne. 2009. Reconstructing verb meaning in a second language: How English speakers of L2 Dutch talk and gesture about placement. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics 7(1). 221-244.
    • Gullberg, Marianne. 2011. Multilingual multimodality: Communicative difficulties and their solutions in second-language use. In Jürgen Streeck, Charles Goodwin & Curtis LeBaron (eds.), Embodied interaction: Language and body in the material world, 137-151. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    • Hopper, Paul. 1987. Emergent grammar. Berkeley Linguistics Society 13. 139-157.
    • Iwasaki, Shimako. 2008. Collaborative construction of talk in Japanese conversation. Los Angeles, CA: University of California PhD thesis.
    • Kendon, Adam. 2004. Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    • Kitzinger, Cathy. 2012. Repair. In Jack Sidnell & Tanya Stivers (eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis, 229-256. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
    • Ktejik, Mish. 2013. Numeral incorporation in Japanese Sign Language. Sign Language Studies 13. 186-209.
    • Langacker, Ronald W. 1999. Grammar and conceptualization. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    • Lefebvre, Claire. 2004. Issues in the study of pidgin and creole languages. Amsterdam & Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
    • Levinson, Stephen C. 2006. On the human “interaction engine”. In N. J. Enfield & Stephen C. Levinson (eds.), Roots of human sociality: Culture, cognition and interaction, 39-69. Oxford: Berg.
    • Liddell, Scott K. 1996. Numeral incorporating roots and non-incorporating prefixes in American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies 92. 201-226.
    • Lutalo-Kiingi, Sam. 2014. A descriptive grammar of morphosyntactic constructions in Ugandan Sign Language (UgSL). Preston: University of Central Lancashire PhD thesis.
    • McKee, Rachel & Jemina Napier. 2002. Interpreting in International Sign Pidgin: An analysis. Journal of Sign Language Linguistics 5(1). 27-54.
    • McNeill, David. 1992. Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
    • Meier, Richard P., Kearsey Cormier & David Quinto-Pozos (eds.). 2002. Modality and structure in signed and spoken languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    • Michaelis, Susanne Maria & Marcel Rosalie. 2013. Seychelles Creole. In Susanne Maria Michaelis, Philippe Maurer, Martin Haspelmath & Magnus Huber (eds.), The survey of pidgin and creole languages. Vol. II: Portuguese-based, Spanish-based and French-based languages, 261-270. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    • Moore, Chris & Philip J. Dunham (eds.). 1995. Joint attention: Its origins and role in development. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
    • Mühlhäusler, Peter. 1996. Linguistic ecology. London: Routledge.
    • Palfreyman, Nicholas. Forthcoming. Variation and change in the numeral system of Indonesian sign language varieties. In Ulrike Zeshan & Keiko Sagara (eds.), Semantic fields in sign languages: Colour, kinship and quantification (Sign Language Typology Series No. 6). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton & Lancaster: Ishara Press.
    • Perniss, Pamela. 2007. Space and iconicity in German Sign Language (DGS). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics PhD thesis.
    • Perniss, Pamela, Roland Pfau & Markus Steinbach (eds.). 2007. Visible variation: Crosslinguistic studies in sign language structure. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    • Roberts, Sarah J. & Joan Bresnan. 2008. Retained inflectional morphology in pidgins: A typological study. Linguistic Typology 12(2). 269-302.
    • Rosenstock, Rachel. 2008. The role of iconicity in International Sign Language. Sign Language Studies 8(2). 131-159.
    • Sacks, Harvey &, Emanuel A. Schegloff. 1979. Two preferences in the organization of reference to persons in conversation and their interaction. In George Psathas (ed.), Everyday language, 15-21. New York: Irvington.
    • Sagara, Keiko. 2014. The numeral system of Japanese Sign Language from a cross-linguistic perspective. Preston: University of Central Lancashire MPhil dissertation.
    • Sagara, Keiko & Ulrike Zeshan. 2013. Typology of cardinal numerals and numeral incorporation in sign languages. Poster presented at the 11th Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research conference (TISLR11), University College London, 13-15 July.
    • Samarin, William J. 1968. Lingua francas of the world. In Joshua A. Fishman (ed.), Readings in the sociology of language, 660-672. The Hague: Mouton.
    • Sandler, Wendy. 1999. The medium and the message: Prosodic interpretation of linguistic content in Israeli Sign Language. Sign Language and Linguistics 2(2). 187-215.
    • Sandler, Wendy & Diane Lillo-Martin. 2006. Sign language and linguistic universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    • Schegloff, Emanuel A., Gail Jefferson & Harvey Sacks. 1977. The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language 53. 361-382.
    • Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1982. Discourse as an interactional achievement: Some uses of “Uh huh” and other things that come between sentences. In Deborah Tannen (ed.), Analyzing discourse: Text and talk, 71-93. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
    • Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1987. Analyzing single episodes of interaction: An exercise in conversation analysis. Social Psychology Quarterly 50(2). 101-114.
    • Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1991. Conversation analysis and socially shared cognition. In Lauren B. Resnick, John M. Levine & Stephanie D. Teasley (eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition, 150-171. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
    • Schegloff, Emanuel A. 2007. Sequence organization in interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    • Sidnell, Jack & Tanya Stivers (eds.). 2012. The handbook of conversation analysis. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
    • Stamp, Rose. 2013. Sociolinguistic variation, language change and dialect contact in the British Sign Language (BSL) lexicon. London: University College London PhD dissertation.
    • Streeck, Jürgen, Charles Goodwin & Curtis LeBaron (eds.). 2011. Embodied interaction: Language and body in the material world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    • Supalla, Ted & Rebecca Webb. 1995. The grammar of International Sign: A new look at pidgin languages. In Karen Emmorey & Judy S. Reilly (eds.), Sign, gesture and space, 333-353. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    • Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt. 2005. Language users as creatures of habit: A corpus-based analysis of persistence in spoken English. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 1(1). 113-149.
    • Taub, Sarah F. 2001. Language from the body: Iconicity and metaphor in American Sign Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    • Tomasello, Michael. 2003. Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    • Tomasello, Michael. 2008. Origins of human communication. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    • Wilbur, Ronnie B. 2000. Phonological and prosodic layering of non-manuals in American Sign Language. In Karen Emmorey & Harlan Lane (eds.), The signs of language revisited: An anthology to honour Ursula Bellugi and Edward Klima, 213-244. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    • Wittenburg, Peter, Hennie Brugman, Albert Russel, Alex Klassmann & Han Sloetjes. 2006. ELAN: A professional framework for multimodality research. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC), 1556-1559. http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/lrec2006/pdf/153_pdf.pdf (accessed 28 October 2013).
    • Zeshan, Ulrike, Cesar Ernesto Escobedo Delgado, Hasan Dikyuva, Sibaji Panda & Connie de Vos. 2013. Cardinal numerals in village sign languages: Approaching cross-modal typology. Linguistic Typology 17(3). 357-396.
    • Zeshan, Ulrike & Keiko Sagara (eds.). Forthcoming. Semantic fields in sign languages: Colour, kinship and quantification (Sign Language Typology Series No. 6). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton & Lancaster: Ishara Press.
  • Inferred research data

    The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    Title Trust
    65
    65%
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Funded by projects

  • EC | MULTISIGN

Cite this article

Cookies make it easier for us to provide you with our services. With the usage of our services you permit us to use cookies.
More information Ok