Cover not available
Article published In:
Signed and spoken language contrastive research: A multimodal approach
Edited by Sílvia Gabarró-López and Laurence Meurant
[Languages in Contrast 22:2] 2022
► pp. 259–289

Character perspective shift sequences and embodiment markers in signed and spoken discourse

 | Université du Québec à Montréal (Canada)
ORCID logo | Université du Québec à Montréal (Canada)
The aim of this study is to present a distributional portrait of forms of character-perspective sequences as produced by LSQ (Langue des signes québécoise) signers and Quebec French speakers, in relation to corporal and grammatical marking in a set of recorded discourses. Among the forms we examine are grammatical, corporal and rhythm markers. As for the types of character perspective shift examined, we focus on the nature of the event that is being enacted: speech, thought, action or gesture. The dataset employed in the study consists of short, elicited narratives using video sketches as stimuli. Both Deaf signers and French speakers were asked to describe short scenarios that were displayed without any signing or speech. Half of the stimuli were constructed from a series of factual events containing no emphatic reactions or actions, while the other half included emphatic elements. Twenty-four narratives produced by these two groups were transcribed and coded using ELAN to determine the distribution of character perspective shift sequences (CPS) used in terms of presence (duration) and frequency (occurrences). Further markers were also identified in terms of frequency, which was then analyzed with a factorial ANOVA statistical model. The overall finding of this study is that CPS is used in both language groups, despite their varying results in terms of the distribution of frequency and markers.
Keywords: perspective shift, gestuality, discourse type, multi-modality, French/Quebec Sign Language
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Marking character perspective
    • 2.1Conventionality and entrenchment
    • 2.2Narrative point of view
    • 2.3Perspective shift marking
    • 2.4Research questions
  • 3.Methods
    • 3.1Dataset
    • 3.2Measures and variables
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1Presence and frequency of character perspective shift in discourse
    • 4.2Frequency of types of CPS corporeal markers
    • 4.3Frequency of rhythm variation attributed to CPS
    • 4.4Frequency of grammatical markers
    • 4.5Distribution of different type of embodiment in CPS
  • 5.Discussion on CPS markers in French and LSQ
    • 5.1Presence of CPS in discourse
    • 5.2Form and frequency of CPS markers
    • 5.3Effect of discourse type
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 20 June 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.00022.par
References (43)
References
Blondel, M., Miller, C. and Parisot, A.-M. 2007. Tortoise, Hare, Children: Evaluation and Narrative Genre in LSQ. In Multilingualism and Sign Languages from the Great Plains to Australia, C. Lucas (ed.), 188–251. Washington: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Cassell, J. and McNeill, D. 1991. Gesture and the Poetics of Prose. Poetics Today 12(3): 375–404. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cormier, K., Smith, S. and Sevcikova, Z. 2015. Rethinking Constructed Action. Sign Language & Linguistics 18(2): 167–204. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coulmas, F. 2011. Reported Speech: Some General Issues. In Direct and Indirect Speech, F. Coulmas (ed.), 1–28. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, E. 1999. Coherent Voicing. On Prosody in Conversational Reported Speech. Pragmatics and Beyond New Series 11–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crasborn, O. and Sloetjes, H. 2008. Enhanced ELAN Functionality for Sign Language Corpora. Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC ’08)/Third Workshop on the Representation and Processing of Sign Languages: Construction and Exploitation of Sign Language Corpora. Marrakech, Morocco, 28–30 May 2008. 39–43.Google Scholar
Debreslioska, S., Özyürek, A., Gullberg, M. and Perniss, P. 2013. Gestural Viewpoint Signals Referent Accessibility. Discourse Processes 50(7): 431–456. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Earis, H. and Cormier, K. 2013. Point of View in British Sign Language and Spoken English Narrative Discourse: The Example of ‘The Toirtoise and the Hare’. Language and Cognition 5(4): 313–343. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Emmorey, K., Tversky, B. and Taylor, H. A. 2000. Using Space to Describe Space: Perspective in Speech, Sign, and Gesture. Spatial Cognition and Computation 2(3): 157–180. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Engberg-Pedersen, E. 1995. Point of View Expressed through Shifters. In Language, Gesture, and Space, K. Emmorey and J. Reilly (eds), 133–154. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ferrara, L. and Johnston, T. 2014. Elaborating who’s what: A Study of Constructed Action and Clause Structure in Auslan (Australian Sign Language). Australian Journal of Linguistics 34(2):193–215. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fischer, R. 1998. Lexical Change in Present-Day English: A Corpus-Based Study of the Motivation, Institutionalization, and Productivity of Creative Neologisms. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar
Hoiting, N. and Slobin, D. I. 2007. From Gestures to Signs in the Acquisition of Sign Language. In Gesture and the Dynamic Dimension of Language: Essays in Honor of David McNeill, S. D. Duncan, J. Cassell and E. T. Levy (eds), 51–65. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Janzen, T. 2008. Perspective Shifts in ASL Narratives: The Problem of Clause Structure. In Language in the Context of Use: Discourse and Cognitive Approaches to Language, A. Tyler, Y. Kim and M. Takada (eds), 121–144. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kendon, A. 1988. How Gestures can Become like Words. In Cross-Cultural Perspectives in Nonverbal Communication, F. Poyatos (ed.), 131–141. Toronto: Hogrefe & Huber Publishers.Google Scholar
2004. Gesture: Visible Action as Utterance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Labov, W. and Waletzky, J. 1967. Narrative Analysis: Oral Versions of Personal Experience. In Essays on the Verbal and Visual Arts, J. Helm (ed.), 12–44. Seattle: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. 2008. Cognitive Grammar: A Basic Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levey, S., Groulx, K. and Roy, J. 2013. A Variationist Perspective on Discourse-Pragmatic Change in a Contact Setting. Language Variation and Change 25(2): 225–251. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liddell, S. K. and Metzger, M. 1998. Gesture in Sign Language Discourse. Journal of Pragmatics 30(6): 657–697. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lillo-Martin, D. 1995. The Point of View Predicate in American Sign Language. In Language, Gesture, and Space, K. Emmorey and J. Reilly (eds), 155–170. Hillsdalle: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
2012. 17. Utterance Reports and Constructed Action. In Sign language: An International Handbook, R. Pfau, M. Steinbach and B. Woll (eds), 365–387. Berlin: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Loew, R. C. 1984. Roles and Reference in American Sign Language: A Developmental Perspective. PhD Thesis, University of Minnesota.
Mandel, M. 1977. lconic Devices in American Sign Language. In On the Other Hand: New Perspectives on American Sign Language, L. Friedman (ed.), 57–107. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
McNeill, D. 1992. Hand and mind: What Gesture Reveal about Thought. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
2005. Gesture and Thought. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Metzger, M. 1995. Constructed Dialogue and Constructed Action in American Sign Language. In Sociolinguistics in Deaf Communities, C. Lucas (ed.), 255–271. Washington: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Occhino, C. and Wilcox, S. 2017. Gesture or Sign? A Categorization Problem. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 401: 36–37. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oliveira, M. and Cunha, D. 2004. Prosody as Marker of Direct Reported Speech Boundary. Paper presented at Second International Conference on Speech Prosody, Nara, Japan, 23–26 March 2004.
Padden, C. 1986. Verbs and Role-Shifting in American Sign Language. In Proceedings of the Fourth National Symposium on Sign Language Research and Teaching, C. Padden (ed.), 44–57. Silver Spring: National Association of the Deaf.Google Scholar
Parisot, A.-M., Pilarski, A., Richer-Lemay, L., Rinfret, J. and Voghel, A. 2008. Description de la Variation du Marquage Spatial en Langue des Signes Québécoise (LSQ). Paper presented at the 76e Congrès de l’Acfas. Québec, Canada, 5–9 May 2008.
Parrill, F. 2010. Viewpoint in Speech–Gesture Integration: Linguistic Structure, Discourse Structure, and Event Structure. Language and Cognitive Processes 25(5): 650–668. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012. Interactions between Discourse Status and Viewpoint in Co-Speech Gesture. In Viewpoint in Language: A Multimodal Perspective, B. Dancygier and E. Sweetser (eds), 97–112. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Poisson-Quinton, S., Mimran, R. and Mahéo-Le Coadic, M. 2007. Grammaire Expliquée du Français: Niveau Intermédiaire. Paris: CLE International.Google Scholar
Parisot, A.-M. and Saunders, D. 2019. La Représentation Corporelle dans le Discours Signé. LIDIL: Revue de linguistique et de didactique des langues 601: 1–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Poulin, C. and Miller, C. 1995. On Narrative Discourse and Point of View in Quebec Sign Language. In Language, Gesture, and Space, K. Emmorey and J. S. Reilly (eds), 117–131. Hillsdalle: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Quer, J. 2005. Context Shift and Indexical Variables in Sign Languages. Semantics and Linguistic Theory 151: 152–168. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quinto-Pozos, D. 2007. Can Constructed Action be Considered Obligatory? Lingua 117(7): 1285–1314. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Saunders, D. 2016. Description des Structures de Représentation Corporelle en Langue des Signes Québécoise chez des Locuteurs Sourds Langue Première et Mangue Seconde. Master’s Dissertation, Université du Québec à Montréal.
Slobin, D., Hoiting, N., Kuntze, M., Lindert, R., Weinberg, A., Pyers, J., Anthony, M., Biederman, Y. and Thumann, H. 2003. A Cognitive/Functional Perspective on the Acquisition of ‘Classifiers’. In Perspectives on Classifiers in Sign Languages, K. Emmorey (ed.), 281–306. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Streeck, J. 2002. Grammars, Words, and Embodied Meanings: On the Uses and Evolution of So and Like. Journal of Communication 52(3): 581–596. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tannen, D. 2007. Talking Voices: Repetition, Dialogue and Imagery (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Winston, E. 1991. Spatial Referencing and Cohesion in An American Sign Language Text. Sign Language Studies 731: 397–410. DOI logoGoogle Scholar