Lexical Variation in Mexican Sign Language

LEXICAL VARIATION IN MEXICAN SIGN LANGUAGE J. Albert Bickford 1 Informal assessments of dialectal variation 2 Lexical comparison 2.1 Sources and methodology 2.2 Results 2.3 Comparison to English 3 Interpreting the results 3.1 One language or many? 3.2 Need for intelligibility testing 3.3 How different is Monterrey? 4 Recommendations about language planning Mexican Sign Language (MSL) is the primary language used throughout Mexico among a large segment of the deaf population, especially in towns and cities.' This study represents a preliminary attempt to determine the amount of dialectal variation in MSL, primarily by means of a comparison of the signs used by nine different sources representing various locations, ages, and social groupings. It isoffered in the hopes that it will be of use not only to linguists, but also to educators and social service agencies, both in Mexico and the United States of America. There is considerable uncertainty about this matter among 1Smith-Stark (1986) provides avery rough estimate that there are approximately 87,000 deaf people who use MSL; more accurate figures are unavailable. Although some deaf people are well-educated and thoroughly bilingual in Spanish (at least reading and writing), alarge segment of the MSL population appears to be essentially monolingual. Deaf people generally refer to themselves inSpanish as sordo-mudos 'deaf-mutes' or silentes'silent ones.' There isno standard Spanish name for MSL;some labels inuse are El Lenguaje Manual (de Mexico), El Lenguaje de Sefas M6xicanas, or simply La Mimica (signing)or 'hablar con manos' (speaking with the hands). @by Linstok Press, Inc. See note inside front cover ISSN 0302 1475 Bickford professionals who work with the deaf, and many are very much interested in more accurate information than is currently available.2 Although this study does not come close to covering all of Mexico, or even all social and age groupings in any location, it does give some idea as to the range of variation that is typical. The nature and extent of variation is described informally insection 1,and insection 2 it isshown to be relatively small, at least in terms of its vocabulary. Thus, there isa reasonable probability that MSL is indeed a single language, as discussed insection 3.To be certain, further testing of a different sort will be needed; but for now itseems best to emphasize the similarities within MSL, to foster interaction and increased communication between different segments of the deaf community, and to avoid actions that would tend to divide it or give the appearance that it is seriously divided linguistically. Specific recommendations along this line are given in section 4. 1 Informal assessments of dialectal variation There is considerable confusion as to whether MSL should be considered a single language, a cluster of closely-related languages, or not a language at all. Deaf people themselves, and hearing people who have learned MSL, feel strongly that MSL is a single language, since they have little or no difficulty communicating throughout the country. Although there are differences, they are considered minor and unimportant (with only occasional exceptions). However, when attempts have been made to define exactly what the language is, such as compiling a dictionary or developing materials to teach MSL in the USA, many have reported finding sharp disagreements between deaf people as to the "proper" way to sign. Those who do not know MSL tend to interpret these disagreements as indicating that MSL is not a unified language. They are tempted to think of it as a helter2 Those who are most interested inthis information are also those who have contributed much to compiling information about it. None of this would have been possible without the assistance of numerous people. Ihave named many inAppendix 2,but Ifear Imay have omitted someone. SLS 72 Variation inMSL skelter collection of dialects, and some even question whether it is a language at all. This difference of opinion has been noted especially by Parra and Parra (1986: iii) and by staff members at Deaf Community Services of San Diego (personal communication). I have also observed it directly in my discussions with people in and out of Mexico: deaf people feel strongly that MSL is one language...