Primary Movement in Sign Languages: A Study of Six Languages

6. Results from the Studyof ASL, BSL, LIS, LSF,and Auslan

107 6 Results from the Study of ASL, BSL, LIS, LSF, and Auslan In this chapter, we give the generalizations we have found that hold across the five languages examined thus far and the implications of these generalizations. We then summarize the findings on particular languages and on clusterings of languages. Based on the analyses of the data in chapters 3 through 5, we offer testable hypotheses about sign languages in general, which we then put to the test in chapter 7. Generalizations across All Five Languages Adaptive Modularity The uniformity of adaptive modularity of path directions for 1H noncurve signs across the languages is striking. The distribution of overlappingpathdirectionsfor2HRMsignsislessuniformbutstillvery similar across the languages. Overall adaptive modularity is lower for most directions with 2HIB noncurve signs than it is with 1H noncurve signs and with 2HRM noncurve signs. We repeat the hierarchy here: Adaptive Modularity Hierarchy For 1H: GOAL > Away > Down > Ipsil > Up > Contral > Rear For 2HIB: GOAL > Away > Ipsil > {Down, Up} > Rear > Contral For 2HRM: {Away, Down} > Contral > Up > Ipsil > Back Overall hierarchy: GOAL > Away > Down > Ipsil > Up > Contral > Rear > Back 108 Results from the Study (Recall that Back is absent from the 1H hierarchy since Back signs were subsumed under Ts. Likewise most Contral signs are absent from the 2HIB hierarchy since they were subsumed under the combination of Tb, OnB, and PastB.) Although we initially approached the whole issue of prevalence of directions within the framework of trying to find ways to typologize languages, the finding that a hierarchy exists and that it is so consistent across the languages is potentially of serious importance to sign phonetics. Degrees of adaptive modularity may give insight into what combinations of direction movements are physiologically possible for signs with noncurve paths. One might then be able to make a model of a possible unmarked phonetics regarding movement directions for a sign language and measure deviations from this norm. We leave this as a suggestion for future research. Anchors/Goals Signs favor movement toward an anchor or goal. For 1H signs, the goal is the signer. For 2HIB signs, the goal is the base hand. For 2H signs that involve reflexive symmetry across a plane (regardless of which plane), the goal (which is bipolar) is the plane of symmetry. In chapter 3 we suggested that tactile feedback could be a factor in accounting for the existence of goals in 1H and 2HIB signs. However, for 2H signs that involve reflexive symmetry the goal does not offer tactile feedback. Nevertheless, it is possible that a common motivation is at play in goal selection for all these types of signs, a motivation that is physiological. A physician’s checkup sometimes includes nonequilibrium tests for motor coordination. Among these tests (Shumway-Cook and Woollacott 2007, 118) are the following: 1. Finger to nose. The shoulder is abducted to 90°, with the elbow extended.Thepatientisaskedtobringthetipof theindexfingerto the tip of the nose. Alterations may be made in the initial starting position to assess performance from different planes of motion. 109 Results from the Study 2. Finger to therapist’s finger. The patient and therapist sit opposite each other. The therapist’s finger is held in front of the patient. The patient is asked to touch the tip of the finger to the therapist ’s index finger. The position of the therapist’s finger may be altered during testing to assess ability to change distance, direction, and force of movement. 3. Finger to finger. Both shoulders are abducted to 90° with the elbows extended. The patient is asked to bring both hands toward the midline and approximate the index fingers from opposing hands. Being able to bring the fingertip to the nose is a basic motor ability, as is being able to bring it to the therapist’s hand and to the fingertip of the opposing hand precisely at the Mid plane. These are things the ordinary healthy person can do; they do not strain our eye-hand coordination. Notice that each of these three tests could be seen as a canonical test for exactly the motor coordination needed in reaching the goal in 1H, 2HIB, and 2HRM signs, respectively. That is, reaching a part of the self that does not migrate on its own (the nose), reaching an object that can migrate (the hand of the therapist in the case of the motor test, and of the signer in the case of articulating 2HIB...