ADVERBIAL MORPHEMES IN TACTILE AMERICAN SIGN LANGUAGE PROJECT DEMONSTRATING EXCELLENCE. Submitted to the

Transcription

1 ADVERBIAL MORPHEMES IN TACTILE AMERICAN SIGN LANGUAGE A PROJECT DEMONSTRATING EXCELLENCE Submitted to the GRADUATE COLLEGE OF UNION INSTITUTE AND UNIVERSITY by Steven Douglas Collins In partial fulfillment of the requirements For the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN INTERDISCIPLINARY STUDIES MAY 2004

2 Abstract This PDE discusses an aspect of linguistic use of adverbial morphemes as applied to a single case study of Tactile American Sign Language (TASL) as used by some American Deaf- Blind signers. TASL, a variation of the visual language recognized as American Sign Language (ASL), is not visually based. Significantly, the term TASL, while descriptive of the language used by deaf-blind persons, is not officially recognized among the members of this community. For the purposes of this study, the use of the term TASL describes not only an approach towards building a bridge of understanding of the cultural norms and language habits of deaf-blind persons, but as well, this study affords a locus for the improvement of the interpreting process for the American deaf-blind community. In ASL adverbial morphemes occur on the face and are non-manual signals that the Deaf- Blind signer does not see. This requires the ASL signer to make a slight modification, from these invisible non-manual morphemes to a tactile morpheme. The researcher presents a structural analysis of a conversation between two Deaf-Blind subjects with Usher s Syndrome Type I who have used TASL for at least ten years. The study is based on a 50-minute videotaped conversation utilizing multiple video views of key angles for a detailed analysis of tactile components, non-manual signals and signing space. Accrued data concentrates on six fundamental features of adverbial morphemes intrinsic to TASL: manner/degree, time, duration, purpose, frequency, and place/position/direction. A total of 284 sign sequences were observed and analyzed comparing the tactile signing with the same message signed in visual American Sign Language.

3 Acknowledgement Acknowledgments While a graduate student majoring in interpreting, I became involved with the Deaf-Blind community. I wish to thank the Deaf-Blind community for welcoming me into their community, sharing their experiences, and allowing me to research their language. I wish to thank Mr. Randall Hogue and Dr. Ceil Lucas for the time they took to support me through this process. Additionally I thank Ms. Heather Johnson who was willing to pose for example pictures for this PDE. I especially want to thank the late Dr. Clayton Valli who was my peer on this project and who provided me with many years of mentoring, as well as being a good friend. I thank Dr. Val Dively for her insightful input on nonmanual signals. Thanks, also, to Gallaudet University for allowing me to use their equipment and lab resources during the collection of data for this project. Lastly, I wish to thank my family for all their support and encouragement in accomplishing this task. A big thank you is due Mr. Ed Singer who, with his coaching and support, I have finished this project.

4 Table of Contents Table of Contents 1. Introduction Biography Statement of the Problem Scope Social Relevance Intellectual Context and Literature Review Background and Recent Research Language Variation Tactile ASL Introduction of the Terminology Deaf-Blind Usher s Syndrome Non-manual Signals (NMS) in ASL Tactile ASL Deaf-Blind Interpreting Scope Methods Logistics and the Selection of a Site Coding and maintenance of the videotapes and database Findings and Interpretation Semantic Based Categories Manner/Degree Example One (Manner/Degree) Example Two (Manner/Degree) Example Three (Manner/Degree) Example Four (Manner/Degree) Example Five (Manner/Degree) Example Six (Manner/Degree) Summary (Manner/Degree) Time Example One (Time) Example Two (Time) Example Three (Time) Example Four (Time) Summary (Time) Duration...58

5 Table of Contents Example One (Duration) Example Two (Duration) Summary (Duration) Frequency Example One (Frequency) Example Two (Frequency) Summary (Frequency) Purpose Example One (Purpose) Example Two (Purpose) Summary (Purpose) Place/Position/Direction Example One (Place/Position/Direction) Example Two (Place/Position/Direction) Summary (Place/Position/Direction) Overall Patterns across the various adverbial types Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations A. Appendix A References B. Appendix B - Notes on Transcription Symbols B.1 General Glossing conventions B.2 Other Transcription symbols and conventions C. Appendix C Data for Adverbial Phrases for Analysis D. Appendix D Transcription of Conversation Session E. Appendix E Consent Form F. Appendix F Informant Background Information ii

6 Introduction 1. Introduction Imagine being totally Deaf and totally blind and walking into a room where you are about to partake in a presentation of a subject that is of interest to you. You have engaged a fully certified and qualified interpreter who will act as your personal interpreter for the proceedings. What is the atmosphere within the room? What is the apparent level of enthusiasm of the other persons attending the presentation? What is the physical description of the person making the presentation? It has always been a matter of deep personal concern to me that many interpreters consider their only duty to be to deliver a verbatim translation of the words that the presenter says without conveying all of these other very important and interesting factors. So much additional "message" is contained in the facial expressions and mannerisms of the presenter as well as the reaction of the audience. How much of this will actually be conveyed to the Deaf- Blind 1 person during the session? What will be the worth of the total experience to the Deaf- Blind person? In the above scenario, one can appreciate the information that facial expressions communicate at the paralinguistic level. However, in American Sign Language (ASL), facial expressions, or what are commonly called non-manual signals (NMS), communicate much more. Emotions and moods are shown, but so are grammatical features such as question types, adverbial and descriptive features (i.e., adjectives). NMS are also used to help remove the ambiguity of meanings in such words as recommend, propose, or suggest. This linguistic information, if not accurately conveyed, will distort the message drastically thus impacting the Deaf-Blind individual in social and personal ways. I have an intense interest in researching and improving the quality of interpreting for persons that are Deaf-Blind. For the past thirteen years, I have been working with Deaf-Blind persons both in the capacity as an interpreter and as a researcher, studying their techniques for 1 Throughout this PDE, there are references to Deaf, deaf, Deaf-Blind, and deaf-blind. A culture is generally considered distinct when it has its own unique language, values, behavioral norms, arts, educational institutions, political and social structures, etc. In this respect, Deaf people have a unique culture and, in this context, the use of the word Deaf or Deaf-Blind is used with the capital letter D or B. The word deaf is being used to refer either to those who are unable to hear or, refers to a context unrelated to the Deaf culture, it is used with a small letter d. Likewise, the term deaf-blind will refer to those who are deaf and blind but are not associated with the Deaf or Deaf-Blind cultures. 1

7 Introduction communication. In looking back at my earlier experiences at the North Carolina School for the Deaf, a residence school that I attended, I realized that my Deaf-Blind friends had a significant influence on me. My observation is that there is very little ongoing research in this area. Additionally, only a small amount of work related to understanding and describing the actual process of deaf-blind communication is being undertaken. The process of interpreting for a Deaf-Blind person is somewhat different from the more conventional process of interpreting for a Deaf person. Although each use American Sign Language as a basis for communication, a Deaf-Blind person must depend on tactile reception of signing as a replacement for those aspects of the language that are customarily conveyed through such sight-dependent functions as facial expressions. I have spent many research hours videotaping Deaf-Blind persons and sighted Deaf persons in order to gather data that will demonstrate the subtle nuances of their communication. I regularly collaborate with linguistic experts who have an interest in this area and I have made it a specific professional goal of mine to research this field in depth in an attempt to evolve a formal approach to the linguistic process discussed in the PDE. By doing so, it is my goal to garner an understanding of the process to a degree that I may provide high-quality training for interpreters who have a desire to interpret for Deaf-Blind clients. In my current position as a faculty member at Gallaudet University in the Department of Linguistics and Interpretation, I have an excellent opportunity to carry out these research objectives. I plan to develop a curriculum and refine it to a specific course of study for interpreters, as part of their training, so that they may better serve Deaf-Blind consumers. I have determined that my pursuit of a Ph.D. will provide a strong research foundation that includes a multi-disciplined educational approach to successfully meet my goals. This PDE reflects on three types of learning: 1) experience, 2) learning by studying, and 3) research. The experiences that have greatly influenced this work came primarily from being a part of the Deaf-Blind community as a result of living with Deaf-Blind people, and attending deaf-blind conferences, meetings and lectures with deaf-blind (and Deaf-Blind) people. Part of this experience also included having close friends in the deaf-blind community who have had a great influence on my life. As well, I have observed the communication difficulties that Deaf- Blind persons have with members of their own family and other sighted persons. These 2

8 Introduction experiences and observations instilled in me a desire to investigate obstacles specific to the Deaf- Blind experience, communication-wise. More specifically, I see a need to teach interpreters how to better meet the linguistic needs of the Deaf-Blind community. In order to accomplish this interpreters must have an intimate familiarity with, and knowledge of the structure of Tactile American Sign Language. With this in mind, I have conducted research on aspects of the language used by Deaf-Blind individuals with the overall goal of applying new linguistic findings to the field of tactile interpreting Biography I was born in 1959 in Asheville, North Carolina. I grew up in a very close-knit family with three older hearing siblings. My siblings and I are the sixth generation born away from England and raised in North Carolina. On my mother s side, one family member was Deaf. She was my Great Aunt and her spouse was Deaf. My early education was at the North Carolina School for the Deaf and I considered the people there to be my Deaf family consisting of many of the significant culturally Deaf persons in my life. I am congenitally Deaf, i.e., heredity is the cause of my deafness and research has shown that genetics plays a role in only about 10% of Deaf persons. At the age of four, my family made the decision to move to Morganton, North Carolina in order for me to attend the North Carolina School for the Deaf. This move allowed me to commute to school each day and still remain at home with my family while I received my education. During my school years I gained invaluable perspective towards both hearing and Deaf cultures. As a day student, I interacted with teachers and peers in an environment much like the Deaf community. Then at home, I was able to experience hearing culture through daily interaction and activities with my family. I developed an awareness of the different forms and methods of communication and began an exciting and challenging venture in learning about linguistics and how language is structured differently between hearing and Deaf cultures. It is particularly important to note that my entire family made a significant commitment on my behalf in making the move to Morganton. For twenty years, my father commuted 65 miles each way every day to his business in Asheville, North Carolina so that I could live in Morganton in proximity to the Deaf school. This strong commitment to give me their support 3

9 Introduction has always had a significant impact on me. When I compare the opportunities that this opened up for me with the more limited opportunities of some of my friends whose families did not make such a commitment, I truly realize the importance of family and community pitching-in to help others. I graduated from the North Carolina School for the Deaf in 1979 with honors as the Salutatorian of my class. I knew by this time that I wanted to continue learning and develop the necessary skills that provide insight into the differences in communication between Deaf and hearing cultures. I was certain that I would excel in this field because of the experience I obtained while growing up in both cultures. I applied to and was accepted at Gallaudet University in Washington, DC, where I majored in Communication Arts. While at Gallaudet, I was a co-founder of a local chapter of the Kappa Sigma Fraternity. While attending Gallaudet, I developed friendships with several Deaf-Blind students and began to interpret for them on an informal basis. This interaction provided me with an opportunity to gain perspective on the differences between communication within Deaf culture and communication within Deaf-Blind culture. Through these friendships, I gained additional insight into how language is used and structured. After my graduation in 1984, I worked for several years as a free-lance interpreter and contract instructor of American Sign Language (ASL) for the College of Continuing Education program at Gallaudet University. When Gallaudet created a Master s degree in the field of Interpretation, several of my colleagues encouraged me to enroll because of my strong interpersonal communication and interpreting skills. I felt this would be a great opportunity for me to learn about linguistics and theories of interpretation as well as to begin cross-cultural research in these two areas. Specifically, I continued to be intensely interested in communication within the Deaf-Blind community and I wanted to pursue research in this area. I enrolled and became the first Deaf person to receive a Master of Arts degree in Interpretation from Gallaudet University in June Much of my research for my Masters degree centered in this same area of Deaf-Blind communication. Subsequent to my graduation, I went to work as a supervisor for Gallaudet Interpreting Services specializing in Deaf-Blind interpreting requirements. Later, I joined the faculty as an Interpretation instructor in the ASL, Linguistics and Interpretation Department where I currently work. 4

10 Introduction Between the time of my undergraduate education and my return to graduate education, as mentioned above, I worked for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) as a clerk in the Legal Affairs division. During this time, I also started to work as a free-lance American Sign Language teacher at various community colleges and schools. In addition to my interpreting skills, I had computer skills and subsequently changed jobs to work for two different high-tech companies configuring and testing computer hardware and software and preparing them for delivery to customers. In addition, I had responsibilities for purchasing and inventory. While I was doing this work, I continued to teach and free-lance interpret for deaf-blind persons. During this period, I realized that my real vocation is to teach language and interpreting. At this time, I became very interested in the complex issues of Deaf-Blind culture and, particularly, the aspects of interpretation and communication in the deaf-blind community. In 1990, I decided that I would focus my professional life in the fields of linguistics, interpreting, and teaching. My goal would be to do research in the specific area of Deaf-Blind communication in order to enhance the interpreting experience for people in the Deaf-Blind community. I began collaborating with several others in this field and subsequently have given numerous workshops and presentations as well as published several professional papers on these subjects. As previously mentioned, I enrolled in the Master of Arts degree program in Interpretation at Gallaudet University and became the first Deaf student to graduate from that institution with a Master's Degree in Interpretation. Upon graduation, I went to work at the Gallaudet Interpreting Service as the supervisor of the interpreting program for students and as the coordinator of Deaf and hearing interpreters. I supervised 100 free-lance interpreters and 12 staff interpreters. I qualified for, and received, my certification as an interpreter from the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf (RID). In 1995, I received a temporary appointment to the faculty as an instructor in the ASL, Linguistics and Interpretation Department. In 1997, I competed for, and received a permanent appointment to that department. I am currently in this faculty position doing research and teaching interpretation and linguistics. To date, I have remained active in my research area of interest, Deaf-Blind communication, and I continue to give regular workshops and presentations around the country. In addition, I was chairman of the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf (RID) special task force 5

11 Introduction for setting certification standards for Deaf interpreters (CDI Task Force). I was also an advisory committee member for the State of Connecticut National Interpreter Education Project. As well, for three years, I served as chairman of the National Coalition of Deaf and HIV (NCDH). In this capacity, I worked with the White House Aids Czar in the Clinton administration as an advisor on issues related to the education of AIDS prevention awareness within the Deaf community. Conventional public service communication is generally not effective for this population. During this period I collaborated with the author of a Time Magazine article on the subject (Van Biema 1994). In summary, I have brought my professional goals into focus specifically in the area of teaching and researching Linguistics, ASL, and Interpretation, especially as it pertains to the Deaf-Blind community. It is my goal to continue to do research to improve the interpreting environment in support of the Deaf-Blind community and to improve the teaching of interpreters who serve this community Statement of the Problem Settings for interpreting include a variety of communicative events in which two individuals have a need to communicate with each other but cannot communicate directly because they use different languages. During my doctoral program, I gained additional insight into the process of providing better deaf-blind interpreting services by conducting preliminary investigations with a specific group of Deaf-Blind consumers' non-visual and tactile signed language, Tactile ASL (TASL), and their interpreters' ASL to TASL interpreting performance. In the field of Deaf-Blind Studies, there are several primary categories of Deaf-Blind persons and these include variations in degree of visual and hearing loss. For purposes of this research, only the terms blind and Deaf-Blind are used and I am focusing on a specific group within the Deaf-Blind community, those individuals with Usher s Syndrome Type I. Further, within each of these categories, it is essential to keep in mind that there will be a significant cross section of educational backgrounds as well as a diversity of modes of communication between and among individuals in the deaf-blind community. The social variations in this specific group affects communication styles and interpreting needs of Deaf-Blind individuals. 6

12 Introduction To effectively interpret in a tactile signed language, an interpreter for the Deaf-Blind must carefully observe the manner in which information is tactually presented. This includes non-manual signals such as the grammatical use of space, as well as movement in time and space. Deaf-Blind persons who use and depend on a tactile signed language as their primary language cannot acquire or perceive grammatical information through visual means. The visual acquisition of syntactic markers on the face and shoulder in ASL must occur through the tactile expression of syntactic markers on the hands in TASL. One of the major implications that I have found in my earlier studies is that further research is necessary in all syntactic aspects. This doctoral program and PDE does that. Hence, interpreters for the Deaf-Blind will be able to express syntactic markers in their tactile production of TASL, rather than simply relying on the non-manual markers of ASL. As well, my research proves that this transformation must occur during the ASL to TASL cognitive interpreting process Scope. In this PDE the focus is on a specific category of Deaf-Blind persons who have a condition known as Usher's Syndrome Type I. This condition generally results from a degeneration, over time, of the retina, resulting in most cases, in the person being nearly totally deaf-blind by the age of 30 to 35. In addition to this pattern of becoming blind, Deaf-Blind persons with Usher's Syndrome Type I are congenitally deaf from birth. In view of the fact that the onset of their becoming blind occurs later in life after they have acquired fluent communication in ASL, these individuals will make the transition from ASL, a visual language that involves manual, facial, and other body movements, to TASL, a non-visual and tactile language, as their vision diminishes. An important element of the research relates to aspects of ASL that become apparent in this later tactile phase of deaf-blind communication. This study is concerned with a specific group of individuals who identify themselves as culturally Deaf, who are also blind. This researcher found that there is a very small body of research on Tactile Sign Language. This appears to be due primarily to a lack of knowledge and skills associated with interpreter training programs, thus leading to the heart of the PDE. Research on TASL and 7

13 Introduction interpreters requires an understanding of the linguistic features of TASL. Therefore, the fundamental research question for the present project is: What is the nature of adverbial use in Tactile American Sign Language? In previous collaborative research in which this researcher has been involved with, TASL and ASL sentence types were analyzed. It was found that in ASL, a sentence type mainly is determined by a set of certain non-manual signals. For example, ASL yes-no questions involve non-manual features such as the raising of eyebrows, the widening of the eyes, and the forward tilting of the head and/or body (Baker and Cokely 1980; Liddell 1980). In addition to providing grammatical cues that define sentence or phrase types, visual ASL uses non-manual signals in an adverbial manner; however, the deaf-blind person cannot see these signals and, consequently, they communicate these adverbs by using tactile signals. For example, according to Valli and Lucas (1995), visual ASL has features of a sign that carry adverbial meaning [which] often are incorporated directly into the structure of the adjective sign or the predicate sign. Specifically, the two researchers explain that, for instance, the sign TALL 2 is a two-handed sign in which the active hand moves from the base to the fingertips of the passive hand. The sign can be glossed VERY-TALL when the sign begins well below the passive hand, brushes it, and ends above the fingertips, along with a marked facial expression. This study demonstrates the consistent use of linguistic factors in this tactile sign language. TASL has many interesting features; my focus is on adverbials Social Relevance My internship leading up to this PDE consisted of ongoing learning experiences as an interpreter for the Deaf-Blind and as an interpreter educator, whereas my PDE is a preliminary investigation of adverbs in Tactile Sign Language. This section briefly notes how my internship and PDE integrate a process of improvement for the field of interpreter training along with a fundamental socially relevant result of an improved quality of life for Deaf-Blind persons. Initially, I participated in classes, seminars, and other doctoral learning events that are necessary in relation to my program. Thereafter, I did an internship that gave me practical 2 The use of capital letters as in TALL indicates Gloss is being used in the notation. See Appendix B for a full explaination of Gloss. 8

14 Introduction benefits from these learning experiences. Moreover, this internship contributed to my designing and developing a solid investigation of TASL and ASL-to-TASL interpreting in the United States and Italy. My internship program was done while working as a Fulbright Scholar in Italy. As an intern, the focus of my attention was to develop and incorporate deaf-blind interpreting services for Deaf-Blind employees and students. This internship provided me with a fertile ground for research and information gathering. Additionally, there is a large deaf-blind community in Seattle, Washington. I did much of my studies while working with contacts I developed primarily in the community college and interpreter training areas in Seattle. With the completion of this PDE, I will be able to share my findings with Deaf-Blind consumers, interpreters for the Deaf-Blind, deaf-blind interpreter educators, and signed language linguists regarding TASL and TASL interpreting. My PDE is a preliminary investigation of one group of syntactic markers found in communication between Deaf-Blind persons. The PDE's data collection will consist of at least two videotaped sessions of a significant communication event between two Deaf-Blind subjects. I anticipate that these findings will contribute to improved TASL interpreting services and greater sensitivity and familiarity on the part of deaf-blind interpreter education programs towards the deaf-blind community. By conducting research, establishing a program in Italy, networking with various communities on a nation wide basis, and further studying of TASL, I hope to further enlighten those who are in the field of interpreter education that TASL and ASL are variations of a unique language. By providing an improved training process for interpreters who will serve the Deaf- Blind community, both hearing and Deaf interpreters will be able to provide a means of communication access to a specific group of individuals who have historically been socially isolated from the world. Implementation of the PDE s research findings into interpreter training programs should result in more Deaf-Blind persons leading successful and fruitful lives. 9

15 Intellectual Context and Literature Review 2. Intellectual Context and Literature Review 2.1. Background and Recent Research William Stokoe is known in Deaf culture as the Father of American Sign Language (ASL). In his studies of American Sign Language (Stokoe 1960), Stokoe applied the idea of minimal pairs to reveal the distinctive parts of a sign. In doing so, he discovered the existence of three parameters: handshape, movement and location. Eventually, additional research demonstrated that orientation and a non-manual component were also distinctive, and these two parameters were then added. Although the physical form of a sign differs from the physical form of a spoken word many of the same phonological processes and principles, such as assimilation, epenthesis, and metathesis, are found in both spoken and signed languages (Padden and Perlmutter 1987; Liddell and Johnson 1989). Currently, there are several competing theoretical models of ASL phonology, each trying to best represent the hierarchical structure, the relationship between the parameters, and the features within each parameter (Coulter 1992). Liddell and Johnson s (1989) model proposes that a sign consists of a sequence of hold and movement segments, somewhat analogous to consonants and vowels, and each segment contains specifications for the four parameters. Movements are segmented in Liddell and Johnson s model. Dr. Ceil Lucas (1995) has also done studies focused on the sociolinguistics of Deaf communities, including issues of sociolinguistic variation within signed languages, issues of bilingualism and language contact, language policy and planning, and language attitudes. She has also researched the structure of sign language discourse and is the editor of a journal series entitled Sociolinguistics in Deaf Communities, which produces a yearly volume consisting of papers in all areas of sociolinguistics pertaining to Deaf communities from around the world. As Lucas (1995) notes, Liddell & Johnson s model is particularly suited for describing phonological processes often found in variation studies. 10

16 Intellectual Context and Literature Review The following is an example of the movement-hold notation for American Sign Language developed by Liddell and Johnson, as shown in Valli and Lucas (1995): The sign WEEK as shown on page [37] in a simplified version of the Movement-Hold notation. The sign WEEK begins with a hold (H), with the right hand (for right-handed signers) at the base of the left hand. It then moves (M) to the tip of the left hand and ends with a hold in that location. The change in the sign is in the location of the active hand, from base to tip of the passive hand. 11

17 Intellectual Context and Literature Review Using the Liddell and Johnson notation, the following examples are from the Learner s data on Tactile American Sign Language. This example shows the adverb SHOCK with emphasis, showing the degree to which the person reacted to the specific situation. The sign SHOCK begins with a hold (H), with the right hand (for right-handed signers) at the forehead. It then moves (M) to the position next to the left hand and ends with an extended hold in that location. The change in the sign is in the location of the active hand, from the head to a position next to the passive hand. 12

18 Intellectual Context and Literature Review A second example of the notation is seen with the adverb EVERY-TWO-WEEKS. In the Tactile ASL production of the sign, the signer must make it clear that the every two weeks is meant to convey the frequency aspect as well as its regularity. Since the citation form of EVERY-TWO-WEEKS involves two identical movements already, it was modified to have three movements, resulting in three distinct locations. For the visual ASL signer, the non-manual signal of the lip protrusion is sufficient to convey this concept. The sign EVERY-TWO-WEEKS begins with a hold (H), with the right hand (for righthanded signers) at the base of the left hand. It then moves (M) to the tip of the left hand and ends with a hold in that location. The change in the sign is in the location of the active hand, from base to tip of the passive hand. This notation system can very easily describe the specific features that the researcher finds in the data, such as prolonged hold, tenseness, extended location, and repeated movement. For the purposes of this paper, the researcher utilizes parts of this model when studying morphological variation in the Tactile ASL data. When people think of ASL, they usually mistakenly only think of the manual component, specifically, the signs articulated by the hands. However, ASL has a complex non-manual component that involves specific configuration and movements of: facial features (the eyes, 13

19 Intellectual Context and Literature Review eyebrows, tongue and mouth); head movements (tilts, nods, or shakes); muscle tenseness (tense, lax, or neutral); and upper body positions (leans and tilts). Several ASL signs include a nonmanual feature in their underlying form. Many adjectives and adverbs in ASL consist of a nonmanual facial configuration that co-occurs while a manual predicate is being articulated (Liddell 1980; Padden 1988). The adjectival and adverbial configurations generally use the lower face, e.g., clenching of the teeth, tensing of the open lips and pursing of the mouth (Bienvenu and Colonomos 1991). This paper examines which features of TASL function as non-manual adverbs in visual ASL. The following illustrations show six examples of non-manual components of ASL which function as adverbs. These figures illustrate adverbials that are inherent in the facial grammar of ASL. Each of the six examples is shown in two forms, with and without the NMS. Figure 1 VERY WOW Figure 2 WOW Figure 1 shows the sign glossed 3 as VERY WOW. The NMS is described as puffed cheeks with narrowed eyes. The NMS is an intensifier similar to the English word very. Figure 2 shows a similar sign glossed as WOW without the puffed cheeks and widened eyes. Without the NMS the sign loses the intense meaning. 3 A gloss is a symbol for a sign in ASL. Throughout this PDE, glosses are used. For a more detailed description of glosses and gloss conventions, see Appendix B. 14

20 Intellectual Context and Literature Review Figure 3 TOO EXPENSIVE Figure 4 EXPENSIVE Figure 3 shows the sign glossed as TOO-EXPENSIVE. Figure 3 also shows the NMS described as SS or teeth clenched with cheeks pulled back and the eyes are squinted. The NMS is an intensifier similar to the English word too. Signs accompanied by this non-manual component may also have a larger movement than the citation form. Figure 4 shows a similar sign glossed as EXPENSIVE without the intensifier. Without the NMS, the sign means simply expensive. Figure 5 VERY RAINY Figure 6 RAIN Figure 5 shows the sign glossed as VERY-RAINY. The NMS is described as a tightened facial expression. Signs occurring with this NMS often have sharp forward movements. The NMS is a modifier similar to an English word ending in y such as in the English word rainy. This ASL sign means raining very hard. Figure 6 shows a similar sign glossed as RAIN without the intensifier. Without the NMS the sign loses the intense meaning. 15

21 Intellectual Context and Literature Review Figure 7 VERY-STORMY Figure 8 STORM Figure 7 shows the sign glossed as VERY-STORMY. The NMS is described as CH with squinting eyes, a spread mouth and spread fingers. The NMS is also a modifier whose meaning here is similar to the English word very stormy. Figure 8 shows a similar sign glossed as STORM without the intensifier. Figure 9 REALLY-GOOD Figure 10 GOOD Figure 9 shows the sign glossed as REALLY-GOOD. The NMS is described as SH with a tilting of the head downwards, squinting eyes and a strong quick movement of the hand. The NMS is also an intensifier similar to the English word very or really. The sign in combination with the SH non-manual component means really good. Figure 10 is a similar sign glossed as GOOD without the intensifier. Without the intensifier, the added component of really is removed. 16

22 Intellectual Context and Literature Review Figure 11 VERY-CLOSE Figure 12 CLOSE Figure 11 shows the sign glossed as VERY-CLOSE. The non-manual component is described as EE with clenched teeth and a slightly turned head. The NMS is an intensifier similar to the English word very. The sign and NMS in Figure 11 means that the location is not far away. Figure 12 is a similar sign glossed as CLOSE without the intensifier. Thus the location is close by and not very close by. In addition to providing semantic content, non-manuals also play a key role in syntax. ASL verbs are divided into several classes determined by their morphological properties (Fischer and Gough 1979; Padden 1988). These classes include spatial/locative verbs which contain a classifier, plain verbs which cannot inflect for subject or object agreement, and agreement verbs, which can inflect for subject and/or object agreement (Padden 1988). With agreement verbs, the beginning point, end point, and/or orientation of the verb changes to reflect subject and/or object agreement. In ASL, locations in the signing space can be associated with different entities and, later reference to that location is taken to be co-referential with the entity. For instance, after signing, B-O-B, a signer can point to a location on their left. In a sense, the location is now associated with Bob. If, in the articulation of the agreement verb INFORM, the hand starts pointing to the space to the signer s left (the same as indicated by IX-lf), the verb is inflected for third person subject agreement and has the meaning He/Bob informed me. B-O-B IX-lf (left) INFORM (PRO1) 17

23 Intellectual Context and Literature Review Null arguments are missing subjects or objects which are not needed in some usages because either the context or a verb ending has a specific meaning that makes it clear what the missing subject or object would be. These null arguments i.e., deleted subjects and/or objects in both subject and object position, can occur with agreement verbs as in the example above and with plain verbs in ASL. Examining data from syntactic islands within a Government and Binding (GB) framework, Lillo-Martin (1986) proposed that the null arguments with plain verbs were licensed or, controlled, differently from those with agreement verbs. She argues that null arguments with agreement verbs are licensed through agreement, similar to the licensing in other agreement languages such as Spanish. However, null arguments with plain verbs are licensed through discourse in a manner similar to the discourse licensing in non-agreement languages such as Japanese and Chinese. Following this work, Lillo-Martin (1986) proposed this discourse licensing occurred through the mechanism of topic chaining. More recently, and of relevance to this study, Bahan (1996), proposed an alternative analysis, which employs the interactions of non-manual eye-gaze, and head tilts with spatial locations. In this proposal, agreement, (the head of the AGR phrase), licenses the null arguments that occur with both agreement and plain verbs. Therefore, in addition to the null argument being licensed through verbal agreement, it can also be licensed by agreement that occurs by eye gaze and/or head tilt directed toward a specific location. In a large-scale study of sociolinguistic variation in ASL, Lucas et al, (2001) looked at variation that occurs with null arguments. Variation studies on null arguments can provide further data to be considered by the two very different analyses, and potentially provide support for one analysis over the other. Though null arguments were not a focus of this study, the fact that they may be at least partially licensed by eye gaze demonstrates once again that some critical elements of ASL are nonmanual. Furthermore, the function of eye gaze must be executed by some means that can be perceived tactually for users of TASL. The underlying word order of ASL is subject-verb-object (SVO). However, as a result of phrase and clause organization and the use of null arguments, other word orders are made possible. Word orders other than SVO tend to require non-manual grammatical markers. Nonmanuals also mark such structures as: topics, yes/no questions, wh-questions, rhetorical 18

24 Intellectual Context and Literature Review statements, conditionals, and relative clauses (Liddell 1980; Coulter 1978, 1979; Baker-Shenk 1983). At the discourse level, in addition to manual signs, there are also independent nonmanual configurations such as tensing of the muscles around the nose, around the mouth, eyegaze direction, and specific types of head nods that are used to provide turn-taking cues and back-channel feedback for regulating conversations (Baker 1976; Baker and Padden 1978; Nowell 1989). Clearly, non-manual signals are a pervasive component of ASL. They accompany single lexical items with the purpose of modifying the canonical meaning of the sign with which they occur. They are involved in the licensing of null arguments. Their presence allows alternate word orders and they are essential parts of sentence, clause and phrase types. Even at the discourse level, NMS are crucial for conversing in acceptable and predictable ways. The prominence of non-manuals in ASL strongly suggests that at least some of their functions must be carried out by some other means in TASL Language Variation In 1966, William Labov and his colleagues pioneered studies in which the focus was on linguistic variation in relation to a multiplicity of social and cultural factors. Ethnicity, for example, has played a central role in current discussions of identity, and was the focus of Labov s 1966 study of New York City English among Italian, Jewish, Irish and Black Americans. It was also the topic of Gumperz s extensive work on cross-cultural miscommunication (Gumperz 1966). Labov s work illustrated that non-linguistic factors could affect the use of one linguistic form over another. In his groundbreaking study, he showed that while a strict linguistic analysis could not account for optional r deletion in the speech of Lower East Side New Yorkers, an analysis that took into account a person s socioeconomic background and their speech style, could account for this variability. Since Labov s findings, sociolinguists have found many types of linguistic variation that are correlated with external, non-linguistic constraints. These external constraints include social and personal characteristics, such as age, gender, education, and ethnicity, and also characteristics of the interaction in which speech occurred, i.e., the formality or casualness of the situation, the context (a bar brawl versus a 19

25 Intellectual Context and Literature Review sermon), or the status relations between participants (talking to a lawyer versus talking to a Deaf friend.) In addition to external constraints, variation studies also consider internal linguistic factors and take into account their possible correlations with linguistic variations. Internal constraints that can affect variability include the neighboring linguistic environment, the grammatical category of the word (adjective, noun, verb, etc.), and the position of the variable within the sentence or discourse. While some linguistic variation can be accounted for by external constraints, or internal constraints, it is often the case that variation results from a combination of both. It appears that Croneberg (1965) was the first to systematically look at variation in ASL. As he traveled around to different states on the east coast, and to the Carolinas and Virginia, he used a 134-item sign vocabulary list and asked local people for their signs. Croneberg found that lexical variation correlated with geographic region, which was, and still is, influenced by state boundaries and the location of the residential schools for the deaf. In the 1970 s, there were several ASL studies that looked for correlations between external and internal constraints, and phonological, morphological or lexical variation. For example, Woodward (1973 a, b: 1974), and Woodward and DeSantis (1977) examined the variable use of three morphological inflections and found that the inflections were used more by those who learned ASL before they were age six, and those who had Deaf parents. In 1975, Battison, Markowicz, and Woodward studied thumb extension variation within certain signs. They found weighted linguistic constraints including a correlation between thumb extension and the bending of other fingers in the sign, the extension of the middle finger in the sign, and the sign having a twisted movement. No relationship was found between external factors such as the signer s gender, the audiological status of the signer s parents, or if the signer learned ASL before they were age six. Woodward, Erting and Oliver (1976) looked at the varied use of a sign that had two forms; one form was near the face and the other in neutral space, such as RABBIT. Results showed that New Orleans signers used the form that was near the body more often, while Atlantic signers used the other form. In 1976, Woodward found lexical variation when African- American signers and Caucasian signers were studied. Shortly after, Woodward and DeSantis 20

26 Intellectual Context and Literature Review (1977b) looked at variation in the use of a one-handed and an older two-handed form of the same sign. They report weighted internal constraints such as that of one-handed forms which have an outward movement as opposed to an inward movement, and are articulated at a higher facial location as opposed to a lower placement on the face. Woodward and DeSantis also noted external constraints, finding that older, southern, and African-American signers use the older two-handed form more often than do younger, northern and Caucasian signers. After this spurt of variation studies in the 1970 s, few studies appeared again until the 1990 s. Between the 1970 s and the 1990 s, however, there has been a tremendous increase in our knowledge of the linguistic structure of ASL and in our understanding of the complexities and diversity of the language situation in the Deaf community (Padden & Humphries 1988; Lucas & Valli 1992; Paranis 1997). This knowledge has lead to a re-examination and concern about the methodologies used in sociolinguistic studies of ASL, particularly in informant and interviewer selection, and data collection methods (Lucas 1995; Patrick and Metzger 1996). For example, several of the earlier studies used written questionnaires or direct elicitation, often had hearing researchers conducting the interviews, made broad generalizations based on a very small number of informants, and used informants with varying language backgrounds, e.g., one informant might be a native signer while another might have learned to sign when they were 19 years old. Recent methods now reflect contemporary efforts in using natural data. Data is videotaped and coded for further analysis, and careful attention is given to ensuring that subjects are representative of the group being studied (Milroy 1987 a, b; Lucas 1995). Lucas et al (2001) conducted a large study on ASL variation in the deaf black community and in the deaf white community. The ongoing analysis is based on videotaped conversational data from 207 White and African-American ASL signers in three age groups, in two socioeconomic groups, and in seven sites around the United States. In the study, three phonological variables and the linguistic and social constraints on participants were analyzed: 1) the sign DEAF which, in citation form, is produced from ear to chin and can also be produced from chin to ear or as a single contact on the cheek: 2) a class of signs represented by the sign KNOW, which, in citation form, is produced on or at the side of the forehead. The variants of KNOW, for example, were produced on or at the side of the forehead or were formed at lower locations including the cheek or even the space in front of the signer, and 3) signs produced with 21

27 Intellectual Context and Literature Review a 1-handshape (index extended, all other fingers and thumb closed) which show a wide range of variation: thumb extended, all fingers extended etc. In all three cases, it was hypothesized that the variation would be driven by phonological factors such as features of the preceding or following sign. While there is some phonological involvement in all three cases, a Varbrul analysis with a total of 10,000 tokens has shown that the most significant factor is grammatical function: in the case of DEAF, whether the sign functions as an adjective or part of a compound, as a predicate, or as a noun adjectives and compounds favoring non-citation forms, nouns being neutral, and predicates disfavoring them; the location study involving signs like KNOW with preposition signs favoring non-citation forms and noun and verbs disfavoring them; and in the 1-handshape signs, first-person pronouns strongly favoring non-citation forms, second-person pronouns being neutral and third-person pronouns, nouns, and verbs disfavoring non-citation forms. This data was also analyzed for variation on the presence of grammatical subjects and for lexical variation Tactile ASL As stated earlier, it is primarily Deaf-Blind adults who have Usher Syndrome Type I who use Tactile ASL. These individuals typically grow up using ASL as their primary means of communication. Eventually, when their vision deteriorates, they start receiving ASL tactilely because Deaf-Blind people have increasing difficulty seeing the non-manual signals (NMS) that are an integral part of ASL. What we are seeing is that these non-manual signals are being represented manually. This manual representation of NMS is the variation that this paper examines, specifically as it pertains to the representation of adverbs. Variation defines the different ways of saying or signing the same thing where meaning remains constant. (Fasold, 1984). That is precisely what is happening with Tactile ASL: signals that are represented nonmanually in ASL are being represented manually in Tactile ASL, with no change in meaning. Using ASL in a tactile mode may appear to be a contradiction. That is, ASL, which is described as a visual language, includes non-manual components which the Deaf-Blind person cannot see; and many ASL signers use two hands while the Deaf-Blind person usually has tactual contact with only one hand. Additionally, many signs use handshapes involving combinations of the fingers, yet the Deaf-Blind person s hand is on the back of the signer s hand, not in contact with 22