Contenidos: proceso para diseñar mensajes interpretativos

In addition to the additive and multiplicative systems that have been discussed already, a further process associated with the formation of numerals, lexicalisation, is exemplified in the numbers 12-14 in the Hokkaido dialect (Hokkaido Deaf Association 2005). The number 12 is shown in Figure 5.13 below. While formational elements of the original component parts TEN-1 (bent index finger) and TWO (index finger and middle finger) are still visible in this sign, it can now be considered a single non-componential lexeme. It seems that the sign has undergone a lexicalisation process whereby its constituent parts have fused together into a form that can now be considered monomorphemic. The transition from multi-sign expressions to monomorphemic lexemes has been studied for other domains. According to Zeshan (2003:132), “lexicalisation involves the creation of conventional lexemes out of constructions” and it “is extremely common and productive” in the domain of classifier constructions that are the focus of this publication. Zeshan (2003) provides the following definition of lexicalisation:

Initially, a form that describes a certain object or situation for which there is no conventional lexical sign is freely coined. When an originally descriptive form is regularly used for a certain object or situation, it may become a conventional lexical sign (Zeshan 2003:134-135).

72

The difference between a so-called construction and a lexicalised form may be described on both a phonological and semantic level. On a phonological level, lexicalised forms are fixed and formal variation is no longer present. On a semantic level, the lexicalised forms lose their semantic compositionality so that the sign is no longer analysable into constituent parts (Zeshan 2003).

Figure 5.13 TWELVE-2

Signs such as the form in Figure 5.12 seem to have undergone a parallel process, although the domain of numerals is quite different from the domain of classifiers in sign languages. Because lexicalisation is a continuous process, it is expected that there will be varying degrees of lexicalisation (see Figure 5.14 below): signs may be ‘semi-lexicalised’, ‘non-lexicalised’ or ‘fully lexicalised’ (Zeshan 2003). In their discussion of variation and change in sign languages, Johnston & Schembri (2010) refer to lexicalisation as a process that accounts for elements of variation seen across sign languages. In relation to the numeral signs of JSL, a lexicalisation process exists where initially separated lexical signs become compounded, and eventually this compound may become a fully lexicalised numeral sign, such as TWELVE-2 above in JSL.

Similar pairs of compositional and lexicalised forms are also found in other sign languages. For example, in American Sign Language (ASL) the sign for ‘25’ has both a compositional and a reduced, trilled form (Valli 2005:495; see Figure 5.14). In Ugandan Sign Language, there are several variants of ‘100’, and in the most reduced form the index finger bends as the hand moves across the signing space, instead of a separate articulation of ONE ZERO ZERO. Over time, these three signs have combined into a single sign whose formation parallels numeral incorporation, and Lutalo-Kiingi (2013:151) speaks of on on-going process “from digital numeral to compound to numeral incorporation”.

73

Figure 5.14 Compositional and lexicalised numerals

The lexicalisation apparent in such forms is, as section 3.4 briefly notes, due to internal linguistic processes that result in changes over a period of time. This can be observed not only within one and the same linguistic variety but also across different dialects and different languages. In section 8.4.3, this lexicalisation continuum is explored in more detail with respect to sign language varieties in Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea.

5.6. Summary

Chapter 5 has described several of the forms used to construct JSL numerals. Examples of productive morphology include the numeral incorporation exploited in most of the paradigms for ordinal numerals, as well as in multiples of 10, 100 and 1,000. Conversely, numbers from 11 to 19 are expressed as compounds that are combined using the additive system. An exception to this rule is the Hokkaido variants, which use monomorphemic lexemes for some of the numerals between 11-19. In addition to this, forms often have different variants, e.g. the shortened form of multiples of ‘thousand’ and the trilled form of the sign for ‘15’. JSL’s ordinal numeral paradigms seem to be quite extensive when compared to the way such numbers are expressed in other documented sign languages. Most sign languages appear to have only one or two means of signifying ordinal numerals.

The variation and change observable in JSL suggests that signs are becoming phonologically reduced and more arbitrary. For example, the two-handed variant for ‘11’ is only used by older signers, while younger signers use one-handed variants. In addition, some numeral signs are subject to a process of lexicalisation over time, and can be situated along a lexicalisation continuum, where initially separated signs become compounded and eventually fully lexicalised. A number of issues were raised in this chapter in preparation for more detailed discussions of sociolinguistic variation. In particular, ways in which variants are identified, and issues of geographical and age variation as well as historical change in terms of lexicalisation are all important concepts for appreciating the discussions in Chapter 8.

74

6. THE SEMANTIC MOTIVATIONS OF NUMERAL SIGNS

This thesis aims not only to document numerals in JSL but also to view them in the light of cross-linguistic variation using typological comparisons with a wide range of sign languages. This comparison is carried out with respect to several sub-domains, and this chapter is concerned with the issue of semantic motivation of numeral signs in JSL and across other sign languages. Numeral signs often display a level of non-arbitrary form-meaning pairing in various ways, which is discussed in this chapter. For instance, the use of the extended fingers to indicate numerals 1 to 5, which is known as ‘number for number iconicity’ (Taub 2001:85),is a typical example of this representation, and this resembles transparent gestures that hearing people also employ. Semantic motivations are noted in this chapter as including the iconicity apparent in the form of numeral signs (see section 6.1), which includes the relation between numerals and the body parts that provide locations for the numeral signs, the increased use of the signing space to semantically indicate larger numbers, and the derivation of numerals from other types of sign, namely sign names (section 6.7) and signs denoting monetary units (section 6.8).