A different description of orientation in sign languages

  1. Antonio F. G. Sevilla
  2. José María Lahoz-Bengoechea
Revista:
Procesamiento del lenguaje natural

ISSN: 1135-5948

Año de publicación: 2019

Número: 62

Páginas: 53-60

Tipo: Artículo

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openRUA editor

Otras publicaciones en: Procesamiento del lenguaje natural

Resumen

Sign languages are a very interesting object of linguistic study, posing challenges not present in oral languages. One of these challenges is describing and transcribing the internal structure of the language in a way that is adequate to its characteristics but also compatible with existing linguistic practice. The phonology of sign languages is of special interest. We focus on one phonological feature: that of hand orientation. We propose an interpretation and description system that better captures underlying meaning and structure, and that is more appropriate for its formal and computational treatment.

€ Ver financiación

Información de financiación

This research is partially supported by the IDiLyCo project (TIN2015-66655-R) funded by the Spanish Ministry of Economy, Industry and Competitiveness.

Financiadores

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Hanke, T. 2004. HamNoSys-Representing sign language data in language resources and language processing contexts. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Representation and Processing of Sign Language, Workshop to the fourth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’04), pages 1–6.
  • Herrero Blanco, Á. L. 2009. Gramática didáctica de la lengua de signos española (LSE). SM, Madrid.
  • Tülay Karayllan, Özkan Kl 2017. Sign language recognition. 2nd International Conference on Computer Science and Engineering, UBMK 2017, pages 1122–1126.
  • Liddell, S. K. and R. E. Johnson. 1989. American Sign Language: The phonological base. Sign Language Studies, 64(1):195–277.
  • SignWriting Vector SignWriting Vector SignWriting Vector SignWriting Vector
  • Sandler, W. and D. Lillo-Martin. 2006. Sign language and linguistic universals. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  • Senghas, A. and M. Coppola. 2001. Children creating language: How Nicaraguan Sign Language acquired a spatial grammar. Psychological Science, 12(4):323– 328.
  • Starner, T., J. Weaver, and A. Pentland. 1998. Real-time American Sign Language recognition using desk and wearable computer based video. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 20(12):1371–1375.
  • Steriade, D. 1995. Underspecification and markedness. In J. A. Goldsmith, editor, The handbook of phonological theory. Blackwell, Oxford, pages 114–174.
  • Stokoe, W. C., D. C. Casterline, and C. G. Croneberg. 1976. A dictionary of American Sign Language on linguistic principles. Linstok Press, Washington, DC.
  • Sutton, V. 2009. SignWriting: Sign languages are written languages! The SignWriting Press, La Jolla, CA.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet