Non-Manual Features in Multilingual Sign Language Communication

The aim of the article is to determine the role of non-manual features of sign languages (SLs) in the multilingual communication of deaf, hard of hearing and hearing people. Nonmanual features refer to significant speech markers (“non-manual markers”) such as facial expressions, mouth articulation, head and body movements. The study hypothesizes that a set of non-manual markers has a specific function that can facilitate understanding of a foreign sign language. Extending the hypothesis, we assume that the influence of non-manual features on perception of a foreign SL depends on the genetic and historical links between the languages. In the course of the study, we conducted an experiment with a multimedia survey of two groups of respondents: Russian (35 people) and French (33 people) groups with deaf, hearing and hard of hearing participants. Both groups were offered videos in foreign SLs and questions that determined the degree and complexity of understanding, as well as a subjective assessment of the role of manual and non-manual signs in the perception of each video. We used videos in three sign languages, of which the first was related to the respondent’s SL; the second was not related, but had some historical connection with the respondent’s SL; the third was not related and had no connection with the respondent’s SL. Based on Henri Wittmann’s classification, we determined that for the Russian group these languages were Italian SL, French Belgian SL and German SL, while for the French group we chose Russian SL, French Belgian SL and German SL, respectively. For each language, we selected a video with frequent use of non-manual features (80% or more of marked signs) and a video with a lesser degree of their involvement in the narrative process (52% or less of marked signs) - six videos in three foreign SLs for each group in total. As a result of the experiment, we received preliminary confirmation of the hypothesis and came to the following primary conclusions. First, the abundance of non-manually marked signs can facilitate the perception of a foreign sign language: regardless of the relations in the language pair, respondents described videos with a higher concentration of non-manual markers better. Second, the significance of nonmanual features and the degree of their influence on the understanding of a particular SL depend on the relationship between the informants’ languages and tend to increase by contact with a closer one, while manual signs play a more important role when interacting with an unrelated language. For more comprehensive conclusions, further studies are planned, including the participation of a larger number of respondents.

Keywords

Authors

References