Figure–Ground Spatial Relationships in Finnish Sign Language Discourse
This study is about expressing spatial relationships between Figure and Ground in Finnish Sign Language discourse and shows that the variation in this expression is primarily discourse dependent. The main findings are, first, that Ground mainly precedes Figure whether the Figure is new or a known re...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
De Gruyter
2020-12-01
|
Series: | Open Linguistics |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2020-0041 |
id |
doaj-559f902db8a44c5e8d7bda89174e697a |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-559f902db8a44c5e8d7bda89174e697a2021-10-02T19:26:30ZengDe GruyterOpen Linguistics2300-99692020-12-016172374610.1515/opli-2020-0041Figure–Ground Spatial Relationships in Finnish Sign Language DiscourseDe Weerdt Danny0Department of Language and Communication Studies, Sign Language Centre, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä 40014, FinlandThis study is about expressing spatial relationships between Figure and Ground in Finnish Sign Language discourse and shows that the variation in this expression is primarily discourse dependent. The main findings are, first, that Ground mainly precedes Figure whether the Figure is new or a known referent within the discourse; the reverse order is possible only when the Figure is known. Second, the lexical sign olla (‘have’) appears more frequently in expressing spatial relationships with a new Figure and less frequently with a known Figure but never in a construction with Figure preceding Ground; the form oli (‘had’), referring to the past, appears only in Figure preceding Ground constructions when Figure is known. Finally, the main way to express the spatial relationship between Ground and Figure is either the simultaneous production of the units, or Ground and an adposition sign. A sequential strategy is another way of expressing spatial relationships but this can be used only when the Figure is new within the discourse. The choice of strategy can be attributed to the emphasis put on the Figure’s presence when it is new while with a known Figure, the emphasis is on the location of that Figure.https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2020-0041spatial relationshipsfiguregrounddiscoursefinnish sign languagesimultaneitysequentiality |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
De Weerdt Danny |
spellingShingle |
De Weerdt Danny Figure–Ground Spatial Relationships in Finnish Sign Language Discourse Open Linguistics spatial relationships figure ground discourse finnish sign language simultaneity sequentiality |
author_facet |
De Weerdt Danny |
author_sort |
De Weerdt Danny |
title |
Figure–Ground Spatial Relationships in Finnish Sign Language Discourse |
title_short |
Figure–Ground Spatial Relationships in Finnish Sign Language Discourse |
title_full |
Figure–Ground Spatial Relationships in Finnish Sign Language Discourse |
title_fullStr |
Figure–Ground Spatial Relationships in Finnish Sign Language Discourse |
title_full_unstemmed |
Figure–Ground Spatial Relationships in Finnish Sign Language Discourse |
title_sort |
figure–ground spatial relationships in finnish sign language discourse |
publisher |
De Gruyter |
series |
Open Linguistics |
issn |
2300-9969 |
publishDate |
2020-12-01 |
description |
This study is about expressing spatial relationships between Figure and Ground in Finnish Sign Language discourse and shows that the variation in this expression is primarily discourse dependent. The main findings are, first, that Ground mainly precedes Figure whether the Figure is new or a known referent within the discourse; the reverse order is possible only when the Figure is known. Second, the lexical sign olla (‘have’) appears more frequently in expressing spatial relationships with a new Figure and less frequently with a known Figure but never in a construction with Figure preceding Ground; the form oli (‘had’), referring to the past, appears only in Figure preceding Ground constructions when Figure is known. Finally, the main way to express the spatial relationship between Ground and Figure is either the simultaneous production of the units, or Ground and an adposition sign. A sequential strategy is another way of expressing spatial relationships but this can be used only when the Figure is new within the discourse. The choice of strategy can be attributed to the emphasis put on the Figure’s presence when it is new while with a known Figure, the emphasis is on the location of that Figure. |
topic |
spatial relationships figure ground discourse finnish sign language simultaneity sequentiality |
url |
https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2020-0041 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT deweerdtdanny figuregroundspatialrelationshipsinfinnishsignlanguagediscourse |
_version_ |
1716846767869263872 |