ASL Grammar:  Is ASL grammar like a diorama?


Definition:  A diorama is a three-dimensional model of a scene, usually in miniature, that's meant to look real. Dioramas can be life-sized or miniature, and often include figures, objects, and a painted or photographed background. They can also include illuminating devices, stuffed wildlife, and figures made of wax or other materials.

It has been suggested by one or more sources in the Deaf Community that to understand ASL grammar it may be helpful to:  "Imagine making a diorama. What would you put first? Sky? Grass? Clouds? Then what? Trees? Rocks? Finally, the main object. What does that thing do or say?  Using this approach will help you think in visual layers -- not English wording."

 

Let's call that perspective on ASL grammar:  "The diorama model of ASL grammar."

While the diorama model has a certain simplistic appeal --  the fact is many languages (including ASL and English) have multiple word orders that tend to overlap rather than being mutually exclusive.

In the "Linguistics of American Sign Language" (3rd Ed.) textbook, page 135, item #3 of the chapter summary we read: "The most basic word order in ASL sentences with transitive verbs is Subject-Verb-Object."

Definition: "main object":  In an English sentence, the main object is the noun or pronoun that receives the action of the verb. For example, in the sentence "She reads the book," "book" is the main object. Thus using the main object as the topic, we get: BOOK, SHE READ.

BOOK, SHE READ -- is most definitely O,SV but it is no more topic comment than the phrase: SHE READ BOOK.

BOOK, SHE READ: The topic is "book"
SHE READ BOOK: The topic is "she."

Both of those sentences are topic / comment type sentences. (They both state a topic and then state a comment.)  However the first sentence is using a topicalized main object as the topic. The second sentence is simply using the existing subject as the topic.

The issue as far as linguistic efficiency -- is that little comma "," in the first version. That "comma" takes (a small bit of)  time and effort. It typically involves a pause, a raising of the eyebrows, a glance at the conversation partner to see if they are "with us, yes or no?" (That is why we raise our eyebrows instead of lowering them - we are in effect asking a yes or no question..)

We could (and perhaps should) gloss it the sentence as:
BOOK? SHE READ.
Or: "BOOK?-(y/n) IX-(she) READ (nod)." (Or some similar approach.)

Because that little "comma" (or question mark) takes more work it is natural for language users to only use that structure if we have a specific reason.  For example, we may need to deal with uncertainty regarding whether or not our conversation partner recalls or is clear that we are discussing "the" (previously identified) book as opposed to "a" random book.

If (due to high context or pre-familiarization) we don't need to deal with such uncertainty -- it makes sense to forego the extra work involved in O,SV.  (In other words, language users tend to use the approach that requires the least work to get our message across.)  That is why most of the time we "don't" use O,SV.   That is why the most common structure in ASL sentences involving transitive verbs is subject / verb / object (not O,SV).

When we sign OSV we tend to sign the object and raise our eyebrows to topicalize it -- we are actually signing: O?SV. (Keep that in mind as we look at the examples below.)

ASL instructors and content creators sometimes push the idea of avoiding  "English wording" -- (or in other words "English syntax") as if somehow English wording and ASL wording are mutually exclusive.  However, English doesn't "own" SVO and ASL doesn't "own" OSV.

For example, English also uses "topicalization."
(Topicalization could be referred to as passive voice and/or using your main-object as your topic instead of using your subject as your topic.)

You will see topicalization (or "passive voice" or "object used as your topic") in (English) phrases such as:
"Do you remember John? Well, yesterday, I saw him..."
"That red sweater of yours? I washed it and..."
"About tomorrow, we need to..."
"Do you recall my old car? I sold it."
"In regard to your educational plan, you should..."
"Your doctor appointment? It was canceled."

My point is that both ASL and English use:
Active voice: SVO
Passive voice: O,SV

Passive voice tends to be slower and takes more effort in both languages.

Of possible interest is to consider the difference between:
1. She is reading a book.
2. She is reading the book.

Let's ask ourselves: How (in ASL) can we quickly and efficiently convey the difference in meaning of those two sentences?

An approach can be to sign:

1. SHE READ BOOK. (She is reading a book.)
2. BOOK? SHE READ. (She is reading the book.)

There are other ways of course, (such as SHE READ THAT BOOK) but the point here is that version two (the passive / topicalized "O?SV" version) sacrifices a fraction of a second of time to add the meaning of "the" (specific) as opposed to "a" (nonspecific).

In version 2. "BOOK? SHE READ" -- we are raising our eyebrows to create a meaning of:

"Do you remember or are you familiar with that book? Well, she is reading it."

The point here is that OSV (O?SV) has a place (or function) in ASL but comes at a cost. The cost is a micro bit of time and effort.
The function is to create specificity and/or check for familiarity so as to reduce the need for even more expansion in conversational situations in which we are not sure if we need to expand or not.

In high context situations we don't need to expand and can often save time by using SVO.

 


 

 

 

 a situation allows the "setting of a scene" we can drastically reduce the amount of linear signing we need to do.

An interesting skill set I think advanced signers have is the ability (and tendency) to recognize when to switch over to depictive signing and 3d layouts instead of just using SVO.

Of late I've been considering the idea that ASL has both depictive grammar and linear grammar and that depiction is preferred when available (due to the affordances of the topic, the context, and the skill level of the conversation partner or audience) due to its efficiency -- and linear is preferred or at least tolerated when there isn't much to depict and/or mapping to "environmental" or "future" English is needed -- for example in a typical classroom or business (contracts, etc.) situation in the U.S. (Terps often need to terp in a way that informs the student of the concept while prepping the student to recognize the concept in written form later on a test -- in which case depiction is perhaps too abstracted from the eventual English words or phrases that will appear on the test.

We Deaf live in this state diglossia with constantly alternating (and often interwoven) high and low languages.

 



 

Notes: