We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Users of natural sign languages such as South African Sign Language (SASL) resist the influence of phonetically based languages such as English that are spoken by hearing people. However, languages that come into regular contact interfere with each other, with the dominant language creating greater interference in the non-dominant language than vice versa. In the case of sign languages, this interference is proposed to manifest in the predominance of SVO sentence structure, mouthing (full or partial miming of spoken words), increased emotive rather than grammatical use of facial features (e.g. brow actions) and increased use of artificial signs, nonce words and fingerspelling. This study explores these interference features in a pioneer corpus project consisting of news broadcasts interpreted into SASL by two hearing interpreters (native SASL users). A discussion of how phonological, grammatical, syntactic and discourse features of SASL differ from their English counterparts is followed by a discussion of the corpus and relevant annotations. The results show high frequencies of SV sentence constructions and mouthings, and relatively high frequencies of fingerspelling, artificial signs and nonce words; brow actions are more resistant to interference.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.