International Sign as a Conference Language

1. This project is funded by the European Research Council, Project ID 714615
Forced Migration Labour Migration Professional Mobility Tourist Mobility
Annelies Kusters
International Sign as a
conference language

2. An ethnography of
International Sign (IS)
Themes:
• IS strategies 1on1/small groups
• IS as teaching language
• Learning and teaching IS
• Presenting in IS (with/without
interpreters)
• Online uses of IS
• IS variants + naming ISes
Main locations:
Frontrunners
Conferences
Clin d’Oeil festival
Winter Deaflympics
DOOR centre in Kenya
Methods
• Focus groups (7)
• Interviews (145)
• Visual methods
• Recording interactions
• Observations
• Informal conversations
Outputs
• MobileDeaf.org.uk vlogs/blogs
• Film series “This is IS” (2022)
• Book on IS (2023)
Core focus:
• language attitudes/ideologies
• language practices

3. Participants’ metaphors to
describe IS

4. Research participants about privilege:
”IS is…”
“… easier when fluent in European sign language(s)”
“… easier when knowing ASL”
“… harder when knowing ASL”
“… easier for native signers”
“… easier for Europeans who cross borders”
“… easier for white able-bodied people”
“… harder for deafblind people”
“… easier when knowing English”
“… harder when not fluent in IS fingerspelling”
etc…..

5. DAC: IS only & deaf-only policy (1)
• Every 2 years, since 2002
• Direct communication
• Interaction: Q&A, SIG, workshops, (dinner)
• No one presents in first/national sign language (=equalizer?)
• IS: some fluent, others new
• But: IS abstract
• Lack of IS courses/materials
• DAC: rapid & immersive IS (re)learning
• Exhausting; often rewarding
• White sighted & able-bodied Europeans seen as most privileged

6. DAC (2)
• Discussing language on the stage
• “This is my first presentation in IS”
• “Sorry for my ASL/BSL/…”
• “This is very clear IS!”
• “That’s not IS!”
• “IS is not slow ASL”
• “Too much English in slides”
• “English in slides really helps”
• DAC workshop 2017: “DAC = prime site for
academic IS development and vitality”

7. SIGN8 in Florianopolis:
dual language policy
• SIGN: sign language conference (since 2006)
• SIGN8: deaf (<= most) & hearing, mostly
Brazil
• Pre-conference IS and Libras course (1 day)
• No interpretation => barriers AND rapid
learning + adaptation
• Presentations: Libras signs in IS & IS signs in
Libras, slow pace, unpacking
• PPT: Portuguese, English or mix
• Posters: adaptation
• People fluent in IS AND Libras most
privileged

8. Understanding
• “How can a non-language (or a mix) be a conference
language?”
• 100+ years of IS on the stage proves it’s possible
• “It works if you don’t expect the same from IS as from
national sign languages”
• Working hard on clear expression
• Not expecting to understand everything (eg. some
people/signs not understood, getting the gist)
• Audience brokering: scaffolding practice, core to IS

9. WFD 2019 (Paris)
• WFD: since 1951, every 4 years
• 2019: IS and host NatSL (LSF) in
presentations encouraged
• Most signed presentations were in IS
• Interpreters:
• IS & LSF on stage
• NatSL* scattered + mostly
European
• Deafblind
• Large presence from global South (on
stage + in audience) – often no prior
access to IS learning + IS terps
• Hearing people who know English and
IS most privileged (interpreters had
prep)
*NatSL= National Sign Language

10. TISLR 2019 (Hamburg)
• TISLR: since 1986, every 3 years
• Theoretical linguistics, very specific
vocabulary, fast pace
• Not always IS interpretation at TISLR,
but 2019 edition had IS, ASL, DGS on
stage
• Presentations in 2019:
• More (deaf/hearing) in ASL than in IS
• Signing in informal interactions: ASL
dominant
=> Hearing people with ASL +
English fluency most privileged

11. Different conference language policies
= different opportunities and inequalities
Environments with NatSL
interpreters; aim for full
understanding => shortcomings of IS
Direct communication = accepting
partial understanding, in IS or in blends
of sign languages
DAC SIGN8 WFD TISLR
Presence of IS Presenters Presenters Presenters +
interpreters
Mostly interpreters
Deaf/hearing Deaf only Deaf majority Mix Hearing majority
Interpretation? No No Yes + IS terps
privileged over
NatSL terps
Yes, but not always
IS
Host country SL? No Yes Yes Yes

12. Presenting in NatSL vs IS?
• Present in NatSL: who has this privilege?
• Deaf people who know host country NatSL (SIGN8, WFD, TISLR,
not DAC)
• Deaf people who can bring interpreters
• Why present in NatSL if can present in IS?
• Clarity, comfort, depth
• Not fluent in IS
• Show own language
• Why present in IS if can present in NatSL?
• Address international audience directly
• To not draw on privilege others don’t have (eg. LSF at WFD 2019)

13. IS as “more deaf”?
• Because we have no choice?
• IS-only events: mostly deaf-only
• TISLR: “I am going to speak now because I am tired”
#hearingprivilege
• Hearing do not always look at IS signing (ie. listen to voice
over)
• Calibrating: cultivating deaf linguistic strategies

14. Why is presenting in IS different if
there are interpreters?
• Expectation of understanding everything (esp. for
interpreters)
• Simultaneous interpretation impacts on
• Choice of signs (more conventional ones, more ASL?)
• Creativity, visuality, freedom
• Preparation
• Pace (eg. waiting, interruptions)
• Inequalities:
• Hearing terps: discussion of “deaf topics” changes
• Most IS terps: white (& male) – but representation matters
• NatSL terps: advantage/privilege of global North

15. Conclusion – about IS as conference
lingua franca (with no interpreters):
• Rare
• Barriers and opportunities
• Eliminate hearing privilege
• Deaf collaboration/calibration
• Learn types of IS by immersion
• Developing IS academic lexicon