Gallaudet University, October 7th, 2021

1. Linguistic ethnography
and the semiotic
repertoire
Annelies Kusters

2. What is linguistic
ethnography
(LE)?
A theoretical and methodological
approach of language and social
life as mutually shaped

3. Opening
linguistics up
Tying
ethnography
down
Eg:
• Classroom as a site of interaction

4. Studies of
multimodality
Studies of
multilingualism
Semiotic repertoire
Gestures Signs Objects Drawing
Speech
Body
posture
Smell Writing
Emoticons Tattoos Pictures
Facial
expression
alternating features
simultaneously
combining or
blending features

5. Today: two cases of communication which are
not always regarded as “language”
Gesture-based
interactions
International
sign

6. Gesture-based
interactions

7. Research in Mumbai
! Focus on customer interactions: shops,
restaurants, transport. Six deaf people (one
deaf blind) who sell and buy, order or serve,
and travel.
! Meta-linguistic reflection: study of language
ideologies
! Potential and limitations of gesture
! Gesture vs ISL
! Creation of 80 min. ethnographic film: Ishaare:
Gestures and Signs in Mumbai (online!)
https://vimeo.com/142245339

8. • Reena short intro video

9. handling
objects
(objects for
sale,
weights,
money)
1
mouthing
/speaking
(English,
Hindi,
Marathi,
Gujarati, …)
2
reading/
writing
different
languages/
scripts
(Roman,
Devanagari,
Braille,…)
3
Head movements, facial expressions
Pointing (objects, text)
Tracing shape/size of objects
Conventionalised gestures (such as
water, bottle, toilet, train)
Gestures based on certain actions
(lemon, milk)
Examples of gestures Gesture-based interactions:
multimodal and
multilingual
Combinations:

11. Linguistic status of gesture
19th century
Until 19th century in European
society:
• co-speech gestures = natural
• “gesture” = “sign”
End of 19th century
- Darwinism: gesture/sign = primitive
- Structural linguistics = focusing on written word
1960s
Sign linguistics:
• sign languages = spoken languages
• sign languages ≠ gestures
1980s
rediscovery of co-speech gesture
(audio-visual technology in research)
=> Researchers need to come to terms with
difference/similarity between gestures and
signs

12. Implied academic language ideologies:
• “Language and not-language can be neatly separated”
• “Forms of signing can be classified”
Linguistic ethnographers challenge classifications

13. Distinction gesture – sign is context-based (and what one
person sees as gesturing, the other may regard as signing!)
Different researchers called similar language practices “gesture”,
“homesign” or “sign language”
For example: Jepson (1991), called interactions in rural villages in India “Rural
Indian Sign Language” (RISL) => Criticised by Zeshan who said RISL = homesign
Gesture-prone areas: distinction between gesture /
rural homesign / village SL often blurry

14. • Short video to demonstrate use of gestures in India

15. Indian Sign
Language
classes for deaf
teachers
• ISL class since 2001 (training ISL
teachers): introduction of separation
gesture/signing
• Course handbook: “Sign languages
are NOT just gestures and
pantomime, but do have their own
grammar.”
• 1. gesturing ≠ signing
• 2. signing = “ISL”

16. “Before the ISL class while I used gestures with hearing
people (…) I thought that hearing people can use [slow,
simple] signs. They can sign and can improve their signing (
…) but later I realized they were not signs but gestures.
Before I joined the ISL class, I didn’t know the word
“gesture”. (…) That’s when we let the gestures remain for
what they are, seeing gesture as not sign language and
thus something not to focus on, and continued to focus on
sign with deaf.“
Kusters, A., & Sahasrabudhe, S. (2018). Language ideologies on the difference between gesture and sign.
Language & Communication, 60, 44-63.

17. Language
ideologies
are linked to
contexts of
language use
Distinction between gesturing and
signing is context-dependent:
•Gesture = signing
• Eg. in enabling contexts (shop, train)
•Gesture ≠ signing
• Eg. in limiting contexts (classroom, police, court)

18. International
Sign

20. Frontrunners 13
• 9-month deaf-led educational course
• Remote location in Denmark
• Official languages: IS, English
• 13 deaf students, 4 deaf teachers
• Two data collection sessions; Sept 2017, May 2018

22. International Sign
Iconic, transparent
signing, “showing rather
than telling”
Signs from different
signed languages (incl.
ASL)
Repetitions, duplication,
paraphrasing,
periphrasing
Optional: mouthings
(English or others
eg Spanish, Arabic)
Optional: text
(PPT/writing/
fingerspelling/
Google translate)
Optional: pictures
(eg. on mobile phone)

23. • formal settings (e.g., WFD conferences): shared lexicon
• rapid IS learning during events! (limited lexicon) ->
easier when knowing some ASL signs / English
more conventionalized IS(es)
• between signers with limited experience in using
conventionalized IS
less conventionalized IS

24. Conflicts on
“languageness”
of IS
Often not called a language
(as in “International Sign
Language”)
• Eg: “Not possible to talk in-
depth in IS”
• Eg: “Too varied”
• Eg: ”Too risky” (cf WFD)

26. Brokering to mitigate non-understanding
National sign
language
Expansions/
examples
Finger-
spelling
Pictures on
phone
Google
Translate Tactile
However, traditionally, IS is a collective experience and
cooperative practice!
Research so far looks at strategies of IS interpreters +
comprehension of IS presentations + 1-on-1 conversations

29. • sign languages as real languages
• (national) sign languages as bounded languages
• Gesture as not (sign) language
(Academic) language
ideologies can be extremely
empowering/useful for deaf
communities and for
researchers
• gesture/IS are marginalised: “not language” or “not-full”
communication
• bypassing the “IS/gesture is not a language” trope: IS/gesture is
language/ing!
• local ideologies value gestures/IS!
(Academic) language
ideologies can underpin
limiting views on how
language operates
• investigate use of semiotic repertoires in particular contexts
• investigate mutual shaping of language practices and language
ideologies
• identify contexts experienced as enabling/optimal (eg gesture in
shops, IS in deaf-only events)
Importance of linguistic
ethnography