This is great! My wife hates signing because it's too much motion for her and I'm deafblind. I'm going to look into this as a way for us to communicate!
P.S. I think ASL (or another real sign language) would probably be better for you. Those are actually developed, you can find interpreters easily, etc. I don't know what issue your wife has with it being "too much motion"; to me that's a strange problem to have unless she has some sort of really severe arthritis, and there are certainly ways you can make ASL work with reduced motion anyway
Oh, I use ASL all the time. The thing is my wife is on the autism spectrum so skin gliding on skin is like nails on a chalkboard to her, and since I'm deafblind, I have to use ASL tactually. So the gripping language just might be our solution since there's no friction involved.
You keep calling things "phonology" and "phonemes." But technically, that's not what they are, since those two words are derived from phono- meaning sound. And your language doesn't use sound. I would recommend creating a neologism like "Somatemes" (somato- means "body (as opposed to mind)) or "Chiremes." (Chiro- means "hand.") However, other than that, this is a REALLY COOL IDEA.
"Phoneme" and "phonology" is the accepted form of describing this level of linguistics, regardless of whether it's sound-based. See for example linguistic analyses of American Sign Language - it uses the term 'phoneme'. ("Sememe" and "chireme" were proposed, but they found it's cognitively indistinguishable.)
Hmm . . . I've never heard of this American Sign Language thing. But I still think one should not use words derived from "phono-" to describe something unrelated to sound.
Yeah, well... lots of terms in linguistics (just like any other formal field) have drifted a bit from their origins. People first thought only of spoken languages; signed languages were only recognized as such in the mid-1900s. It's a formal term; you have to kinda divorce yourself from the etymology to use it correctly. :-P
The original meaning of it being sound-related is based on when the field of linguistics hadn't yet realized that language can be independent of sound. If it makes you feel any better, ASL has two signs for "phonology" -- one which has the more specific "sound-based" meaning and the other one which has the more general meaning.
Are you familiar with the P handshape? It's hard to describe, but if you look up any video on YouTube of the ASL alphabet, you can find it. Take that handshape and point it inside your ear for the sound-based definition, and on your temple for the sound-independent definition.
hmm, for jargon? i only know of one that gives a lot of religious jargon, but for linguistics terminology i don't even know how standardized the signs are. i have another deafblind linguist friend and she said she and her interpreter had to agree on a lot of the signs, but at the same time gallaudet is top in the linguistics of signed/manual languages, so i imagine they have some sort of vocabulary. sorry i can't help you more.
This is , in form, like the fictional battle languages in Dune. It also resembles the hidden form of LAadan in Native tongue by S Haden Elgin.
Cool stuff.
faunflynn 1 year ago
This is great! My wife hates signing because it's too much motion for her and I'm deafblind. I'm going to look into this as a way for us to communicate!
nikamirovak 2 years ago
O.o How'd you manage to watch this then?
If you do try this out, please email us. We'd be interested to know how it goes.
saizai 2 years ago
P.S. I think ASL (or another real sign language) would probably be better for you. Those are actually developed, you can find interpreters easily, etc. I don't know what issue your wife has with it being "too much motion"; to me that's a strange problem to have unless she has some sort of really severe arthritis, and there are certainly ways you can make ASL work with reduced motion anyway
saizai 2 years ago
Oh, I use ASL all the time. The thing is my wife is on the autism spectrum so skin gliding on skin is like nails on a chalkboard to her, and since I'm deafblind, I have to use ASL tactually. So the gripping language just might be our solution since there's no friction involved.
nikamirovak 2 years ago
You keep calling things "phonology" and "phonemes." But technically, that's not what they are, since those two words are derived from phono- meaning sound. And your language doesn't use sound. I would recommend creating a neologism like "Somatemes" (somato- means "body (as opposed to mind)) or "Chiremes." (Chiro- means "hand.") However, other than that, this is a REALLY COOL IDEA.
Entwistle54 2 years ago
"Phoneme" and "phonology" is the accepted form of describing this level of linguistics, regardless of whether it's sound-based. See for example linguistic analyses of American Sign Language - it uses the term 'phoneme'. ("Sememe" and "chireme" were proposed, but they found it's cognitively indistinguishable.)
saizai 2 years ago
Hmm . . . I've never heard of this American Sign Language thing. But I still think one should not use words derived from "phono-" to describe something unrelated to sound.
Entwistle54 2 years ago
Yeah, well... lots of terms in linguistics (just like any other formal field) have drifted a bit from their origins. People first thought only of spoken languages; signed languages were only recognized as such in the mid-1900s. It's a formal term; you have to kinda divorce yourself from the etymology to use it correctly. :-P
saizai 2 years ago
The original meaning of it being sound-related is based on when the field of linguistics hadn't yet realized that language can be independent of sound. If it makes you feel any better, ASL has two signs for "phonology" -- one which has the more specific "sound-based" meaning and the other one which has the more general meaning.
nikamirovak 2 years ago
What're the signs? I don't know any linguistics jargon in ASL.
saizai 2 years ago
Are you familiar with the P handshape? It's hard to describe, but if you look up any video on YouTube of the ASL alphabet, you can find it. Take that handshape and point it inside your ear for the sound-based definition, and on your temple for the sound-independent definition.
nikamirovak 2 years ago
I'm decently fluent in ASL - I just don't know jargon. So yes, I know P. :-P
Know any dictionaries / sites that have a good list?
saizai 2 years ago
hmm, for jargon? i only know of one that gives a lot of religious jargon, but for linguistics terminology i don't even know how standardized the signs are. i have another deafblind linguist friend and she said she and her interpreter had to agree on a lot of the signs, but at the same time gallaudet is top in the linguistics of signed/manual languages, so i imagine they have some sort of vocabulary. sorry i can't help you more.
nikamirovak 2 years ago
Fascinating! A really different approach to phonology.
Amrito78 2 years ago
Ingenious!! A really nice idea, I think.
jotomicron 3 years ago