Figure 3: GIVE written according to Stokoe’s Notation
An important pattern emerges as Stokoe’s Notation and the ASL-phabet are designed for writing
at the word level only in a dictionary type format. The ASL-phabet was used in an Arizona charter
school setting with young deaf children. When children encountered unfamiliar English words, they
could look them up in what is called The Resource Book (RB). This allowed deaf children to read the
sign equivalents to the English words. Sam Supalla explained that the RB empowers these children in
independently identifying thousands of English words through ASL.
SignFont, on the other hand, is designed for writing at the sentence level in a text format. Don
Newkirk who developed SignFont in 1987 saw that the number of phonological parameters increased
to four with the inclusion of “Action Area”. The information on where the handshape(s) make contact
with the body was apparently thought to be critical for how signs should be written. The order of the
parameters for SignFont is: Handshape, Action Area, Location, and Movement. As shown in Figure 4,
the written word for GIVE reflects the set-up of SignFont.
Figure 4: GIVE written according to SignFont
SignFont is the first system that relies on computer-based font for the graphemes (and many
SignFont graphemes are also used in the ASL-phabet). The fifth parameter called non-manuals is
included in SignFont referring to how eyebrows would be raised to mark topicalization in an ASL
sentence, for example. Apparently due to the use of five parameters and writing ASL text (instead of
writing just words), the number of SignFont graphemes is the largest at 85.
In all, the ASL writing systems developed to date aim at the representation of the signed
language on the paper. The ASL writing systems are achieved through the use of graphemes or
stylized drawings. More research is evidently needed in understanding and testing the different ASL
writing systems for their efficacy. Literacy and education issues in the area of signed language reading
recently received attention in the field of deaf education. One special issue of the American Annals of
the Deaf (2017; Volume 161, Number 5) devotes to the topic of reading and writing for ASL. Don
Grushkin had an article in there supporting this endeavor in the education of deaf children. He received
response from a number of scholars who wrote their own articles. Many different insights have been
provided, including a scholar who is against the whole notion of reading and writing for ASL.
Further Readings:
Augustus, R. A., Ritchie, E., & Stecker, S. (2013). The official American Sign Language writing textbook. Retrieved from http://aslized.org/files/ASLwritingslides.pdf
Grushkin, D. (2017). Writing signed languages: What for? What form? American Annals of the Deaf, 161(5), 509-527.
Hopkins, J. (2008). Choosing how to write sign language: A sociolinguistic perspective. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 192, 75-89.
Miller, C. (2001). Some reflections on the need for a common sign notation. Sign Language & Linguistics, 4(1), 11-28.
Newkirk, D. (1987). Signfont handbook. San Diego, CA: Salk Institute for Biological Studies and Emerson & Stern Associates.
Stokoe, William, C., Casterline, D., & Cronenberg, C. (1965). A dictionary of American Sign Language on linguistic principles. Washington, DC: Gallaudet College Press.
Supalla, S. J. (2017). A sketch on reading methodology for deaf children. Society for American Sign Language Journal, 1(1), 35-55.
Sutton, V. (1999). SignWriting: On the occasion of its 25th anniversary November 1999. Sign Language & Linguistics, 2(2), 271-282.
The Power of ASL
11
Winter 2018 – Issue 12