NATIONAL STEREOTYPES IN SIGN LANGUAGES
Good afternoon, my topic is national stereotypes in sign languages.
My talk is a follow-up to the morning session.
As I'm going to talk about stereotypes,
I would like to repeat the definition discussed during the morning session.
The definition tells us what the meaning of a stereotype is.
A stereotype is a representation of an object,
formed in a certain shared empirical framework.
It defines our perception of the object, what the object is, what it looks like,
what impression it makes and how one treats it.
It is entrenched in language and forms part of our shared view of the world.
Many designations we are going to use are rather politically incorrect,
so it is important to mention another definition.
This definition says:
Stereotypes often betray more about their authors
than the persons or objects that they relate to.
This is an important definition we have to bear in mind.
As mentioned earlier, my topic is national stereotypes in sign languages.
But before we start discussing stereotypes in sign languages,
we need to use a spoken language as our basis, specifically spoken Czech.
We can think about stereotypes in spoken Czech on two levels.
The first one is a linguistic level, by which I mean the structural level.
This category consists of designations and phraseology.
The second one is a textual level, or the discourse level.
We can see examples of these stereotypes in advertisement, folklore,
belles-lettres and other texts. All these fall into the discourse level.
As I have mentioned before, first I would like to address
designations in sign languages, using the model for spoken languages.
Mrs. Filipiová created a basic classification of designations.
It was made for spoken languages, specifically for spoken Czech.
She created 5 different groups and I will go through all of them.
The first group comprises unmarked word forms, or neutral words.
These designations do not have any positive or negative connotations.
An example in spoken Czech is the word N?mec.
For English translation ("German") please look at the slide behind me.
The second group consists of marked word forms.
These designations are derivatives of neutral ethnonyms.
These words relate to the neutral form as they are derived from it
but they are marked. An example in Czech is the word N?m?our ("Jerry").
You can see that it is a derivative,
some morphemes change and this alone makes the word marked.
In spoken English, we can use the word "Jerry" as an example.
Again, the designation is marked. You can see the example at the slide.
The third group are designations that originally used to be unmarked.
They used to be neutral. Yet these words are often archaic,
so nowadays they contain a secondarily marked meaning.
An example in spoken Czech is the word Germán, or "Hun" in English.
These designations used to be unmarked in this context, now they are marked.
The fourth group are ethnonyms not derived from the unmarked form.
This means that these designations were not derived from a neutral word.
In spoken Czech, we can use for example the word Skop?ák ("Kraut").
None of these words is derived from a neutral unmarked form.
The fifth group comprises phonically expressive ethnonyms.
They consist of unusual phoneme clusters.
An example in Czech is the word Doj?ák ("Fritz/Heinie/Jerry").
This designation expresses emotions because it is marked in this way.
I am not sure how to translate it into English, the slide shows 3 words.
I am using Czech as a base language, we are discussing Czech classification.
Therefore, it is not always possible to find a correct term in English.
In order to discuss these designations in the Czech Sign Language
we have to divide the first group into two subcategories.
An example of neutral word form in CzSL is this sign for N?mec ("German").
N?mec ("German"), this is an unmarked sign in CzSL.
The second group are marked derivatives.
These signs are marked, they contain a certain evaluation, e.g.this sign.
As you can see, this minor modification of a sign adds some subjectivity.
A simple modification in one parameter makes the sign marked, not neutral.
The third group are synonyms.
These signs have no relation to the neutral designation.
They comprise different possibilities of expressing the sign, e.g. this sign.
As you can see, this sign has no link to the sign N?mec I showed before.
This is the case of a synonym, a completely different sign form.
We can include one more group in the classification of sign languages
but we will not use this one in our discussion about stereotypes.
This group comprises borrowed signs from other sign languages.
I am now going to discuss the situation of CzSL.
We have to divide the first group of unmarked signs into two subgroups.
The signs belong to a subgroup depending on their relation to spoken language.
Signs are either linked to spoken words or not. E.g. this initialization sign.
The sign for Latvia. I will repeat it one more time: Latvia.
You can see the letter "L" referring to the spoken word.
Another example is the sign for Norway.
This sign contains the initial "N", incorporated from the finger alphabet.
Therefore, this sign is again related to the spoken language.
There is also a second subgroup of signs related to the spoken language.
This subgroup comprises calques, or literal translations, from Czech.
An example from CzSL is the sign for Dán ("Dane").
The sign has the same form as the sign for da? ("tax").
So the Czech word da? is translated into CzSL with the same sign as Dán.
Another example is Novozélan?an ("New Zealander").
The sign consists of the sign for "new" with "Z" from the finger alphabet.
We are still talking about the first group: neutral signs.
I will now discuss the subgroup of signs with no relation to the spoken language.
We can divide it into 3 categories.
The first category refers to the flag of the designated nation.
E.g. the sign for the Swiss is inspired by the Swiss flag.
You can see the picture on the slide. The sign looks like this.
So the sign is inspired by the flag.
Another category of the neutral unmarked sign forms consists of signs
referring to the shape of a particular country on the map,
to what its territory looks like. E.g. the sign for Italians.
The sign is visually motivated by the territory shape shown on the map.
I am not sure if it is relevant to consider these 2 categories
because they do not say much about the people of the specific nation,
what they look like or how they behave.
For our purpose, the third category might be the most interesting one.
This category refers to the culture or appearance of the local people.
We are talking about cultural-visual phenomena.
You can e.g. consider what the locals are like and what is said about them.
In the next step, you can find signs referring to those personality traits.
E.g. this is the sign for a Spaniard.
It refers to the Spaniards being famous bullfighters.
They hold a cloth and the sign refers to the movement of the cloth.
The sign in fact tells us what the people of the nation are like.
Another example from this group is the sign for a German.
Why does the CzSL sign look like this?
The Deaf consider Germans as people who talk a lot, who use a lot of words.
The sign therefore refers to speaking.
The reason may be the said German trait
but also the strong German tradition of the oral approach to Deaf education.
Another sign referring to the nation's activities is the sign for Irishmen.
The sign refers to the Irishmen as the nation playing the harp.
Irishmen are considered musicians and, therefore, this is the sign for them.
The next group of signs refers to the behaviour of these people
or what we consider them to be like.
E.g. Russians are considered to be heavy drinkers, hence their red noses.
This is the sign in CzSL.
It refers to the alcoholic red nose.
The third group contains signs referring to the people's clothing.
This is the sign for Slovaks.
The sign for a Slovak refers to the hat on his head.
So one more time, this is the sign for Slovaks.
And it refers to their hats.
I'll give you a second example: the sign for a Korean.
Again, it refers to headwear.
Another example is the sign for a Peruvian.
It refers to a noticeable object which American Indians put in their hair.
Another example is the sign for a Mexican.
Mexicans have a national costume with braces.
So the sign for Mexicans refers to this typical piece of clothing.
The fourth group consists of signs referring to what the people look like.
Just a moment, I will show again the signs for the Dutch and Koreans.
I'm sorry, I skipped something in my slide.
I didn't show you an example of the Dutch but of Koreans.
I will repeat it one more time, this is the sign for Slovaks.
This is the sign for Koreans.
Sorry, this is the sign for Koreans.
The third one is the sign for the Dutch, the fourth one for Peruvians.
And the last one for Mexicans. Hopefully, it's clear now.
The fourth group consists of signs referring to what the people look like.
For example the sign for the Chinese used to look like this.
This sign referred to slanted eyes.
Today, the old sign is no longer used, this new sign is used instead.
Another sign referring to the appearance of the people is one for Bulgarians.
It refers to the moustache often worn in Bulgaria.
The sign for Mongolians then refers to their wide eyebrows.
I've now told you all about the group a) - unmarked sign forms.
We'll now move to the next group: b).
We'll discuss marked sign forms.
The signs are modified in one parameter: handshape, location or movement.
I have a very nice example for you. I've shown you the sign for Slovaks.
I don't want to offend anybody. I'm only using signs from real language.
In our material, we found this marked sign form for Slovakia.
Sometimes it has this gesture incorporated in it.
Because a few years ago, this happened in Slovakia:
Slovaks hosted an important sporting event.
They failed to do it correctly.
So the sign refers to some people's dissatisfaction with their work.
Later, when Slovaks failed to host the Olympics and embezzled the funds,
the sign was reintroduced among the Czech Deaf.
The sign contains negative evaluation of Slovaks and of what happened.
I will show you not only the approach of the Czech Deaf towards Slovaks
but also which sign the Slovak Deaf use for Czechs.
This is the neutral sign for Czechs in Slovak sign language.
Yet Slovaks had the impression that Czechs live in better conditions
and they are thus somewhat arrogant.
So they moved the place of articulation more towards the nose.
The sign contains an element of mockery.
This is again an example of a sign which is no longer neutral
due to the change of one parameter. It becomes a marked sign.
This was the group b) and now we'll move to the group c).
These signs are not derived from the unmarked form, they are synonyms.
They are variants with the same meaning.
I'm sorry, I'll be using signs for Germans.
We collected this material among elderly Deaf.
And the signs are linked to WW2 and Nazism.
So I apologize to all Germans in here, it's nothing against you.
These are the signs for Germans used by elderly Czech Deaf.
They refer to SS and to Nazism.
Other signs for Germans looked like this.
And again, they referred to the gesture used by the Nazi.
The young generation of the Czech Deaf also uses special signs for Germans.
They use this sign for Germans, it means a cochlear implant in CzSL.
It is because cochlear implantation has been widely used in Germany.
So young Czech Deaf use the same sign for Germans and for a cochlear implant.
They also use a sign referring to the oral approach to Deaf education.
And they use it as a sign for Germans.
I have shown you all my examples.
And I'm looking forward to the workshop where we'll discuss this topic.
Just a few questions as food for thought:
Are national stereotypes used in CzSL only relevant in the Czech context?
Or are they used internationally?
What is its impact on the Deaf community here and what is the global impact?
Thank you for your attention. I'm looking forward to the workshop.