24.Washabaugh Hearing and Deaf Signers Providence Island

8/19/2019 24.Washabaugh Hearing and Deaf Signers Providence Island

1/25

Hearing and Deaf Signers on Providence Island

William Washabaugh

Sign Language Studies, Volume 24, Fall 1979, pp. 191-214 (Article)

Published by Gallaudet University Press

DOI: 10.1353/sls.1979.0003

For additional information about this article

Access provided by University of the West Indies (12 Oct 2014 13:34 GMT)

http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/sls/summary/v1024/24.washabaugh.html

http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/sls/summary/v1024/24.washabaugh.htmlhttp://muse.jhu.edu/journals/sls/summary/v1024/24.washabaugh.html


2/25

SLS

24

1979),

191-214

@

by

Linstok

Press,

Inc.

HEARING

AND

DEAF

SIGNERS

ON

PROVIDENCE

ISLAND

William

Washabaugh

Introduction

Providence

Island,

Colombia,

harbors

a

small number

of

deaf

persons

who

have developed

a

manual

sign

language.

The

island

(see

Figure

1) is

small

in size

(15

square

miles)

and in popula-

tion

2500-3000).

The

people

of

Providence are

isolated

from the

British West

Indies

with

which

they

are

culturally

affiliated.

They

are governed by Colombia,

but

their pol-

itical

and

economic

links

to

the distant

mainland

are weak.

In short,

Providence is

not only

a

geographical

island; it is

a

cultural, economic, and

political

island as

well.

The

deaf people

of Providence Island

are

scattered

in

villages

around the perimeter

of this

mountainous island in

such a way that a few of them live in each of the seven

villages. Three deaf persons

live in Town, one

in Bailey,

three in

Rocky Point,

two

in

Smoothwater

Bay, five in

South-

west Bay,

two in Lazy

Hill. Three

deaf persons

regularly

live in Old Town, though

they are temporarily

absent

while

recuperating

from

illnesses. One

deaf person

who

resided

in

Bailey for

some twenty-three years

now resides in

the

neighboring

island

of San

Andres.

Most

of

the deaf people

are integrated

into the daily

round

of life

on

Providence

Island;

though

one

middle aged

male

in Town

has

been

confined

and

isolated by

his parents

since

his youth.

The

integration

of

the deaf into the

social

life

of Providence

is facilitated

by the

character

of

the

island's

economy.

Traditionally

the

mainstay of the

economy

has

been

a

combination

of

fishing,

slash-and-burn

horti-


3/25

Sign Language Studies 24

culture,

cattle-raising,

and fruit

gathering.

The

products

of

these

labors, when

augmented

by the cash

returned by

the

men who have

shipped

out

to work

in

the

merchant

marine,

provide

for the material necessities

of life on

Providence.

Formal education

has long

existed

on

Providence,

but except

for

training a few to take up

work outside the island,

that

formal education has

not trained persons to

handle the work-

aday

tasks that they

face on their home

ground.

This

subsistence

economy

is

one

to which

a

deaf person

can

make as significant

contribution as a hearing

person. Not

a few deaf persons

are

well reputed

in

their villages for their

cooking,

washing,

sewing,

fishing, farming, and cattle

raising.

The

participation

of the deaf

in

the routine

subsistence

activities

of

the

island has led to

a rather more

positive

valuation of the deaf and their language than is

realized

in

the

United

States. Woodward (1978a: 66) has shown that a

majority

of

the hearing

on

Providence judge the

sign

language

of the deaf (which will be

referred to

here as PSL) to be an

autochthonous and

systematic language,

which is distinct

from the oral

language

of the island

(Woodward

1978b). These

favorable

attitudes

and judgments

contrast

sharply with the

negative

attitudes that the majority of hearing

Americans

hold

in

regard to

the American

deaf and

their

language.

Both

the subsistence

character

of the

economy

and the

favorable attitudes

of the hearing

toward

the deaf promote

the

acquisition

of the

deaf sign

language by

the hearing

on

Provi-

dence Island.

This natural,

untutored

acquisiton

of a sign

language

by

hearing

persons

is a

rare

process, and one

that

has

not

been described

for any

other community.

The des-

cription

that follows

is intended to fill

this gap in

the literature.

A sociolinguistic

profile

The

deaf on

Providence

of the signing

community.

Island,

as

in

the

United

States,

are for the

most

part

born into hearing families.

There is

no

deaf person

on

Providence whose

parents

are

deaf.

In

consequence,

the deaf

must accommodate

their behavior

to the needs

of

the

hearing.

And

conversely,

in

every deaf

person's

family there

are

hearing

persons

who

must attune much

of their daily

behavior

to the

needs

of

the deaf.

A second

significant

sociolinguistic

fact

is

that

the


4/25

sh b ugh

Santa

Catilina

Is.

Town

Old Town

Mountain

Lazy

Hill

T

n

Bailey

Freshwater Bay

Rocky Point

Sothes:BySmoothwater

Bay

Southwest

Bay

---

.

Bottomhouse

Providence

Island

Figure


5/25

Sign

Language

Studies

24

deaf

people are

scattered

in

different

villages

around

the

island.

Being

so scattered,

the deaf

of one

village

interact

with the hearing of their

own

village

much

more frequently

than they

interact

with

the deaf

of

other

villages. The

deaf

of different

villages

do not

join into groups,

form clubs,

or

otherwise

ally themselves

with

one another

so

as to deal

corporately

with

the

world or

with the hearing-in

this

respect

the

deaf

of

Providence

Island

differ

from

the deaf

in

the United

States (Schein

1968).

In

summary, two

factors

work to promote

interaction

between

the deaf and

the

hearing

on

Providence

Island.

First, the

deaf are born

to

hearing parents;

and

second, the

deaf

are scattered in

different

villages.

The

isolation

of (a

few)

deaf persons

in a world of

hearing persons

leads

the

deaf and the

hearing

to accommo-

date

to

each other's

needs.

But the isolation

of

the

deaf

is

not so complete

as

to

prevent

them

from

constructing

and

transmitting

a vernacular signed

language. Intrahousehold

and

interhousehold

interactions

between

deaf persons facili-

tate

the genesis and

transmission

of PSL.

These

sorts of

interactions

are described

below.

The deaf

are born

to

hearing parents

and

that locates

the

deaf in the

world of

the

hearing.

But

deafness

runs

in

families and

by that fact

the deaf are located in

a

deaf

world

as

well.

To be

exact,

fifteen

of the

nineteen

deaf persons

enumerated above live with

deaf

siblings. Most

dramatically,

in

Southwest Bay

three

of

the

five

deaf persons

living in that

village are the children

of the same parents.

The other two

deaf

persons

in

the

village

are

children

of a hearing sister

of

those

three deaf

persons. This collocation

of

deaf

persons

in households establishes

the

social groups in

which the

sign language of Providence

Island is generated.

These deaf

households

are

linguistically

critical masses,

for

from

them

the

vernacular

language

of the deaf

arises through

the activity

of unconscious

semiotic

processes

of code

construction

(Washabaugh in

press).

Inter-village

interaction

between

the

deaf

goes on

right

alongside

the

interaction

of

the

deaf

within

households.

Such

inter-village

interactions

were

not

always

so

frequent

on

Providence.

They

have

been

facilitated

in

recent

years

by the

construction

of

a

road

around

the

island

in

1961.

Now

inter-

Village

interaction-severely

hampered

in

former

times

by

mountains

jutting

out

into

the

sea

and

by

impassable

mires


6/25

Washabaugh

in

the

rainy season-is a

matter

of

hopping

a pick-up

truck.

The

deaf and the hearing

members

of deaf households move

about as frequently as anyone else,

and

inevitably they make

contact with

the

deaf

of other villages.

This

inter-village

contact between

members

of

deaf households,

though

irregu-

lar,

facilitates

the homogenization of PSL (however see

Woodward,

DeSantis,

&

Washabaugh

in

press).

The foregoing

description

can be distilled

and pack-

aged into

a

sociolinguistic

model

of

the

PSL

community.

Such a model

will

have

the general

form

of concentric

circles

(Figure 2). The

core

of

the

signing community is

made

up of the

deaf

siblings

from whose interactions

the

rudimentary

sign

language arises. Outside

of but

in

close

contact with

the

deaf sibling core are

the

hearing members

of

the

deaf household.

These are

the hearing

persons

with

whom the deaf

interact daily

and who

often

seem

to

acquire

a great facility

in the language

of the

deaf.

Hearing

acquaintances

of

deaf

families

Hearing

members

of

deaf

households

-

Deaf si lin s

Village

1

Village 3

a -

Intra-village

interaction

Village

2

b

-

Inter-village interaction

Figure

2 .

A sociolinguistic

model

of

the Providence

Island

signing community.


7/25

Sign

Language Studies

24

Two

qualifications

about

the

interaction

between

the

deaf

and the

hearing members

of deaf

households

are

worth

stating.

First,

where deaf

households

are

extended

and

con-

tain a

great

span

of ages,

and

where

the

deaf

are

either

advanced in age

or

are

very

young, some

hearing members

of the household

are

either

too old

or too

young

to interact

with the

deaf

members.

Thus in

Rocky Point one deaf man

lives with

his parents and his sister and his

sister's

family.

The

sister

has

acquired

a

great

facility with

the

sign lan-

guage,

but

her

children

seem

to

be

less

competent

(quanti-

tative evidence

for

this observation will be supplied below).

Second, deaf households are sometimes

so restricted

in

size that

they

contain no hearing members. Such is the case

where the deaf

are

advanced in age and where the hearing

members

of

the

household

have died

or

moved

away.

In Old

Town

and

in

Lazy

Hill deaf

siblings

live alone with

each

other,

but

they have established

close

bonds with

certain

hearing neighbors.

Those

hearing neighbors,

for

their part,

have

acquired

an

advanced

competence in the

sign

language

(again

evidence

will be supplied

below).

Besides the hearing members

of

deaf households, there

are a larger number

of hearing acquaintances

of

the deaf.

These

hearing persons

do not interact with

the

deaf as

fre-

quently as do

the members

of deaf households,

but

never-

theless they

do work and play alongside

the

deaf

daily

or

weekly

or monthly. Some of

the acquaintances

are

peers and

intimate friends,

who

either

live near the deaf

or who

deal

with the

deaf daily.

Others are

casual

acquaintances,

who

know the

deaf but

do

not

interact

with them

so frequently.

Finally,

in

the outermost

ring of

the model

are the

persons

who

have knowledge of the

deaf

but do

not

interact with them.

To

recapitulate, every

set

of deaf siblings forms

the

core for a set

of

concentric

rings. The

hearing

who

occupy

the closest

ring

around the

core

are those

who interact

most

frequently

with the deaf.

They

seem to

have

acquired

greatest

proficiency

in PSL.

The hearing

in

the

outermost

rings

have

least

knowledge

of

the

sign

language.

For

every

such

set

of

deaf

siblings

on

Providence

Ishand

there

exists

a

similar

set

of

concentrically

organized

rings

of

hearing

persons.

In

the

commonplace

events

of

daily

life

the

different

concentrically

organized

sets

of

persons

interact

with

and

influence

one

another.

It

is

not

merely

the

deaf

of

a

village

who

interact

with

the

deaf

of

another

village,

but


8/25

Washabaugh

the deaf of one village interact with the

hearing

of different

levels

or circles of another

village, and the hearing

of one

village also

interact

with

the hearing

and deaf

of

another

village (Figure 2b).

Given

this complexity of interaction,

it seems

plausible

to argue

that

while the deaf-with-deaf

interaction

initiates

PSL,

deaf-with-hearing

interaction

contributes

significantly

to

its development .

Some

anecdotes will illustrate and flesh out this

model

of

PSL development.

First, I observed that the trans-

mission

of the

sign

language

material outward

from

the

deaf core

to the hearing rings

of

a village

can be

quite

rapid.

A research

assistant

and I spent the

better part

of

a day working with a deaf woman

unaccompanied

by any

other

deaf

or hearing person. We

struggled

with her to eli-

cit

from

her

some

metalinguistic

observations

on

her

lan-

guage.

While our efforts went

unrewarded, the

deaf woman

acquired during the

session the ASL

sign

NAME-there

being

no

equivalent sign

in

PSL-and

a

knowledge

of

how

to

use

it

appropriately.

Ten days

later we

observed

the

deaf woman's

hearing

brother interact

with her

deaf brother. The

hearing

brother,

without

my provocation,

employed

the sign

NAME;

the deaf

brother

responded

appropriately.

This

anecdote

sug-

gests

that some

hearing

members

of deaf

households

participate

in

the

earliest stages

of

sign language

construction

and

pro-

mote

the

transmission

of signs

to

the hearing

and

to

the deaf

alike.

The

preceding

anecdote

illustrates

the development

of

signing

as it moves

from

the

core

to

the

rings of

the concentric

circles.

But

signing

at the

core

is

itself

influenced

by the

hearing

persons

at

the

outer

rings.

The

observations

below

will

illustrate

the

manner

in

which

the

deaf

incorporate

into

their

signing

some material

drawn from

the

world

of the

hearing.

It

is

a case

that not

a few

signs employed

by

the

deaf

are

drawn

directly

from

the communications

of

the

hearing.

Signs

like

LIE

and

BAD

are

constituted

of

movements

of

the

mouth

that

imitate,

with

exaggeration,

the

movements

speakers

make

in pronouncing

the

words

lie

and

bad.

[Though Providence

is

politically

part of

Colombia,

its spoken

language

is an

English-based

pidgin

]

Second,

the

signs

FAMILY,

LENGTH,

and STINGY

are

but

a

few of the

signs

of

PSL

that

also

serve

as gesticulations

( emblems )

in

the

hearing

community.

It

is possible

that

these

gesticulations

of

the

hearing

were re-

coded

by

the deaf

and

incorporated

into

their

signing.


9/25

Sign

Language

Studies

24

The

significance

of these

anecdotes

and

in fact

of

the

whole

sociolinguistic

model shown

in

Figure

2b

is

that

al-

though

sign language

genesis

may

result from

deaf-with-deaf

interaction,

the development and

final

shape of

the

sign

lan-

guage cannot be understood

without

a consideration of

deaf-

with-hearing interaction.

The

target

.

The

foregoing

description

has

shown

that

the

hearing

play

a

significant

role

in

the

signing

community

of

Providence

Island.

The

ultimate

aim of

the sub-

sequent

description will

be to

reveal the

manner

in which the

hearing

acquire competence

in

PSL

syntax so as to

make clear

and

specific the nature of the contribution

of the hearing

to

the development

of PSL.

But it will

be necessary

to

preface

this study of the

acquisition of sign by the

hearing

with

a

brief

review of the general nature

of sign languages,

of

some

specific

problems in describing

sign

language structure,

and

of the

specific

character of

PSL.

The

acquisition of PSL, or

of any vernacular sign

lan-

guage,

by hearing

persons is problematic,

because

all

sign

language vernaculars

seem to

be organized according

to

principles

some of which are

unlike

those of spoken languages.

Sign language

vernaculars

generally

make greater

use of sim-

ultaneously

collocated

expressions than

do

spoken

languages

(Stokoe

1976); they make greater use of

iconic devices

(Fried-

man

1977);

greater use of

repetition

and

less use

of

redundancy

of

expression

than do spoken

languages

(Bellugi

&

Fischer

1972). In

regard to syntax, Fischer

1975) has shown that

ASL

makes

no

use of morphological

affixing

but frequent

use of

semantic

context,

verb

directionality,

object

incorporation,

and

word

order to disambiguate

sentences. I.

M.

Schlesinger

1970) has

argued

that

Israeli

sign language

makes no use

of

word

order

to disambiguate

sentences,

and Friedman

1976)

has

said

the

same

for ASL,

although

her emphasis

is

on

the

alternatives

to

word

order

and

case

marking

principles

that

are

employed

by

the

American

deaf

in

their

language.

2

This

review

of

literature

on

the distinctiveness

of

sign

language

organization

is

appropriate,

because

PSL

like

ASL

and

other

sign

languages

is

organized

according

to lin-

guistically

extraordinary

principles.

The

deaf

signers

of

Providence

Island

make

no

use

of morphological

affixing

or

word

order,

but

their

utterances

do

follow

a

Topic

Comment

format;

PSL

utterances

are

replete

with

repetition

and

make

ample

use

of

a

panoply

of

non-manual

and

context-dependent

devices

for

utterance disambiguation

(Washabaugh

i.p.

Wash-

abaugh

et al.

1978).


10/25


11/25

Sign

Language

Studies

24

verb

sign

JAIL,

because

this verb

sign

is one

that

lacks

a

directional

expression

and

it

takes

reversible

agents

and

patients

(Fischer

1975:

16f).

JAIL

is

the

sort

of verb

the

agent and

patient

of

which

could be

confused;

hence

utter-

ances

containing

the

verb

JAIL are good

testing grounds

for

a word-order

principle;

however,

in

no instance

is

there

any evidence

for such a word-order

principle.

Excerpt

(2)

occurred

in a

conversation between CB

from Southwest

Bay, her hearing brother,

who helped with

translations,

and

LA

of Rocky

Point.

Both CB

and LA

had

undergone

surgical operations at one time or another, and

at this

point

in

their

conversation they

began

talking

about

their experiences.

CB volunteered the information

that

her

father

would not allow

her to

undergo another operation.

(All translations are

arrived

at

through

advice from CB s

brother,

through

a

knowledge

of island

affairs,

as

well

as

through

observation of signed utterances.)

(2) (CB) DREAM INJECTION DREAM (LA)

OPERATE

DREAM

(CB)

DREAM LIGHT,

ME

PAPA GO

NO ME JAIL

ME GO

OPERATE NO PAPA JAIL ME LA)

SHE

JAIL OPERATE

NO SHE (CB) JAIL

PAPA

GO

OPERATE

NO (VT

7-8:

113)

The sign JAIL is used

four times

in this excerpt,

each

time

as a verb.

Two

of the four uses seem to

require an intransi-

tive reading (patient,

no agent):

ME JAIL and

HIM

JAIL both

mean

CB

will

be

jailed.'

In

the

phrase

JAIL PAPA,

the first

person patient

has been deleted;

PAPA in

this

utterance must

be

a specified

agent.

Thus,

in

the

first three

uses in this

excerpt, JAIL is preceded

by a

patient

sign

and/or

followed

by an

agent sign.

But

in the fourth use

of JAIL,

PAPA

JAIL

ME,

the

verb JAIL

is

preceded

by an agent

sign,

PAPA,

and followed

by an

index

that

indicates

the

patient.

This

same problematic

order, JAIL

+Patient,

appears

again

later

in

the

same

conversation.

In

(3)

LA

summarizes

CB's

plight, signing

that if

CB were to

fly

to

San Andres

for

an operation,

her

father

would

jail

her.

CB

adds

that

she

cannot

even

send

for

pills.

LA

reiterates

that

CB

cannot

write

for

pills

or

her

father

would

jail

her.

Both

lament

over

the

situation:

(3)

(LA)

SHE

THERE

FLY

GO

JAIL

SHE

OPERATE

PAPA

NO

NO

SHE

OPERATE

WHAT-TO-DO?

SHE

PAIN

(CB)

PILL


12/25

Washabaugh

NONE

PILL EAT

PAIN

LA) ME

SHE

TWO

PILL

GO PILL

WRITE

GO

-NO-

NO

JAIL

SHE WHAT-TO-DO?

(CB)

WHAT-TO-DO

DEAD

(VT 7-8:

170)

Here

as

in (2)

the agent,

PAPA,

is

not specified

and

the

patient

(SHE)

follows

the

verb JAIL.

These

two

uses,

and

the

previous

four

uses

of

JAIL

in (2), support

the claim

that

agents

and patients

can

either

precede

or

follow

the verb

JAIL,

or

that

the

grammar

of

PSL tolerates

either

an

S 0

order

or

an

0 S

order.

Close

inspection

of

these

sentences

may raise

sus-

picion

about

this

claim. All

the cases

in

which

the patient

follows

JAIL

seem

to

come

after

the specification

of a set

of

conditions.

In

(2)

there is

ME

GO

OPERATE

NO

PAPA

JAIL ME

('If

she goes

and flies, papa

will

jail

her');

also

PILL GO

PILL

WRITE

GO

NO

JAIL SHE

( CB

may

not go for or

write

for

pills,

else

(papa) will

jail her'). It may

well

be that the

problematic

sign

order JAIL

Patient

signals

a

result of

specified

conditions.

Some support

for this

'result of conditions

hypothesis

is apparent

in (4). Here

BT

of Rocky

Point

is

conversing

with

LA

and

CB

and

myself.

BT tells CB

that everyone in

Providence

is

lazy,

will

not work, drinks, smokes

grass, and steals.

He

adds that he neither drinks nor smokes for

fear

of being jailed.

(4)

(BT) ALL WORK STOP DRINK MONEY STEAL WORK STOP

DO-NOTHING

ALL

MONEY

STEAL

FIGHT

DRINK

ALL

DANCE

(CB) STEAL?

(BT)

ALL STEAL. DRINK

ME

NO

STAY

DRINK NO SMOKE-GRASS

ME

NO

JAIL

ME AFRAID

ME

(VT

8-8: 209)

Here again JAIL

ME

signifies 'they will jail

me and

follows

as the result

of

a

series

of specified

conditions.

As

in pre-

vious

utterances,

the

conditions contain

an N V

order

(i.e.

M

NO),

whereas the

results

are

expressed in

an

inverted

V N

order.

Excerpt

(5) however

raises

problems with

this

hypo-

thesis and

simultaneously

suggests

an alternative

hypothesis

to explain

the JAIL+

Patient

sign

order.

In (5)

LA

describes

the pernicious assault

by three young men

from

Rocky Point

on BT.

A rough

translation

of (5)

would be:

'Three

men

grabbed

him.

One of

them with

a

beard-the

one

whose

big

mother


13/25

Sign

Language

Studies

24

died

when

the

ship

went

down-was

grabbed

and

jailed.'

(5)

(IA)

MAN

THREE

GRAB HIM

BEARD

ONE

MAN

DEAD

SHIP

SINK

WOMAN

BIG HIM GRAB

JAIL,

HEAR YOU, JAIL HIM (VT 8-8: 139)

The

problem

raised

by (5)

is that

if

JAIL

HIM's

order

is

the result

of

some set

of

specified conditions, then why is

JAIL HIM preceded

immediately

by HIM

GRAB

JAIL?

The

result of conditions hypothesis

cannot

explain this

fact,

but

perhaps

an

afterthought hypothesis

is

more

appropriate.

In another

paper (Washabaugh in

press), I

note

that

at

the end of utterances

in PSL,

noun

signs

are often added

parenthetically

as clarifiers. Occasionally

verbs

are

paired

with these

afterthought

noun

signs, but

when

that

occurs,

the

phrase that results is placed

in

an inverted V

N order.

HEAR

YOU in

(5)

is typical

of such afterthought

phrases.

This

hypothesis might explain

all the

cases

of

JAIL

Patient,

since

in

all situations

the

V

+N

phrases

appear

at

or

near

the end

of an utterance.

But this hypothesis

is scotched

by

evidence from

ut-

terances

(6) and (7).

In (6), CB and

her

niece AB, both of

Southwest

Bay,

are conversing

at the

home of AB.

CB recounts,

with

great

enthusiasm,

a

tale

of horse-meat

sausage. A

rough

and ready translation of this

tale

goes like this: According

to a

telegraph

report,

a young man,

designated

earlier by

the

descriptive

sign

AFRO-HAIR,

was

thrown

in

jail for his

role in

putting horsemeat into

sausage

where

he

worked.

(6) (CB) TELEGRAM COME

TELEGRAM

SAY HORSE EAT

KNOW YOU

SAUSAGE EAT (AB)

HORSE

EAT

SAUSAGE

EAT

HORSE

EAT

(CB)

SAUSAGE EAT RADIO

FAR

GET-

OUT HIM

COME

JAIL

COME

LOOK ABOUT LOOK

SMELL

LOOK ABOUT

EAT SAUSAGE

GATHER

COW

NO

FEEL NO

SMELL NO

COOK

NO

SMELL

EAT STINK

(VT

8-8:

299)

The

parts

of

the

utterance

that

are

significant

for

our

con-

cerns

have

to

do

with

the

signs

EAT

and

SAUSAGE.

Used

twice

by

CB

in

mid-utterance,

the

phrase

is

once

ordered

SAUSAGE

EAT

and

later

EAT

SAUSAGE.

Neither

the

result

of

conditions

hypothesis

nor

the

afterthought'

hypothesis

will

explain

this

variation

in

sign

order.


14/25

Washabaugh

Again

in

(7) there

is

an inexplicable

variation

in sign

order.

Here

CB

of

Southwest

Bay

and

LA and BT

of Rocky

Point

are

talking about

BT's

favorite

subject,

work.

LA

in-

dicates

that BT's

old

father

does

not

work,

and

that

BT must

carry

water

down

from the

hills.

CB summarizes

the situation

for

her

brother.

(7)

LA)

PAPA

THERE

NOTHING

CARRY

AWAY HIM

ONE

-NO-

CARRY WATER

THERE

BOTTOM

TO TOP (CB)

WATER

THERE

(BT) PAPA SIT

ME

ONE WATER

THERE

CARRY

THERE

(VT

8-8:

288)

Where

LA

signs

HIM CARRY

WATER

in

mid-utterance, BT

signs ME WATER

CARRY in utterance-final

position.

This

will be a

sufficiently clear

demonstration

that

Verb

Patient

order

is

not explained

by

the position

of the phrase

in the

utterance

nor by

its

semantic

relation

to some

previously

specified

set

of

conditions.

Utterances

(2)

through

(7)

above provide

evidence

from

candidly signed

PSL

that agents

and patients

are not ordered

relative

to

verbs. Moreover,

the

preceding

analysis of

a

corpus

of forty-eight

rather formal utterances

elicited from

eight deaf

persons

has

shown

that agents and

patients

are

not ordered relative to

one another. In general then,

semantic

categories

are not distinguished

by their position in

PSL

utterances.

Given that no

specifically syntactic categories,

which could

be

ordered,

exist

in

PSL,

I

conclude

that

PSL

does

not

make

use of a word-order

principle.

The Topic-C omment

f

ormat. Word

order is not a

principle

employed

by

deaf signers

of PSL. But that

conclusion

should not

be mis-

interpreted to

mean that any

constituents

can

occupy

any

position

in a PSL utterance.

There

seems

to

be a discourse

principle, a

principle

that

has

to do with the

presentation

of

the utterance as a whole rather than

with

the specification

of

relationships

between utterance constituents, which

prin-

ciple inclines

signers

to place

verb

signs in

utterance-final

position (Li

&

Thompson

1976,

Washabaugh

in

press).

Such

a principle advocates, but does not require,

the

specification

of the topic

early

in the utterance.

The topic,

once speci-

fied, is

to be followed by a verbal

comment. Unlike

the


15/25

Sign

Language

Studies

24

syntactic

constituent,

Subject,

the

Topic

bears

no

marked

relationship

either

to

the verb sign or

to other noun

signs

in

the

utterance.

Instead

Topic performs

the

discourse

func-

tion

of

setting

a

spatial,

temporal,

or

individual

frame-

work

within which the

main

production

holds

(Li

& Thompson

1976:

464).

Such a

Topic-Comment

organization

is said

to

characterize

utterances

in ASL

(Friedman

1976:

142);

and the

evidence

from both

formal

elicited signing

as

well

as

casual

signing

points to

that same principle

of organization in

vernacular

PSL.

An

analysis

of the above-mentioned

corpus of forty-

eight paired utterances

elicited

from

eight

deaf

signers sug-

gests the presence

of a

Topic-Comment

principle

of utterance

organization. Specifically,

0.70 of the

forty-three codable

utterances

of the corpus

were verb

final utterances.

Where

verbs

are

final, noun signs

appear earlier in the utterance,

and

such

a manner of

utterance organization

is

consistent

with

the

Topic-Comment

discourse

principle.

Candid

PSL

signing corroborates

the claim

that

PSL

signers make

use of a Topic-Comment

principle

to

organize

their

utterances.

Utterances

(8) and

(9) each begin

with a

noun

sign

that has

no apparent

grammatical

role to

play in

the

proposition

that

follows.

Such

double

subject

utter-

ances (Li

& Thompson

1976:

468) are distinctive

earmarks

of

Topic-Comment

utterances.

(8) LONG

AGO COLD FAR PLANE SO-BIG,

NO

SO-BIG,

SO-BIG

MAN

COLD

FAR

STOUT

BLACK

SIDEBURNS ONE

CLEAR

TWO

DRUNK

DRIVE

TUMBLE

CRASH THERE

SAN

ANDRES

(r-19: 4)

'Long ago

from

the states

a

small

plane, two

men from the states,

one with black

sideburns,

the

other

with light skin,

flew while

drunk

and crashed

in

San Andres.'

(9)

SPLIT-LIP

INDEX

SPLIT-LIP,

MOTHER

SPOUSE

GONE

?)

DEAD

3

PILL

EAT

PILL

EAT EAT BELLY

WORK

DAY

ONE TWO

BABY

ABORT

DEAD

F-6:

4)

'About

this cleft-lipped

boy,

his

mother,

now

dead

and

father

gone,

took

pills

and

aborted

her

baby.'


16/25

Washabaugh

Repetition.

Besides

this Topic-Comment

organization,

vernacular

PSL

is

characterized

by repeti-

tiousness similar

to that

of

ASL

(see Stokoe

1973: 53).

Either

particular

signs or

combinations of signs

are

frequently

repeated

or

complemented

by additional

expressions.

In

the

corpus of forty-eight paired utterances

elicited

from eight

deaf signers,

forty-four utterances

were codable for repeti-

tiousness,

and

of those

forty-four

utterances

thirty 0.68)

contained signs that were repeated or

complemented

by

additional signs.

The communicative

advantage

to

be gained

from such

repetitiousness might not be immediately apparent. But a

reconsideration

of

(1),

page

199, will

show

that ambiguous

utterances

may

be distinguished

through

such

repetitiousness.

The

utterances

in

(1)

were elicited

with puppet

sequences

that involved

only

an action of

hitting.

The

utterances

that

describe that

hitting

action are

ambiguous,

because

the

signs

for

agent

and

patient

are

not

distinguishable;

however,

by

repetition of the noun

signs and the

addition of the

verb

sign

CRY

with

appropriate

noun

signs,

the signer provides

an

utterance-internal

context

that the

receiver can

use to

dis-

ambiguate

the

utterances.

Thusin

repeated

expressions,

cues

can be

laid down,

which

in the

absence

of other

dis-

ambiguating

devices,

facilitate

a proper interpretation

of

the

utterances.

In

summary,

deaf

signers

on Providence

Island

do not

make

use

of

a

word-order principle but

do

employ

a

Topic-

Comment format

in constructing

utterances, and

they do

em-

ploy

repetition

as one of

the

sorts

of

devices

for

distinguishing

ambiguous utterances.

Hearing

signers

.

The

contrasts

between

the

vernacular

sign

language

and the

spoken

lan-

guage

of

Providence

Island

have been

made

clear in

the

above

discussion.

Given

that

hearing

persons

play

a significant

role in

the

PSL

signing

community,

it is

reasonable

to

wonder

whether

the hearing

really

acquire

this

typologically

distinct

sign

language,

and

how they

acquire

it. Such

questions

about the

acquisition

of

the sign

language

by hearing

persons

are

not

only

reasonable,

they are

theoretically

well advised,

because

the

answers

to

them

will shed

light

on

the central

theoretical

question

of

the

nature

of the

human

virtue

for

language

acquisition.


17/25

Sign

Language

Studies

24

I

gathered

data

on the

signing abilities

of the hearing

by using

a formal elicitation

instrument. Thirty-three

hearing

persons

were

asked

to describe

in sign

the actions

in each

of eight sequences

portrayed

by hand

puppets. The hearing

persons

signed descriptions

of

the sequences

they

saw to

other

islanders-in

all but ten instances

to

deaf islanders-

who

had not seen the puppet sequences. The stimulus

sequences

are

described below:

1. Old

man

takes photo of black-bearded man.

2. Black man gives candy

to

black-bearded

man.

3. Black-bearded man takes photo of old

man.

4.

Black-bearded man gives candy

to

black

man.

5. Old man washes

face of

black

man.

6.

Black-bearded man

combs hair of

black man.

7. Black

man

washes face

of

old

man.

8. Black

man

combs hair

of black-bearded

man.

Two

comments on these sequences

are

in

order. First, most

of

the

actions in

these sequences are

such that they would

normally

be signed by verb

signs

that do not have vectoral

or directional qualities (GIVE is an exception) that

might

specify

the semantic relationship

between the noun signs

related to

the verbs. Also

when

such

verbs appear in an

utterance

with two noun

signs,

the

semantic

relationship

between the noun signs is

ambiguous,

since either noun

sign

could

serve

as patient

or

agent.

In

other

words,

nei-

ther sign

formation nor

semantic

context could

clarify

the

meaning

of any utterance

describing

these sequences in

PSL.

Second, the

stimulus

actions above

are

paired

so that

the

agent

in

1.

is the

patient

in

3., etc.

Accordingly

this

elici-

tation

method

sets

up

a

rather tightly

controlled

test

of a

signer's

ability

to

produce

contrasting

utterances.

The

264

utterances

elicited

by

this

procedure

are

predictably

variable.

For

any

particular

stimulus

action

of

the puppets,

some

hearing

signers

produce

curt

three-sign

SVO

utterances;

others

produce

repetitious,

verb-final

utterances.

The

proximate

objective

of

the

following

analysis

will

be

to

discover

a

patterning

in

this

variation,

with

the

expectation

that

such

a

pattern

will

provide

clues

about

the

process

of

sign

acquisition

by

hearing

persons.

Patterns

of

variation

can

be

discovered

by

distinguish-

ing

groups

of

hearing

signers

and

by

discovering

a

correlation


18/25

Washabaugh

between

such

groups

and a

type of

signing

variation.

Hearing

signers

may

be grouped

according

to any

number

of

factors,

age, sex,

residence,

etc.;

and

there is

ample

sociolin-

guistic

documentation

for

the

correlation

of such

factors

with

spoken

language

variation.

So it

is likely

that

e.g.

age, sex,

and residence

are

factors

that

contribute

to the

variability

in

the

corpus

of

264

utterances.

However,

I

will

sidestep

these

factors and

concentrate

on

one factor

that is

likely to be

indicative of

differential

success in

the

acquisition of the target

language. The

term

for

this

factor

is

distance.

Schumann

1978: 76)

argues that

language

acquisition

in

general will be stalled if

the learner is socially

and/or

psychologically

distant

from

the speakers

of

the

target

lan-

guage.

Distance itself is a

product

of political and

social inequality, of lack of social cohesiveness, of

the

absence

of

residential

contiguity, and of unfavorable

atti-

tudes

of

the

groups toward

each

other

(ibid.:

77).

In

sum,

distance

subsumes

a complex

of factors that inhibit real

communication

between the language

learner and the

users

of the target language (ibid.: 107).

In the

Providence

Island

community,

where

the deaf

are

the users

of

the target language, hearing

acquaintances

of

the

deaf

are

socially

and psychologically

more

distant

from

the

deaf

than

are the hearing

members of households

containing

deaf

persons.

The hearing

acquaintances

of

the

deaf

should therefore

be

less

advanced in

their

acquisition

of

the sign

language

than

the

hearing

members

of

deaf

house-

holds.

Accordingly,

these

two

groups

of

language

learners

should

vary

in

their

signing competence.

The

hearing

acquain-

tances

of

the deaf

should

show

that

they

have

acquired

fewer

of

the distinguishing

features

of vernacular

PSL than

do

the

hearing

members of

deaf

households.

To

test

this

hypothesis

I examined

the

patterns

of

vari-

ation

between

the

utterances

of these

two groups

with

regard

to

the

placement

of verb

signs

and

the

repetition

of

signs.

According

to

the

hypothesis

one

would

predict

that

the

char-

acteristics

of

vernacular

PSL

would

be

more

clearly

apparent

in

the

signing

of

hearing

members

of

deaf

households

than in

the

signing

of

hearing

acquaintances

of

deaf

persons.

Tables

1

and

2

show

that

the

prediction

is

supported

by

the

evidence.

Hearing

members

of deaf

households

employ

verb-final

utter-

ances

in

0.53

instances

as

contrasted

with

0.29

for

the

hearing

acquaintances

of

deaf

persons.

Also

hearing

members


19/25

Sign

Language

Studies

24

of deaf households

repeated

at

least

one element

in 0.44 of

their

utterances as

contrasted

to 0.14

repetitions

in the

signed utterances

of

hearing acquaintances.

While these frequencies

are

clear enough

to

demon-

strate

a

tendency

in

the variation,

they become even

stronger

if we adjust the membership

in

the two

groups

according to

the sociolinguistic description

made

earlier. Specifically,

we noted

that

some hearing

members of

deaf households may

be

too

young

to

enter

into

real

communication with

the

deaf

members

of

their

own

households.

Such

may

be the

case for hearing signer 15,

who

is the young niece of a

mature deaf

man.

It

is

important

to

note that signer

15

uses

verb-final

utterance

pattern and repeats

formatives

only

0.25

of

the

time.

It is

likely that signer 15

has

had

no

greater

contact

with deaf

signers than

have

many hearing

acquaintances of deaf

persons,

and

so she should

be re-

classified

as a

hearing acquaintance. On

the other

hand,

certain

hearing neighbors

of

the

deaf

have

befriended

deaf

persons who live alone

or with only

deaf companions.

In

the

process those

hearing neighbors seem

to

have

acquired

an

advanced competence in

signing. Signers 18 and

#29

are

twq

such persons,

and

their high

frequencies

of

verb-

final

utterances and

repetition

give witness

to

that fact.

These

two

signers

have as

much contact

with deaf

signers

as do

many hearing members

of deaf households and so

should

be reclassified.

These

adjustments

in the groups

strengthen

the

corre-

lation between

competence

in signing

and

distance

as

measured by

household

membership-both

correlations

are

significant beyond a 0.001 level of probability.

4

With the

group

membership

adjusted,

hearing members

of deaf

households

employ

verb-final

utterances

0. 64 of the

time

compared

to 0.23

for the

hearing

acquaintances

of deaf

persons.

And

they repeated formatives

0.43

of the time

compared

to

0.13

of

the

time

for the

hearing

acquaintances.

The

signing

of the

hearing

members

of

deaf house-

holds

with

its

rather

high

frequency

of

verb-final

utterances

and

with

its

repetitiousness

is

like

the

vernacular

signing

of

the

deaf.

But

that

is not

to

say

that

hearing

members

of

deaf

households

have

acquired

all other

characteristics

of

vernacular

PSL

to

an

equally

advanced

degree.

When

word

order

is

considered,

the

picture

becomes

a

good

deal

more

complicated.


20/25

Hearing

Members

of Deaf Households

Signer

Frequency

Hearing Acquaintances

of the

Deaf

Signer

Frequency

Hearing

Members

of

Deaf Households

Signer

Frequency

Hearing Acquaintances

of the Deaf

Signer

Frequency

25

1/8

26

1/7

27 0/7

28

0/8

29

3/8

30

3/8

32

2/8

33 1/8

Table

1 .

Frequencies

of

Verb-Final

format

in utterances

of two

groups

of

hearing

signers.

Table 2

Frequencies of

Sign

repe-

tition in

utterances

of two

groups

of hearing

signers.


21/25

Sign

Language

Studies

24

The deaf signers

of Providence

Island

do not

make use

of a word-order

principle.

This observation

is

based on the

observations

already

made on the

frequency of

orderings

of

agents

and patients

in

a

corpus

of utterances

by deaf

signers.

That

frequency, 0.57,

was only slightly

above chance. If

this

same

measure is applied to

the corpus of utterances

produced by

hearing signers,

it is

found that as

a

group,

the

thirty-three

hearing

signers placed

agent signs before

patient signs in

0.99

of their utterances. Nor

is there

any

difference in this

frequency between

the signing of hearing

acquaintances

and members

of deaf households. Both

groups

placed

agents before

patients in 0.98

of their utterances.

Thus the

corpus of utterances elicited

from hearing

signers

provides

clear and unmistakable

support

for an

observation

that

the

hearing signers-all

the hearing signers-of

Provi-

dence

Island make use

of a

word-order

principle in the organ-

ization of

their

utterances,

despite

the fact

that the deaf

signers do not.

Conclusion.

The

foregoing

observations

can

be

used

to

identify

certain stages in the acqui-

sition of

PSL

by hearing

signers.

First,

the utterances

of the

hearing acquaintances of the deaf suggest that the

early

stages of sign language

acquisition involve replacement

of

constituents

of spoken

language

by

signs

of

PSL. The rhe-

torical

structure

of

the spoken

language

utterances

is kept

by

these signers:

verbs

are

placed

in

the

middle of

their

utterances,

and

the

succinctness

of

spoken

language

utter-

ances

is maintained.

As

acquisition

advances,

the

complex

and

general

features

of

PSL utterance

organization

are

acquired:

the

hearing

signers

acquire

a verb-final

format

and

the

characteristic

repetitiousness

of vernacular

PSL.

But

word

order,

a

most

basic

feature

of the

spoken

language

structure,

seems

to

be

least

available

for

replacement

by a

sign

language

organizing

principle

in

the

process

of

sign

language

acquisition.

It

is possible that

once

the hearing have

acquired

in

their

first

language

a

word-order

principle-or

perhaps

any

sort

of

general

autonomous

syntactic

principle;

they

cannot

dispense

with

that

principle,

regardless

of

the

nature

of

the

target

language

to

be

acquired.

In

the

specific

case

of

PSL,

the

hearing

signers

seem

unable

to

dispense

with

the

word

order

of

spoken

language

and

replace

it

with

the

ensemble

of

context-dependent

syntactic

devices

that

disambiguate

the


22/25

sh b ugh

utterances

of

vernacular

PSL.

It

is

as

if

autonomous

syntactic

principles

like

word

order

and

context-dependent

syntactic

devices,

such

as

those

in

PSL,

constitute

distinctive

roads

that

can

be

taken

in

language

acquisition.

These

roads

may

be

so

fundamentally

distinctive

that

having

selected

the

road

of

autonomous

syntax,

human

beings

cannot

go

back

and

recover

the

road

not taken.

NOTES

1

The

data

in

this

paper

were

gathered

during

the

spring

of

1977

and

summer

of

1978.

The

fieldwork

was

suppor-

ted

by

the National

Science

Foundation

(Grant

BNS

76-

80056).

I

am

grateful

to

the

Center

for

Latin

America,

Uni-

versity

of

Wisconsin,

Milwaukee,

for

ancillary

funds

for

research

assistance

and

for

travel

to present

an

earlier

version

of

this

paper

at

the

Linguistic Society

of America

Conference

in

Boston,

1978.

I am

grateful

to

Donnie

Dean

and Lynne

Goldstein

for

their

technical

assistance,

to

William

Stokoe

for

his

comments

and

criticism,

and

to

Cathy

Washabaugh

for

her assistance

in

gathering

data

and

editing

the

final

manuscript.

Mostly

I

am

grateful

to

the

people of Providence

Island

for

their

hospitality

and

generosity.

2

These

descriptions

have

revealed

some of

the

distin-

guishing

features

of vernacular

sign languages.

But

in

so doing

they have

uncovered

a problem

that should

be

mentioned.

If

sentence organization

in

sign languages

is

founded

on principles that

are

distinct

from those underlying

sentence organization

in spoken languages,

then

it will be

necessary

to

redefine

the

notion

of

sentence in sign

language

(see Baker & Padden 1978:

35). More

specifically, if princi-

ples

other

than

case

marking and

word order are

used to

or-

ganize

constituents

in a signed sentence, then the

boundaries

of such signed

sentences

cannot even be set

until the complete

set

of

such principles is made

explicit.

Lacking

an

explan-

ation of

the principles

that relate constituents,

one could not

determine where one

sentential unit

in

a discourse

ends and

where another begins. A number of sign

linguists

are

working

at the task

of

identifying the syntactic principles

employed in

vernacular sign

languages

and also at identifying extra-linguistic


23/25

Sign

Language

Studies

24

cues

that might

help to

define

sentential

units

(Covington

1973,

Baker & Padden 1978,

Grosjean & Lane 1977,

Liddell

1978), but

at this

point no

one has

claimed to

have

discovered

a set of

features that can segment

signed utterances into

signed

sentences unequivocally.

Until

such

time as

defini-

tive syntactic principles

or cues

are

described,

sign

linguists

must

continue

to

use gross features

to

isolate sentential

units

(e.g.

the

return

of hands

to rest position;

Stokoe 1973:

5) or

continue

to deal with syntax in

such a

way that the

question

of sentence

boundaries will

not

be

raised.

I have tried

in

this paper

to

describe

some

of the features

of

PSL syntactic

organization without assuming

more

than

a

rough

knowledge

of PSL sentence

boundaries.

Accordingly, I will

refer

in

this

paper to the

characteristics

of PSL utterances rather

than of

PSL sentences.

3

The

interlinear

elements

in

utterances

(3), (7),

and (9)

are

glosses

for

non-manual

expressions that

co-occurred

with

the

manual

sign glossed

directly

above.

4

A t-test was

used

to

measure

the variance

of sign

charac-

teristics

between

the two groups.

The

results are

as

follows:

For the

variance

in

verb finality

between

nine

hearing

members

of

deaf

families

and

24

hearing

acquaintances

of

deaf

persons,

t

= -4.4824,

with

a

significance

exceeding

0.001;

for the

variance

in

repetitiousness

between

nine

hearing

members

of

deaf families

and

24

hearing

acquaintances

of

deaf

persons,

t

= -4.1890,with

a

significance

exceeding

0.003.

The

dependent

variable

data

consist

of

ratios

of actual

occurrences

(of

verb-final

format

or

of

repetition)

to

possible

occurrences.

An

abnormal

distribution

of

those

ratios

within

samples

could

not

be

verified

by

tests

for

skewness

and

kurtosis.

REFERENCES

Baker,

Charlotte,

&

Carol

Padden

1978

Focusing

on

the

Non-Manual

Components

of

American

Sign

Language,

in

Understanding

Lan-

guage

through

Sign

Language

Research,

Siple

ed.

(New

York,

Academic

Press),

pp.

27-58.


24/25

Washabaugh

213

Bellugi,

Ursula,

&

Susan

Fischer

1972

A

Comparison

of

Sign

Language

and

Spoken

Lan-

guage,

Cognition,

1,

173-200.

Covington,

Virginia

1973

Juncture

in

American

Sign

Language,

Sign

Language

Studies

2,

29-38.

Fischer,

Susan

1975

Influences

on

Word

Order

Change

in

American

Sign

Language,

in Word

Order

&

Word

Order

Change,

C.N.Li

ed.

(Austin,

Univ.

of

Texas

Press),

pp.

3-20.

Friedman,

Lynn

1976

The

Manifestation

of

Subject

and

Topic

in

American

Sign

Language,

in

Subject

&

Topic,

C.N.Li

ed.

(New

York,

Academic

Press),

pp.

127-148.

ed.

1977

On

the

Other

Hand

(New

York,

Academic

Press).

Grosjean,

Francois,

&

Harlan

Lane

1977

Pauses

and

Syntax

in American

Sign

Language,

Cognition

5,

101-117.

Li,

Charles,

& Sandra

Thompson

1976

Subject

&

Topic:

A New

Typology

of

Language,

in

Subject

&

Topic,

Li

ed. (NY,

Academic

Pr.), 457-489.

Liddell,

Scott

1978

Non-Manual

Signs and

Relative

Clauses in

Ameri-

can

Sign Language,

in

Understanding

Language

through

Sign Language

Research,

Siple

ed.

(New

York,

Academic

Press), pp.

59-90.

Schein,

Jerome

D.

1968

The

Deaf

Community

(Washington,

DC,

Gallaudet

College

Press).

Schlesinger,

I.

M.

1970

The

Grammar

of

Sign

Language

& the

Problem

of

Language

Universals,

in

Biological

&

Social

Factors

in Psycholinguistics,

Morton

ed.

(Urbana,

University

of

Illinois

Press), pp. 98-121.


25/25

Sign

Language

Studies

24

Schumann,

John

1978 The Pidginization

Process:

A Model

for Second

Language

Acquisition

(Rowley,

MA,

Newbury House).

Stokoe, William

1973

Sign

Syntax

and Human Language

Capacity, Florida

Foreign

Language

Reporter,

Spring/Fall,

pp. 3-6

&

52-53.

1976 Sign

Language

Autonomy, in

Origins

& Evolution

of

Language

&

Speech,

Harnad

&

Steklis

eds.

(New

York, NY Academy

of Sciences),

pp. 505-513.

Washabaugh,

William

in

pr The Manu-Facturing

of a

Language,

Semiotica.

- - -

- -, James

Woodward,

&

Susan

DeSantis

1978 Providence Island Sign Language: A Context-De-

pendent Language, Anthropological Linguistics

20 3),

95-109.

Woodward, James

1978a Attitudes toward

Deaf

People on

Providence

Island:

A

Preliminary Study,

Sign

Language

Studies

18, 40-68.

1978b

Attitudes

toward

Providence Island

Sign

Language.

Unpublished

MS,

Gallaudet College,

Washington, DC.

-

-

-

-

-,

S. DeSantis,

&

William

Washabaugh

in

pr

Getting

Back

to

Nature:

Unhomogenized

Linguistic

Analysis,

Selected

Papers of the

1975-1976

NWAVE

Conferences

(Washington,

DC,

Georgetown

U.

Pr.).

William

Washabaugh

is

an

Assistant

Professor

in the

anthro-

pology

department

of

the

University

of

Wisconsin,

Milwaukee.

His

master's

degree

is

from

the

University

of

Connecticut

1970)

and

his Ph.D.

from

Wayne

State

University

1974).

His

studies

of

Latin

Americans

have

taken

him

both to the

Caribbean

and to

the

urban

and

rural

settings

to

which

they

emigrate.

His

research

interest

is

focused

on

culture

and

language

in

changing

societies.

24.Washabaugh Hearing and Deaf Signers Providence Island

Documents

Transcript of 24.Washabaugh Hearing and Deaf Signers Providence Island