Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b6zl4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-06T08:11:50.464Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Ceil Lucas, Robert Bayley, & Clayton Valli, in collaboration with Mary Rose, Alyssa Wulf, Paul Dudis, Susan Schatz, & Laura Sanheim, Sociolinguistic variation in American Sign Language. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press, 2001. Pp. xvii, 237, appendices, index. Hb $55.00.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 December 2002

Richard J. Senghas
Affiliation:
Anthropology/Linguistics, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, CA 94928-3609, Richard.Senghas@sonoma.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Sociolinguistic variation in American Sign Language is the successful result of applying sociolinguistic theory and methodology originally developed for spoken languages to American Sign Language (ASL). The product of several years of study conducted by a team of researchers, this book is more than just an exercise; both expected and unexpected findings are presented, thereby confirming and advancing the sociolinguistics of signed languages in particular and of language in general. Lucas and Valli bring to this work extensive experience with sign language linguistics; they are joined by Bayley, who is known for his work on Tejano English and Spanish variation among immigrants of Mexican descent. The statistical findings provide the necessary bridge between context and environment, on the one hand, and internal constraints, on the other, to explain the range of variation represented at phonological, syntactic, and lexical levels in ASL. Explicitly building on Weinrich, Labov & Herzog's notion of orderly heterogeneity (14, 193–94; cf. Weinrich, Labov & Herzog 1968), the book provides useful examples and analysis for sign language linguists, and it would do well as a source for graduate and advanced undergraduate courses where materials beyond a primer of sociolinguistics are needed. For those more established in the field, the authors respectfully (and graciously) challenge several frequently cited findings concerning variation in ASL, such as Woodward & DeSantis' (1977) claims about negative incorporation and Liddell & Johnson's (1989) explanations for phonological variation in forms of the sign deaf.

Type
REVIEW
Copyright
Cambridge University Press