Talk:List of sign languages

Ugh, they need to come up with a signal International Sign Language

There is a minority of deaf people, and those able to practiCe sign language and to have sooo many variants will only hinder the amalgamation and cooperation of the deaf community and affiliated institutions.

-G

Gestuno. — kwami (talk) 07:52, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

This opinion is ignorant for many of the same reasons that it is ignorant to say that "everyone should just speak English." While I'm all for international Deaf solidarity, it is not appropriate to ignore, belittle, or disrespect other people's cultures and languages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.41.83.121 (talk) 15:19, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Somali Sign Language

SoSL ---> LIS -> LSF -> BSL --SurdusVII (talk) 08:47, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Hawai'i

Hawai'i is listed under Asia and not America. Any particular reason for that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stubborn Myth (talk • contribs) 05:26, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Great article but it's missing 'prison sign'

This is an amazingly well informed article on sign languages, but it's missing one. When I was in prison we used a language to sign to people we could see but not hear - like in the cafeteria when you see someone across the room and needed to quickly convey (or pass on) a message. I knew it was different from ASL because my wife had taught me some, and this wasn't the same. Just like ASL though, it had letters as well as words. Some of it I could tell came from gang signs, but not much. I'm positive that something similar is used in most prisons across America (if not the world). Sorry I can't help out with more info, but I'll come back and check this page soon. I didn't add it to the article because I don't feel like I know enough about this language since I only used it for a few months. Rich M. 71.220.146.42 (talk) 16:33, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Two questions: Could you hold a conversation in it, or was it limited to rudimentary messages? Is is common across prisons, or different in each one? — kwami (talk) 23:09, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Kwami has brought up a very important point: is prison sign a true language, or just a basic signalling system? For example, can users of prison sign communicate (not just by spelling) an abstract sentence like "I hope that the people I have hurt will forgive me"? If so, then it is a language. Otherwise, such a system is not a true language. Pete unseth (talk) 00:17, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Yiddish Sign Language

There is an ISO 639-3 code yds for Yiddish Sign Language, so we cannot dismiss it without some investigation. I will take it upon myself to contact the ISO 639-3 people and see what evidence, if any, they have in their files. If they have solid evidence, I will summarize it here, then we can simply keep Yiddish Sign Language in this list. If they have no solid evidence, then we can delete it here and I will also file a change request with ISO 639-3, asking them to delete Yiddish Sign Language. So, in the meantime, I gently ask that Yiddish Sign Language be retained in the list for a couple of weeks while I check it out. I hope this is reasonable. Pete unseth (talk) 12:24, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi Pete. I emailed you about this. — kwami (talk) 00:54, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

As of January 2015, yds as the code for Yiddish Sign Language has been retired by ISO 639-3, on the grounds that there is no evidence that it ever existed. See references on the Spurious languages page. AlbertBickford (talk) 22:29, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

(Corrected link) AlbertBickford (talk) 20:24, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Missing?

Thsi needs to add Bhutanese Sign Language the Country of Bhutan's local sign alngauge that they have there which may have influences from Tibet and possibly nepal or india among their local signing from education, home sign and some interaction among the Deaf.

I was under the impression that there were more native american sign languages

and what do we display about dead sign languages?

(regarding whatever that guy said about int'l sign. gestuno is an undead sign language. (perhaps he's not experience being Deaf enough to understand how the multiple levels of visual communication work?) (more than pidgin, signing exact, gesture, and different degrees of linguistic complexity of both lexicon & grammar.), Deaf can communicate visually thru the different levels of their sign. and their grammar and phonology will be different no matter what. (and their visual comprehension both liberates them into visual communication, yet doesn't necessitate having the same visual understandings.) it's like trying to force people to stop being local. quit having accents or creating new local vocab or exclusivising things. and it's belligerent to the fact of how our language and cultural linguistics and needs are diverse and it is among the still persistent connectedness that can be achieved despite and due to the differences challenging us. p.s. gestures across the world will persist so we can't expect one world sign language to be acting against their locality. p.s. humans, (foremost being the Deaf) are local, person to person, (despite infinitesimal number of tech advances delusions.))108.179.147.121 (talk) 23:01, 26 November 2014 (UTC) chuckdub

Provide a WP:RS for Bhutanese SL, and we'll add it -- and create an article. — kwami (talk) 00:06, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Found some minimal info, barely enough to confirm that it exists. Created stub. — kwami (talk) 03:10, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

What should be done about extinct sign languages?

Such extinct deaf sign languages as Martha's Vineyard Sign Language have been deleted? Is there a way to properly include them in this article? Pete unseth (talk) 18:30, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

They haven't been deleted. — kwami (talk) 00:03, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Add ISO 639-3 codes?

I wonder if it would help if we add a column to these tables for a language's ISO 639-3 code, when it has one. It seems rather odd that when we use those codes in so many places in WP, we haven't used them here. Of course, a lot of sign languages don't have ISO codes, but this will be one way of calling attention to that fact. BTW, I have a readily-available list, already sorted by continent and language name, so it would be fairly easy for me to do this. In other words, if others agree, I'm happy to be the one to do the grunt-work. Ping me if you have comments. AlbertBickford (talk) 23:11, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Not sure I see the point. We used to use ISO codes in a lot of family articles, and this page, because we didn't have individual articles on the languages. I've been removing them as language articles were created. Other editors have been removing them too; the lack of objection over several years constitutes silent consensus. The only place I can think of where we still use them is spurious language (because many of those "languages" still do not have articles) and in the list of artificial languages that mentions Kotava and Romanova, whose articles have been deleted as not notable. If we restore them here, why not add them to thousands of family articles? I don't see any advantage in doing that. — kwami (talk) 00:11, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

OK, I didn't know about that history. I'm fine with leaving them out. AlbertBickford (talk) 03:30, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Tijuana Sign Language

(Continuing the discussion #how many sign languages?) ...and about the existence of "Tijuana Sign Language": as far as I know, that was a pure mistake in Ethnologue based on hearsay. In a letter to the Ethnologue editor (Barbara Grimes) in the mid-1980s, I mentioned that a Deaf colleague of mine had told me that the sign language in Tijuana was "different". I was surprised when the next edition of Ethnologue included "Tijuana Sign Language". I objected that there was no reliable evidence that such a language existed, and it was then taken out of a subsequent edition. But, unless someone has come up with better evidence than that it appeared once in Ethnologue, it should be regarded as spurious. AlbertBickford (talk) 22:41, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

(BTW, one of the positive benefits of Ethnologue depending on ISO 639-3 is that these sorts of misunderstandings and mistakes no longer happen.)

Looking further, I see that Tijuana Sign Language is in this list and it has its own article. However, the only sources cited in its article are ones that are not (in this case) independent of Ethnologue. So, this seems to have been a scholarly mistake (that sadly I had a role in, although I won't claim it as *my* mistake) that persists despite the fact that it has been corrected by the original source. I recommend:

• • Tijuana Sign Language be added to the Spurious Languages page.
  • Tijuana Sign Language be deleted from this list
  • The article on Tijuana Sign Language be recommended for deletion, and replaced by a redirect pointing to Spurious Languages.

Before I do so, I want @Kwami: to comment, in case he knows of any better sources. AlbertBickford (talk) 22:50, 26 January 2015 (UTC), revised AlbertBickford (talk) 23:03, 26 January 2015 (UTC), corrected links AlbertBickford (talk) 20:28, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Sounds good, if you can explain Wittmann (1991). Was he just guessing, based on TSL's appearance in Ethn? I've noticed that Wittmann did not seem very reliable, but if he was making claims like that on such poor data, we really need to be careful using him. (Though he did liberally sprinkle his claim with question marks.)

We should also review incoming links. Most will be from the template, which I'll edit now, so we can see if any remain. (It can take a while for 'what links here' to update.) Deleted from Deaf-community sign language, Mexican Sign Language, Languages of Mexico. FYI in case we need to restore it.

[Yikes! I just looked at our Wittmann article, and the supposed Seselwa French creole with an "exotic Bantu-like look" was Swahili! And the error's been there since 2007.] — kwami (talk) 00:25, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Okay, looks like it only remains here and at sign language, under a summary of Wittmann. — kwami (talk) 03:20, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

BTW, you don't need to recommend the TSL article for deletion. If you're comfortable with contradicting Wittmann, then just change it to a redirect. — kwami (talk) 03:25, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Response to @Kwami:: With regard to Wittmann (1991), I have only recently learned enough French to read the paper, and haven't done any more than skim it yet, so I can't comment on its reliability overall. But, I note that its only mention of Tijuana Sign Language gives no references other than Ethnologue (1988), so I'm guessing that's the only information he had at his disposal. Further, the only piece of information that didn't come from Ethnologue was the label "Prototype", which doesn't tell a whole lot. So, in this case, I'd say this reference provides no support to the existence of such a language.

Now, knowing the nature of the border region, it is possible that there is some creolization going on between ASL and LSM in Tijuana, but as far as I know (and I'm in regular contact with people who research LSM), no linguist has actually gone there to check it out. So, I'm not saying that there isn't a distinct variety of sign language there, but simply that the available evidence provides no support for a claim that such a language exists, and hence it shouldn't be included in Wikipedia except as a spurious language.

I'm afraid I don't know how to change the TSL article to a redirect; can you point me to instructions? Or, if you just want to do it, that's fine with me. AlbertBickford (talk) 03:28, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

I did add TSL to the spurious languages page, but had to add a new section to do it. Feel free to do something else if you want. AlbertBickford (talk) 03:42, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm merging the sections, because TSL appears in Wikipedia:WikiProject Languages/Primary language names in Ethnologue 11. Or, is that actually the list from Ethnologue 10? My source wasn't too clear. (If so, we can put it in a section for removed from the 11th ed.) — kwami (talk) 06:02, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

I don't actually have a copy to check, but if 1992 was the 12th ed., then 1988 would have been 11th ed., I'm pretty sure. And, I'm almost certain that 1988 was the first edition that listed sign languages at all. So, what you did is right. I just wasn't thinking straight. AlbertBickford (talk) 18:51, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Korean and Argentine Sign Langauges

There were recent edits that linked Korean Sign Language and Argentine Sign Language. Is this vandalism? Or is this a surprising historical link? Pete unseth (talk) 21:08, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

From what I know about those two languages, I would be *very* surprised if there was any historical connection. Korean Sign Language has a lot of things in common with other East Asian sign languages, and Argentine has commonalities with Paraguay, Chile, and Uruguay, but what I've seen of Paraguayan SL looks nothing like Japanese, Korean, or Chinese. So, I'm guessing vandalism, or someone who doesn't know what they're talking about. At a minimum, let's challenge it as unsourced. AlbertBickford (talk) 19:19, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

OIC, it's already been reverted. Fine--once I looked at the actual changes, they looked more like vandalism. AlbertBickford (talk) 19:19, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of sign languages. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100910070529/http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/LEIS/2002/L10436.htm to http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/2002/L10436.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:58, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Black American Sign Language needs to be on this list

Someone here keeps reverting my edit. I get it that BASL is a dialect. If we are going to be so pedantic as to keep BASL off this list just because the title of this page is "List of sign languages", I suggest we change the title to "List of sign languages and dialects". Many of the sign languages on this list are dialects of each other to begin with. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Singaporeano (talk • contribs) 02:37, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Which languages on this list do you consider to be dialects of other languages? AlbertBickford (talk) 03:39, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

I have the same question. If there are other entries that clearly are dialects they should be removed. But we need reliable sources, not just an opinion. Sundayclose (talk) 03:47, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Here's an idea to consider: Lot's of times, when people know about a sign language variety, they don't realize that it is actually a dialect of another sign language. So, if we don't list the dialect names on this page, they won't be able to find it by the name they know. In those cases where names like BASL are widely-known (which is getting a fair amount of buzz at the moment in the U.S. press and some social media platforms), could we include a new column in the tables for names of prominent dialects that are known by names other than the name of the language as a whole? (Some of these dialects might even have separate Wikipedia articles.) I wouldn't suggest trying to be exhaustive in that column, but this would provide a way of accommodating Singaporeano's concerns while still maintaining the primary focus of the page on languages. AlbertBickford (talk) 17:23, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

One thing to remember, though: Deciding whether two varieties are separate languages or dialects of the same language can often be controversial, and even experts and reliable sources are not going to fully agree on some situations. This is an area of discussion that may generate more heat than light. So, I encourage everyone to be civil as we explore the various issues. AlbertBickford (talk) 17:23, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

@AlbertBickford: Thanks for that suggestion; it is something to consider. Although it is clear that BASL is a dialect, for most other sign languages I would have no idea about what might be considered a dialect. You make a good point about the controversies. I would suggest that we could conservatively add dialects in the "Notes" column, but only with a citation to a reliable source unless it is well sourced in the dialect's article. For BASL it is sufficiently sourced in the BASL article. If there is controversy described in the dialect's article, we should not add to this article. Per WP:BRD, if a dialect is added and someone later sources a controversy, it can be removed and discussed here. I'll be bold and add Black American Sign Language as a dialect, but if anyone disagrees it's fine to remove it and we can discuss. Sundayclose (talk) 18:29, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Auxiliary Sign Languages

Recently Danachos made some deletions from the Auxiliary Sign Languages on the rationale that they are full languages in their own right. This change points out a problem with the conception of Auxiliary Sign Languages. The assumption appears to have been that if a sign language is developed and used by hearing people, as an auxiliary to their normal mode of communication with a spoken language (e.g. when speech is not possible, for whatever reason), that it is not a fully developed language. Yet, it appears that aboriginal sign languages in Australia, Plains Indian Sign Language in North America, and perhaps others, although primarily used by hearing people, are claimed by some to be fully developed languages. There is also a question as to whether deaf people were involved in their creation and transmission, in which case they are perhaps better classified as shared signing communities (i.e. "village sign languages"). If so, then the problem disappears; we simply list them in the Deaf Sign Languages section. But, if there are truly fully-developed sign languages used almost exclusively by hearing people, then we have no natural place to put them. Certainly we would want to distinguish such situations from such things as Baby Sign. But, before I make any changes, I wanted to raise the issue with those watching this page, to see what other editors may think. AlbertBickford (talk) 02:15, 18 January 2021 (UTC)