Siguiendo a Fusellier-Souza (2004), los investigadores de lingüística de lenguas de señas pueden organizarse en dos grandes grupos: (i) aquellos que creen que las lenguas de señas deben ser idénticas a las lenguas orales y que, en consecuencia, las investigan tomando como punto de partida los fenómenos y categorías formulados previamente para estas últimas; y (ii) aquellos que creen que las lenguas de señas, en tanto sistemas de comunicación viso-espaciales, pueden involucrar mecanismos y fenómenos distintos de los registrados en las lenguas orales. En este artículo presento argumentos a favor de una lingüística de la diferencia, mostrando algunos problemas que surgen de la perspectiva tradicional (basada en la equivalencia) los cuales pueden ser abordados desde una postura rupturista, de cara a un mayor reconocimiento de las lenguas de señas como sistemas de comunicación ricos, complejos y diferentes.AbstractAccording to Fusellier-Souza (2004), researchers in the field of sign language linguistics can be organized in two large groups: (i) those who believe that sign languages must be identical to spoken languages and, thus, base their research on the phenomena and categories previously described for the latter; and (ii) those who believe that sign languages, being visual-spatial communication systems, may involve mechanisms and phenomena different from those found in spoken languages. In this article I present some arguments in favor of the second view, and identify some problems that arise from the traditional perspective (based on equivalence), which can easily be solved if we adopt a proposal which acknowledges the complexity, richness and difference of sign languages as communication systems.
According to Fusellier-Souza (2004), researchers in the field of sign language linguistics can be organized in two large groups: (i) those who believe that sign languages must be identical to spoken languages and, thus, base their research on the phenomena and categories previously described for the latter; and (ii) those who believe that sign languages, being visual-spatial communication systems, may involve mechanisms and phenomena different from those found in spoken languages. In this article I present some arguments in favor of the second view, and identify some problems that arise from the traditional perspective (based on equivalence), which can easily be solved if we adopt a proposal which acknowledges the complexity, richness and difference of sign languages as communication systems.
© 2001-2024 Fundación Dialnet · Todos los derechos reservados