Benjamin Anible
Biographic Data
| ID | 1454086 |
|---|---|
| NAME | Benjamin Anible |
| GIVEN NAMES | Benjamin |
| FAMILY NAME | Anible |
| SIGNATURE | ANIBLE B |
| AFFILIATIONS | Western Norway University of Applied Sciences |
| ORCID | 0000-0002-9755-8398 |
| VERIFIED | Yes |
| TOTAL WORKS | 7 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 20 |
| AUTHOR COUNT | 7 |
| EDITOR COUNT | 0 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2015 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2025 |
| H-INDEX | 2 |
Opening up Corpus FinSL: Enriching Corpus Analysis With Linguistic Ethnography in a Study of Constructed Action
Corpus methods are now established within the field of signed language linguistics. Empirical investigations of signed language corpora have challenged many early assumptions about the nature of deaf community signed languages, while making us more aware of the limitations of traditional corpus documentation methods. One limitation relates to insufficient documentation of ethnographic information that is often necessary for accurately understandi…
A cross-linguistic comparison of reference across five signed languages
Do signers of different signed languages establish and maintain reference the same way? Here we compare how signers of five Western deaf signed languages coordinate fully conventionalized forms with more richly improvised semiotics to identify and talk about referents of varying agency. The five languages (based on a convenience sample) are Auslan, Irish Sign Language, Finnish Sign Language, Norwegian Sign Language, and Swedish Sign Language. Usi…
The role of iconicity, construal, and proficiency in the online processing of handshape
Iconicity has traditionally been considered an objective, fixed, unidimensional property of language forms, often operationalized as transparency for experimental purposes. Within a Cognitive Linguistics framework, iconicity is a mapping between an individual’s construal of form and construal of meaning, such that iconicity is subjective, dynamic, and multidimensional. We test the latter alternative by asking signers who differed in ASL proficien…
Iconicity in American Sign Language–English translation recognition
Reaction times for a translation recognition study are reported where novice to expert English–ASL bilinguals rejected English translation distractors for ASL signs that were related to the correct translations through phonology, semantics, or both form and meaning (diagrammatic iconicity). Imageability ratings of concepts impacted performance in all conditions; when imageability was high, participants showed interference for phonologically relat…
The semiotic diversity of doing reference in a deaf signed language
This article describes how deaf signers of Auslan (a deaf signed language of Australia) coordinate fully conventionalised forms (such as lexical manual signs and English fingerspelling and/or mouthing) with more richly improvised semiotics (such as indicating verbs, pointing signs, depicting signs, visible surrogates and/or invisible surrogates) to identify and talk about referents of varying agency. Using twenty retellings of Frog, Where Are You…
Iconicity is in the eye of the beholder: How language experience affects perceived iconicity
A renewed interest in understanding the role of iconicity in the structure and processing of signed languages is hampered by the conflation of iconicity and transparency in the definition and operationalization of iconicity as a variable. We hypothesize that iconicity is fundamentally different than transparency since it arises from individuals’ experience with the world and their language, and is subjectively mediated by the signers’ construal o…
Sensitivity to Verb Bias in American Sign Language-English Bilinguals
Native speakers of English are sensitive to the likelihood that a verb will appear in a specific subcategorization frame, known as verb bias. Readers rely on verb bias to help them resolve temporary ambiguity in sentence comprehension. We investigate whether deaf sign-print bilinguals who have acquired English syntactic knowledge primarily through print exposure show sensitivity to English verb biases in both production and comprehension. We firs…
The semiotic diversity of doing reference in a deaf signed language
This article describes how deaf signers of Auslan (a deaf signed language of Australia) coordinate fully conventionalised forms (such as lexical manual signs and English fingerspelling and/or mouthing) with more richly improvised semiotics (such as indicating verbs, pointing signs, depicting signs, visible surrogates and/or invisible surrogates) to identify and talk about referents of varying agency. Using twenty retellings of Frog, Where Are You…
Iconicity is in the eye of the beholder: How language experience affects perceived iconicity
A renewed interest in understanding the role of iconicity in the structure and processing of signed languages is hampered by the conflation of iconicity and transparency in the definition and operationalization of iconicity as a variable. We hypothesize that iconicity is fundamentally different than transparency since it arises from individuals’ experience with the world and their language, and is subjectively mediated by the signers’ construal o…
Opening up Corpus FinSL: Enriching Corpus Analysis With Linguistic Ethnography in a Study of Constructed Action
Corpus methods are now established within the field of signed language linguistics. Empirical investigations of signed language corpora have challenged many early assumptions about the nature of deaf community signed languages, while making us more aware of the limitations of traditional corpus documentation methods. One limitation relates to insufficient documentation of ethnographic information that is often necessary for accurately understandi…
Sensitivity to Verb Bias in American Sign Language-English Bilinguals
Native speakers of English are sensitive to the likelihood that a verb will appear in a specific subcategorization frame, known as verb bias. Readers rely on verb bias to help them resolve temporary ambiguity in sentence comprehension. We investigate whether deaf sign-print bilinguals who have acquired English syntactic knowledge primarily through print exposure show sensitivity to English verb biases in both production and comprehension. We firs…
Iconicity is in the eye of the beholder: How language experience affects perceived iconicity
A renewed interest in understanding the role of iconicity in the structure and processing of signed languages is hampered by the conflation of iconicity and transparency in the definition and operationalization of iconicity as a variable. We hypothesize that iconicity is fundamentally different than transparency since it arises from individuals’ experience with the world and their language, and is subjectively mediated by the signers’ construal o…
The semiotic diversity of doing reference in a deaf signed language
This article describes how deaf signers of Auslan (a deaf signed language of Australia) coordinate fully conventionalised forms (such as lexical manual signs and English fingerspelling and/or mouthing) with more richly improvised semiotics (such as indicating verbs, pointing signs, depicting signs, visible surrogates and/or invisible surrogates) to identify and talk about referents of varying agency. Using twenty retellings of Frog, Where Are You…
The role of iconicity, construal, and proficiency in the online processing of handshape
Iconicity has traditionally been considered an objective, fixed, unidimensional property of language forms, often operationalized as transparency for experimental purposes. Within a Cognitive Linguistics framework, iconicity is a mapping between an individual’s construal of form and construal of meaning, such that iconicity is subjective, dynamic, and multidimensional. We test the latter alternative by asking signers who differed in ASL proficien…
Iconicity in American Sign Language–English translation recognition
Reaction times for a translation recognition study are reported where novice to expert English–ASL bilinguals rejected English translation distractors for ASL signs that were related to the correct translations through phonology, semantics, or both form and meaning (diagrammatic iconicity). Imageability ratings of concepts impacted performance in all conditions; when imageability was high, participants showed interference for phonologically relat…
A cross-linguistic comparison of reference across five signed languages
Do signers of different signed languages establish and maintain reference the same way? Here we compare how signers of five Western deaf signed languages coordinate fully conventionalized forms with more richly improvised semiotics to identify and talk about referents of varying agency. The five languages (based on a convenience sample) are Auslan, Irish Sign Language, Finnish Sign Language, Norwegian Sign Language, and Swedish Sign Language. Usi…
Opening up Corpus FinSL: Enriching Corpus Analysis With Linguistic Ethnography in a Study of Constructed Action
Corpus methods are now established within the field of signed language linguistics. Empirical investigations of signed language corpora have challenged many early assumptions about the nature of deaf community signed languages, while making us more aware of the limitations of traditional corpus documentation methods. One limitation relates to insufficient documentation of ethnographic information that is often necessary for accurately understandi…
Hearing Impairment and Communication (7 works) · Linguistics (7 works) · Psychology (7 works) · Sign language (6 works) · Language, Metaphor, and Cognition (5 works) · Iconicity (4 works) · Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies (4 works) · American Sign Language (3 works) · Computer Science (3 works) · Cognitive psychology (2 works)