1982Sign language studiesRequires access

Ratings of Sign Translucency & Gloss Concreteness of Two Grammatical Classes of Signs

Richard L. Luftig, Lyle L. Lloyd, Judith L. Page

Open publisher page 7 citations

Abstract

Three hundred eighty sign/glosses of two grammatical word classes were rated for sign translucency and were compared to referent ratings made earlier on concreteness. The ratings revealed that verbs were rated significantly more translucent than nouns but less concrete than nouns. In terms of differences in concreteness and translucency within sign/glosses, verbs tended to be rated similarly for both variables, while individual nouns were rated higher in concreteness. Analysis of the rating categories for nouns and verbs indicated that the lower the rated translucency level of nouns and verbs, the greater the probability of differences between translucency and concreteness ratings. For levels of concreteness, differences in ratings between concreteness and translucency were greater for high concrete and low concrete words than for words of intermediate concreteness. Implications for teaching of signing to language-impaired individuals are discussed.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Three hundred eighty sign/glosses of two grammatical word classes were rated for sign translucency and were compared to referent ratings made earlier on concreteness. The ratings revealed that verbs were rated significantly more translucent than nouns but less concrete than nouns. In terms of differences in concreteness and translucency within sign/glosses, verbs tended to be rated similarly for both variables, while individual nouns were rated higher in concreteness. Analysis of the rating categories for nouns and verbs indicated that the lower the rated translucency level of nouns and verbs, the greater the probability of differences between translucency and concreteness ratings. For levels of concreteness, differences in ratings between concreteness and translucency were greater for high concrete and low concrete words than for words of intermediate concreteness. Implications for teaching of signing to language-impaired individuals are discussed.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 7 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Three hundred eighty sign/glosses of two grammatical word classes were rated for sign translucency and were compared to referent ratings made earlier on concreteness. The ratings revealed that verbs were rated significantly more translucent than nouns but less concrete than nouns. In terms of differences in concreteness and translucency within sign/glosses, verbs tended to be rated similarly for both variables, while individual nouns were rated higher in concreteness. Analysis of the rating categories for nouns and verbs indicated that the lower the rated translucency level of nouns and verbs, the greater the probability of differences between translucency and concreteness ratings. For levels of concreteness, differences in ratings between concreteness and translucency were greater for high concrete and low concrete words than for words of intermediate concreteness. Implications for teaching of signing to language-impaired individuals are discussed.

Key concepts: Concreteness, Noun, Psychology, Referent, Linguistics, Sign (mathematics), Psycholinguistics, Cognitive psychology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Ratings of Sign Translucency & Gloss Concreteness of Two Grammatical Classes of Signs — Research Paper | ScholarLens