4.3 Article

How to Use Comic-Strip Graphics to Represent Signed Conversation

Journal

RESEARCH ON LANGUAGE AND SOCIAL INTERACTION
Volume 54, Issue 3, Pages 241-260

Publisher

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/08351813.2021.1936801

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Oslo Metropolitan University

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This article explores the use of comic-strip-inspired graphic transcripts as a tool for presenting video data from informal multiperson conversations in Norwegian Sign Language. It discusses the advantages and disadvantages of representing the interlocutors' utterances as English translations in speech bubbles, provides a small-scale analysis of conversational interactions, and concludes that graphic transcripts have several advantages for presenting nonsensitive data.
This article explores comic-strip-inspired graphic transcripts as a tool to present conversational video data from informal multiperson conversations in a signed language, specifically Norwegian Sign Language (NTS). The interlocutors' utterances are represented as English translations in speech bubbles rather than glossed or phonetically transcribed NTS, and the article discusses advantages and disadvantages of this unconventional choice. To contextualize this exploration of graphic transcripts, a small-scale analysis of a stretch of interaction is embedded in the article. The extract shows conversational trouble and repair occurring when interlocutors respond to utterances produced while they as recipients were looking elsewhere. The NTS extract is introduced with a short sample of multilinear, Jefferson-inspired glossed transcript and then presented in full as graphic transcript. The article concludes that for presenting nonsensitive data, graphic transcripts have several advantages, such as improved access to visual features, flexible granularity, and enhanced readability. Data are in Norwegian Sign Language with English translations.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available