Semantics -- gripes! My lay understanding is that when two words join to 
form a single word, that word os a compound by definition (at least by my 
definition.) Thus, FIREMAN is indeed a single word and it is a compound. 
Right? So, is APPLE TREE in english a compound or two words? I think they 
are two words, but APPLESAUCE is a compound. (I cheated -- used a 
dictionary.) I don't know whether APPLE TREE is one or two words (or more) 
in ASL. 
 
In Nicaragua, gender appears sometimes as a suffix and sometimes as a 
prefix. Hence, CHILD-MAN for boy. This is clearly one word, but it is also 
a compound. (Two things mix together to form a new thing. Niacin + 
cholorine = salt.) Sometimes, BOY and MAN appear together in the same 
sentence (BOY HITS MAN), and the signs are distinguished in part by the way 
they are set up in space (and I expect some pronouns would be thrown in: 
BOY (ME) MAN (HIM) I HIM HIT). Anyway, as a writing convention, using the 
hyphen seemed to make things easier -- there would be no mistake that 
CHILD-MAN was intended as a single word. 
 
I can see how vertical writing makes it easier to portray body shifts (which 
are super important in Nicaragaun Sign Language.) So, my mind it is open. 
> 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
> 
> Of course. But what we assume are compounds may not be...we may be judging 
> signed languages incorrectly to begin with....after writing lots of 
> compounds I have found that many of them are really ONE sign. 
> 
> This weekend I attended a special dinner in honor of Dr. Ursula Bellugi, 
> and her husband Ed Klima. I really enjoyed it. They had a big notebook, 
> which was passed around the restaurant, which was a collection of papers 
> and research done in connection with the Salk Institute lab in some 
way...I 
> noticed a paper co-authored by Judy Kegl! And there were papers on 
American 
> two-handed fingerspelling I enjoyed talking with an elderly Deaf woman who 
> had taught Ursula and the lab how to sign, many years ago, back when 
> researching signs was such a new topic. 
> 
> Ursula started to tell us about the history of her work. I was really 
> inspired by it and I enjoyed the evening immensely. Ursula explained how 
> hard it was to research the grammar of signed languages back in the 
> beginning, because she and others had first assumed that the grammar would 
> be similar to spoken languages. But of course, through many years of work, 
> they learned that the grammar of signed languages are quite different than 
> spoken languages. 
> 
> So, I personally think that the jury is still out on compounds. After 
> writing down the page, I feel totally different about how to write them. 
> 
> For example, in English, even though the word "fireman" is composed of two 
> parts: "fire-man", we still think of it as one word...(at least I do). We 
> certainly write it as one word. 
> 
> That is what writing down the page has done for compounds in 
> SignWriting...the compounds are going from two signs with a hypen 
> (horizontal writing) to one sign that blends together by movement symbols 
> interconnecting the two parts. 
> 
> I would be happy to create some diagrams to show you...would you like to 
> see some compounds written vertically? 
> 
> Val ;-) 
 
	 |