Actually, that's not quite what I was saying, but I do agree with you on one level. Language is more than just words. When you're translating form one into another, you're not just substituting words. A very big part is grammar.metalangel wrote:Sign language doesn't represent a language, it represents concepts in the same way that spoken or written words do (I think that's what you're saying, right?). The only time it represents another language is when you spell out a word that there's no sign for.
Now I don't know sign language, and that's why I might well be wrong. When you make the sign for love, that's clearly not a specific language. When you spell it out (say someone asks you to spell it), then it's clearly in a specific language. But that's just a word; different languages order thoughts differently. A sentence like "I love you," assuming international signs, should be pretty easy in language where subject - verb - object is a meaningful sequence. That may not always be the case. Some langauges, such as Latin, rely on word-endings rather than word order. Most languages are hybrids. (google analytic vs. synthetic languages). Some languages order the relationship between verbs and nouns in different ways (google nominative-accusative languages vs. ergative-absolutive languages). The list goes on.
I mean kutagh said this above: "for example in Dutch Sign Language we don't have 'the' or 'a' and of course the different grammar rules". I read this as meaning that - as soon as you leave the word-level - you have some differences that relate to your respective mother tongue. From what I know about language, this is necessary. There are very few, if any, universals about language. (Off topic: I'm a bit surprised that Dutch doesn't have articles. Am I misunderstanding something? Or are there articles, but the distinction between definite and indefinite is not there? Am I misunderstanding something?)
Basically, all your language thought habits relate to a language you use, and I doubt that there is any sign language in the world that is entirely independent of any other language. But you're right that you don't always have to represent a particular language when signing.
It's complex, and I can't go into details, because I don't know any sign language.
Not only grammatically correct, but also full of conversational quirks that strike me as uneconomic when signing. I may dig up specific examples and ask questions when I get home.KS is interesting because it translates all signed communication into grammatically correct English*, regardless of whether someone is interpreting or if both participants are signing. I don't know much about JSL, but I am doubtful that it uses proper spoken grammar.