@inproceedings{kimmelman-etal-2018-ipsl:lrec,
  author    = {Kimmelman, Vadim and Klezovich, Anna and Moroz, George},
  title     = {{IPSL}: A Database of Iconicity Patterns in Sign Languages. Creation and Use},
  pages     = {4230--4234},
  editor    = {Calzolari, Nicoletta and Choukri, Khalid and Cieri, Christopher and Declerck, Thierry and Goggi, Sara and Hasida, Koiti and Isahara, Hitoshi and Maegaard, Bente and Mariani, Joseph and Mazo,  H{\'e}l{\`e}ne and Moreno, Asuncion and Odijk, Jan and Piperidis, Stelios and Tokunaga, Takenobu},
  booktitle = {11th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation ({LREC} 2018)},
  publisher = {{European Language Resources Association (ELRA)}},
  address   = {Miyazaki, Japan},
  day       = {7--12},
  month     = may,
  year      = {2018},
  isbn      = {979-10-95546-00-9},
  language  = {english},
  url       = {https://aclanthology.org/L18-1667},
  abstract  = {We created the first large-scale database of signs annotated according to various parameters of iconicity. The signs represent concrete concepts in seven semantic fields in nineteen sign languages; 1542 signs in total. Each sign was annotated with respect to the type of form-image association, the presence of iconic location and movement, personification, and with respect to whether the sign depicts a salient part of the concept. We also created a website: https://sl-iconicity.shinyapps.io/iconicity patterns/ with several visualization tools to represent the data from the database. It is possible to visualize iconic properties of separate concepts or iconic properties of semantic fields on the map of the world, and to build graphs representing iconic patterns for selected semantic fields. A preliminary analysis of the data shows that iconicity patterns vary across semantic fields and across languages. The database and the website can be used to further study a variety of theoretical questions related to iconicity in sign languages.}
}

@inproceedings{yu-etal-2018-sign:lrec,
  author    = {Yu, Shi and Geraci, Carlo and Abner, Natasha},
  title     = {Sign Languages and the Online World Online Dictionaries {\&} Lexicostatistics},
  pages     = {4235--4240},
  editor    = {Calzolari, Nicoletta and Choukri, Khalid and Cieri, Christopher and Declerck, Thierry and Goggi, Sara and Hasida, Koiti and Isahara, Hitoshi and Maegaard, Bente and Mariani, Joseph and Mazo,  H{\'e}l{\`e}ne and Moreno, Asuncion and Odijk, Jan and Piperidis, Stelios and Tokunaga, Takenobu},
  booktitle = {11th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation ({LREC} 2018)},
  publisher = {{European Language Resources Association (ELRA)}},
  address   = {Miyazaki, Japan},
  day       = {7--12},
  month     = may,
  year      = {2018},
  isbn      = {979-10-95546-00-9},
  language  = {english},
  url       = {https://aclanthology.org/L18-1668},
  abstract  = {Several online dictionaries documenting the lexicon of a variety of sign languages (SLs) are now available. These are rich resources for comparative studies, but there are methodological issues that must be addressed regarding how these resources are used for research purposes. We created a web-based tool for annotating the articulatory features of signs (handshape, location, movement and orientation). Videos from online dictionaries may be embedded in the tool, providing a mechanism for large-scale theoretically-informed sign language annotation. Annotations are saved in a spreadsheet format ready for quantitative and qualitative analyses. Here, we provide proof of concept for the utility of this tool in linguistic analysis. We used the SL adaptation of the Swadesh list (Woodward, 2000) and applied lexicostatistic and phylogenetic methods to a sample of 23 SLs coded using the web-based tool; supplementary historic information was gathered from the Ethnologue of World Languages and other online sources. We report results from the comparison of all articulatory features for four Asian SLs (Chinese, Hong Kong, Taiwanese and Japanese SLs) and from the comparison of handshapes on the entire 23 language sample. Handshape analysis of the entire sample clusters all Asian SLs together, separated from the European, American, and Brazilian SLs in the sample, as historically expected. Within the Asian SL cluster, analyses also show, for example, marginal relatedness between Chinese and Hong Kong SLs.}
}