Talks by Lauren W Reed
Centre of Excellence for the Dynamics of Language seminar series, 2018
New Guinea is widely known to be a land of enormous linguistic diversity. Although it is far less... more New Guinea is widely known to be a land of enormous linguistic diversity. Although it is far less well known, there are also many local sign languages in use there for communication between deaf people and hearing ones. This presentation focuses on deaf sign languages used in the rural upper Nebilyer and Kaugel Valleys in the Western highlands of PNG. It is based on fieldwork carried out since 2015 with 12 deaf signers in the region. Each of them has a network of interlocutors with whom they share communicative resources, which include signing, ad-hoc gesture, mouthing, vocalisation, and pointing. Some of the signs are widely used throughout the region and beyond, while others are specific to particular networks. The various local communicative repertoires vary widely in degrees of elaboration and stability. After providing an overview of these networks and their social dynamics, we present a case study of one local variety in its second generation of users, which stands out for its complexity and emergent normativity. Co-author John Onga will reflect on his experience as a hearing user of aksen, as signing is known in this region. The seminar will close by considering the rise of Papua New Guinea Sign Language (PNGSL), the national sign language of Papua New Guinea, which is used mainly in urban areas for communication among deaf people. We will compare its social dynamics and associated ideologies with those of the local sign languages as ones which are used between deaf people and hearing ones.
Papers by Lauren W Reed
Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 2025
It is widely agreed that human linguistic communication draws on theory-of-mind abilities more so... more It is widely agreed that human linguistic communication draws on theory-of-mind abilities more sophisticated than those possessed by our great ape relatives. However, controversy persists regarding the role of enhanced theory-of-mind abilities in explaining the ultimate origins of language. On one common view, an upgrade in our theory-of-mind abilities was a crucial driver of the expansion of communicative complexity in our line, ultimately culminating in the first human (proto)languages. In contrast, on a rival and increasingly influential view, the enhanced theory-of-mind abilities of humans are instead understood to be a cultural evolutionary product of the appearance of human (proto)languages, with these theory-of-mind abilities feeding back to subsequently affect the shape (e.g., the flexibility) of human linguistic communication. This article aims to progress this debate, and ultimately bridge this divide. Towards this end, we make use of recent empirical work on interactive repair in homesigners (i.e., individuals who lack meaningful exposure to natural language models, but whose developmental environment is otherwise normal). Against the strongest versions of cultural evolutionary thinking in this area, we argue that the way in which homesigners flexibly request repair from conversational partners reveals the possession of theory-of-mind abilities that are distinctively human in their sophistication. Nevertheless, we see reason for positing a residual theory-of-mind gap between homesigners and individuals with normal language exposure, and suggest that this gap may be naturally filled by the linguistic tools and processes emphasized by cultural evolutionary theorists, thereby offering a synthesis of the two schools of thought.
The Oxford Guide to the Papuan Languages
history of sign linguistics. For an expanded discussion of sign language types, see Reed (2021). ... more history of sign linguistics. For an expanded discussion of sign language types, see Reed (2021). Sign language linguistics emerged as a field of study in the mid-20 th century (Stokoe 1960; Tervoort 1953). The field's first turn was dominated by the exploration of sign language grammar, with a key goal of showing equivalence between signed and spoken languages at all levels of linguistic structure (see, e.g., Klima and Bellugi 1979; Kyle and Woll 1985; and Liddell 1980). This work was done with deaf community sign languages such as American Sign Language and British Sign Language. Deaf community sign languages are usually multi-generational, usually associated with education and urban areas, and usually identified with a national territory. They are used primarily by deaf people for communication with other deaf people. Over the following decades, more diverse signing situations became the objects of scientific inquiry, including homesign and village sign languages. Goldin-Meadow (2003) pioneered the study of homesign systems, which are one-generation-old creations of a single deaf individual, with varying levels of input from family and community members. As for village sign languages, these are somewhat rare, being multigenerational languages that arise in relatively geographically bounded communities with a high incidence of hereditary deafness. They have a high proportion of hearing to deaf users. Examples include Kata Kolok
Sign language in Papua New Guinea: A primary sign language from the Upper Lagaip Valley, Enga Province, 2020
Papua New Guinea (PNG) occupies less than 0.4% of the world's land mass and is home to approximat... more Papua New Guinea (PNG) occupies less than 0.4% of the world's land mass and is home to approximately 0.1% of its population, yet it is host to around 12% of the world's languages 1. Despite its phenomenal diversity of spoken languages and the by-now large body of publications on them, almost no attention has been paid to signed languages (SLs) of PNG. Remarkably, after nearly 40 years, Adam Kendon's (1980a, 1980b, 1980c) 2 study from the Enga region is still the only one that has yet been published on any of them. When it appeared, that study was a pioneering one, not only as the first to come out of PNG but as one of the first detailed accounts of a SL anywhere in the world. Since that time, there has been a remarkable efflorescence of studies of SLs. The focus at first was almost entirely on first-world deaf community SLs such as ASL (American Sign Language), BSL (British Sign Language), SSL (Swedish Sign Language) and so on (see McBurney, 2012 for an overview of the history of sign linguistics). Deaf community SLs are 1 The latter figure is based on data from Ethnologue: Languages of the World, an online source that provides statistics and other information on the languages of the world. As of 27 April 2019, the number of living languages in PNG is shown as 840, and the total number of languages in the world is shown as 7,111
Asia-Pacific Language Variation, 2020
Most bilingualism and translanguaging studies focus on spoken language; less is known about how p... more Most bilingualism and translanguaging studies focus on spoken language; less is known about how people use two or more ways of signing. Here, I take steps towards redressing this imbalance, presenting a case study of signed language in Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea. The study's methodology is participant observation and analysis of conversational recordings between deaf signers. The Port Moresby deaf community use two ways of signing: SIGN LANGUAGE and CULTURE. SIGN LANGUAGE is around 30 years old, and its lexicon is drawn largely from Australasian Signed English. In contrast, CULTURE-which is as old as each individual user-is characterised by signs of local origin, abundant depiction, and considerable individual variation. Despite SIGN LANGUAGE's young age, its users have innovated a metalinguistic sign (SWITCH-CAPS) to describe switching between ways of communicating. To conclude, I discuss how the Port Moresby situation challenges both the bilingualism and translanguaging approaches.
Associated Motion, 2021
In this paper, we provide one of the first descriptions of associated motion in a Papuan language... more In this paper, we provide one of the first descriptions of associated motion in a Papuan language. Ende, a language of southern Papua New Guinea, has one directional affix that codes path towards the deictic centre when combined with verbs of motion or transfer. When this affix is combined with other verbs, it gives rise to interpretations of an associated, secondary motion event. This type of "deictic associated motion" was first explicitly described by Belkadi (2015) in several languages of Africa. Ende's deictic associated motion system is unlike prototypical associated motion systems, such as that in Kaytetye (Pama-Nyungan, Australia), in that Ende does not have dedicated affixes that code associated motion. Instead, Ende's associated motion expression relies on inference on the part of speakers and hearers to give rise to the motion readings. Accordingly, we propose the terms dedicated associated motion and inferential associated motion to distinguish these two very different associated motion systems, one of which relies on dedicated affixes or other structures, and the other, which relies on speakers' and hearers' inferences.
Language in Society, 2022
The sociodemographic typology of sign languages classifies them based on the characteristics and ... more The sociodemographic typology of sign languages classifies them based on the characteristics and configurations of their users. When considering homesign and sign languages in rural areas, this typology needs further refinement. Here, I present new concepts to enable this. The study is based on fieldwork with twelve deaf people in Western Highlands, Papua New Guinea, and review of studies worldwide. Sign language communities can be mapped as sign networks. Using this mapping, I propose a new typological category for languages with one central deaf user and many fluent hearing signers: nucleated network sign language. I use sign base analysis to determine lexical consistency between unconnected deaf signers in Western Highlands. The high level of consistency among largely unconnected deaf people is explained by a regional sign network connecting deaf and hearing signers. This research emphasises the role of both deaf and hearing signers in sign language emergence and maintenance.
Australian Aborignal Studies, 2019
Frontiers in Communication, 2020
How do children learn to understand and use complex syntactic constructions? In English, Diessel ... more How do children learn to understand and use complex syntactic constructions? In English, Diessel (2004) shows that they do so in two different ways. Complex sentences with dependent clauses (e.g., “Peter promised that he would come”) develop out of simple sentences that are gradually expanded into multi-clause ones. Complex sentences with coordinate clauses (e.g., “He tried hard, but he failed”) develop by integrating two independent sentences into a single two-clause unit. Here we expand on that research by focusing on the acquisition of a kind of complex syntactic structure which involves both dependency and coordination—the clause chain—in Ku Waru, a Papuan language spoken in the Western Highlands of Papua New Guinea. Clause chains are constructions coordinating multiple clauses in sequence, where the non-final or “medial” clauses are in a dependent relationship with the final clause. One function of clause chains, which is often taken to be the prototypical one, is to refer to a series of events in sequence. Some Ku Waru clause chains do refer to sequential events. Other Ku Waru clause chains containing particular verbs refer to single events, sometimes with the particular verb providing aspectual or adverbial qualification (“keep doing,” “do quickly,” etc.). In this article, we track the acquisition of several different kinds of clause chains based on longitudinal recordings of four children acquiring Ku Waru as their first language between the ages of 1½ and 5. We show that, although there are differences among the children in the ages at which they acquire the various kinds of clause chain, all four of them follow the same series of steps in doing so. In conclusion, we compare our findings to Diessel's for English. We find that they are similar in some ways and different in others, which may be related to the differences between subordinate constructions, coordinate non-dependent constructions and coordinate-dependent constructions.
Introduction
Language Documentation & Conservation, 2023
Investigations of quotatives are essential for understanding how humans talk about talking. Howev... more Investigations of quotatives are essential for understanding how humans talk about talking. However, comparison of quotatives and other communicative phenomena have been hampered by theoretical paradigms that privilege Western, spoken, conventionalised forms of communication while marginalising others, including signed languages, visible bodily actions, vocal depiction, and non-Western communication practices more generally. Here we demonstrate how corpus typology methods can redress some of these biases and provide insights on how languages work and why they differ. We investigate the quotatives used by five pairs of Auslan signers and five groups of Matukar Panau speakers undertaking a narrative problem-solving picture task. We find that the signers and speakers in our study used almost unilaterally direct forms of quotatives. However, both groups preferred direct quotation of different narrative elements, with Matukar Panau speakers preferring to quote dialogue and thought, while Auslan signers preferred to quote action and dialogue. We employ a novel "expressivity index" to reveal a range of user variability within each language group. This study demonstrates how a modality-agnostic framework of comparative semiotics is useful for advancing our understanding of interand intra-language variability, while enriching our understanding of direct quotation in both signed and spoken language interactions.
Biological Theory
Forthcoming in Biological Theory: A number of language evolution researchers have argued that whi... more Forthcoming in Biological Theory: A number of language evolution researchers have argued that while language as we now know it is a predominately vocal affair, early language plausibly made extensive use of gesture. Relatedly, these same researchers often claim that while modern language in general uses arbitrary symbols, it is very likely that early language made extensive use of iconicity. Anyone accepting an account of early language along these lines must therefore explain how language shifted over time from a heavily gestural and iconic communication system to a predominately vocal and highly arbitrary one. This article looks at an intriguing theory advanced by Woll (2009, 2014) as to how this shift was made. We find the spirit of the theory plausible but take issue with its details. Specifically, we identify a serious tension at the core of the theory. We then go on to explore how that tension might be plausibly resolved. The result is a blueprint for a much-improved version of the theory in our view.
Thesis Chapters by Lauren W Reed
The diverse sign languages (SLs) between established deaf community SLs and homesign have been ca... more The diverse sign languages (SLs) between established deaf community SLs and homesign have been called the “grey area” of SL linguistics, by virtue of their resistance to classification and the fact that they are understudied (Nyst, 2010, p. 416). This thesis investigates the languages of 12 deaf people living in the Nebilyer/Kaugel region of the rural Papua New Guinea highlands, with the view to situating them within the extant sociodemographic typology of SLs. I do this by considering sociodemographic data of deaf individuals, comparison of sign bases to determine lexical consistency, and emic perspectives of users. As a result of these analyses, I find that the diverse but interrelated languages of these 12 deaf people are not well classified within the existing sociodemographic taxonomy of SLs. In order to expand that taxonomy, I first present the concept of a sign network, which is a network of strong and weak sign ties, with strength defined as the presence of fluent, regular signed communication between individuals, irrespective of deaf/hearing status. I offer the new category of a nucleated network SL, the sign network of which is characterised by a central deaf individual with multiple strong sign ties to other individuals, who prototypically are all hearing. This is differentiated, I argue, from a canonical homesign language such as David’s (Goldin-Meadow, 2003), which is characterised by only weak sign ties to other individuals, either deaf or hearing. As such, I advocate for the extension of Horton’s (in press) typological category of “individual homesign” to account for regular contact not only with deaf signers, but hearing ones as well.
In determining the degree of lexical consistency between SLs, I present the metric of sign base comparison, predicated on the idea that even in iconic signs, there is a measure of arbitrariness underlying which aspect of a referent is selected (cf. Planer & Kalkman, 2019). This is a useful tool for work with SLs whose users exhibit a high degree of intra-signer variation in form, and thus cannot be well compared using the standard model of sublexical parameter comparison (cf. McKee & Kennedy, 2000; Guerra Currie, Meier, & Walters, 2002). I account for the high level of lexical consistency between Nebilyer/Kaugel SLs with the notion of a regional sign network, which is a sign network characterised by an abundance of weak sign ties between individuals in a larger region. I propose that signs diffuse along these weak sign ties, which accounts for lexical consistency between the languages of largely unconnected deaf people and their networks. The regional sign network model provides an explanation for similarly reported degrees of lexical consistency in other rural SL situations, where this cannot be explained wholly in terms of independent invention or recruitment of majority community gesture (e.g. Osugi, Supalla, & Webb, 1999). This research enriches the sociodemographic typology of SLs, filling in missing links in the “grey area”, and offering tools to continue to do so (Nyst, 2010, p. 416). More broadly, it also contributes to our understanding of how patterns of human sociality condition language shape.
Conference Presentations by Lauren W Reed
Language vitality indices (LVIs), such as the Graded Intergenerational Disruption Scale (GIDS; Fi... more Language vitality indices (LVIs), such as the Graded Intergenerational Disruption Scale (GIDS; Fishman 1991), the Language Vitality and Endangerment framework (LVE; UNESCO 2003), Krauss’ (2007) framework for classifying language according to viability, the Expanded GIDS (Lewis and Simons 2010) and the Language Endangerment Index (Lee and Van Way 2016, 2018) have been used to raise awareness of language loss amongst policy makers, communities, individuals, and other stakeholders for decades.
In Australia, language vitality is embedded in funding programs and other government initiatives. Target 16 of Closing the Gap is measured partly by the number of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander languages categorised as ‘strong’ (National Agreement on Closing the Gap 2020). For reporting against Target 16, strong languages are defined via an adaptation of UNESCO’s LVE applied to data collected in the third National Indigenous Languages Survey (Productivity Commission nd; Commonwealth of Australia 2020). First Languages Australia’s Priority Language
Support Program, funded by the Office for the Arts, is available to “critically-endangered” languages (FLA 2023). These are defined as living speakers being elderly: a definition consistent with that in the UNESCO LVE for severe and critical endangerment.
However, existing LVIs have limitations for both communities and policy makers, especially in the Australian context. There is a growing cohort of Aboriginal communities reviving their traditional language, where people are relearning the language after a period of it not having been spoken. Existing LVIs are not designed to capture languages in a state of revival. Current LVIs are designed to measure language loss; they are not designed to predict the future of any language (Dołowy-Rybinska 2017) or understand the diverse pathways of revival contexts.
Most LVIs privilege intergenerational language transmission as the primary factor in language vitality (Lee & Van Way 2016). In language revival contexts, several language relearning stages must occur before language transmission can occur (Paton & Eira 2011). LVIs’ focus on
intergenerational transmission (and associated fluency) may diminish the hard-won successes of communities reviving their languages, because communities may define success as more than fluency (Wiltshire et al. 2022). LVIs’ focus on intergenerational transmission also makes it difficult
for policy makers to understand communities’ changing needs along their language revival journey.
The categories in existing LVIs may not reflect the perception of a language by its speakers. In our experience, Aboriginal communities’ concept of “strength” with regards to languages is broader than as applied in LVIs. Indigenous epistemologies understand language revival as broader than increasing speaker numbers (Marmion et al. 2014); “language makes culture strong” (Hosking et al. 2000, p.5). Language stakeholders we have worked with clearly articulate that their “language
is strong” or they are “strong in [their] language”, even where an outsider perspective informed by an existing LVI may classify the language as “endangered” or even “extinct”. We must find a “meeting point” (Couzens et al. 2014) for Indigenous and Western conceptions of language strength
and vitality, if we are to make LVIs and surveys which use them relevant, useful, and culturally responsive to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
In response to these challenges, we propose a Language Revival Index (LRI) to sit alongside traditional LVIs. The LRI is fit for purpose to measure the gradual strengthening of revival languages. While traditional LVIs privilege intergenerational transmission as the major factor in language endangerment, the LRI privileges (1) domain expansion and (2) governance as the major factors in measuring the strength of languages in a state of revival. The LRI also accounts for language revival contexts where intergenerational transmission is inverted; specifically, when
children learn the language at school and bring it home to their parents. The LRI will be of use to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities in their “language revival journeying” (VACL nd). The LRI will help policy and decision-makers understand the diverse needs of language communities across Indigenous Australia, and fine-tune policy and funding programs as a result.
Books by Lauren W Reed
AIATSIS Research Publications, 2024
Prior to colonisation, hundreds of Indigenous languages were spoken in Australia. Just over two c... more Prior to colonisation, hundreds of Indigenous languages were spoken in Australia. Just over two centuries later, only around 12 of these languages are still being acquired by children as their mother tongue from birth and spoken as their main language. As a result, Australia has the dubious distinction of having one of the highest rates of language loss worldwide.
On 26–27 September 2022, AIATSIS co-hosted a Language Policy Symposium with the Australian Research Council (ARC) Centre of Excellence for the Dynamics of Language (CoEDL) in Canberra. The theme of the symposium was: ‘Strengthening Australian languages: between policy and practice’. The event brought together Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander language workers to share their experiences strengthening and supporting their languages with one another, with policy makers and with other stakeholders.
In this report, we synthesise key themes that emerged from the various presentations, amplifying Indigenous voices and providing guidance to Australian policymakers and the public.
You can learn more about the event and access copies of selected presentations at https://aiatsis.gov.au/whats-new/events/2022-language-policy-symposium
Uploads
Talks by Lauren W Reed
Papers by Lauren W Reed
Introduction
Thesis Chapters by Lauren W Reed
In determining the degree of lexical consistency between SLs, I present the metric of sign base comparison, predicated on the idea that even in iconic signs, there is a measure of arbitrariness underlying which aspect of a referent is selected (cf. Planer & Kalkman, 2019). This is a useful tool for work with SLs whose users exhibit a high degree of intra-signer variation in form, and thus cannot be well compared using the standard model of sublexical parameter comparison (cf. McKee & Kennedy, 2000; Guerra Currie, Meier, & Walters, 2002). I account for the high level of lexical consistency between Nebilyer/Kaugel SLs with the notion of a regional sign network, which is a sign network characterised by an abundance of weak sign ties between individuals in a larger region. I propose that signs diffuse along these weak sign ties, which accounts for lexical consistency between the languages of largely unconnected deaf people and their networks. The regional sign network model provides an explanation for similarly reported degrees of lexical consistency in other rural SL situations, where this cannot be explained wholly in terms of independent invention or recruitment of majority community gesture (e.g. Osugi, Supalla, & Webb, 1999). This research enriches the sociodemographic typology of SLs, filling in missing links in the “grey area”, and offering tools to continue to do so (Nyst, 2010, p. 416). More broadly, it also contributes to our understanding of how patterns of human sociality condition language shape.
Conference Presentations by Lauren W Reed
In Australia, language vitality is embedded in funding programs and other government initiatives. Target 16 of Closing the Gap is measured partly by the number of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander languages categorised as ‘strong’ (National Agreement on Closing the Gap 2020). For reporting against Target 16, strong languages are defined via an adaptation of UNESCO’s LVE applied to data collected in the third National Indigenous Languages Survey (Productivity Commission nd; Commonwealth of Australia 2020). First Languages Australia’s Priority Language
Support Program, funded by the Office for the Arts, is available to “critically-endangered” languages (FLA 2023). These are defined as living speakers being elderly: a definition consistent with that in the UNESCO LVE for severe and critical endangerment.
However, existing LVIs have limitations for both communities and policy makers, especially in the Australian context. There is a growing cohort of Aboriginal communities reviving their traditional language, where people are relearning the language after a period of it not having been spoken. Existing LVIs are not designed to capture languages in a state of revival. Current LVIs are designed to measure language loss; they are not designed to predict the future of any language (Dołowy-Rybinska 2017) or understand the diverse pathways of revival contexts.
Most LVIs privilege intergenerational language transmission as the primary factor in language vitality (Lee & Van Way 2016). In language revival contexts, several language relearning stages must occur before language transmission can occur (Paton & Eira 2011). LVIs’ focus on
intergenerational transmission (and associated fluency) may diminish the hard-won successes of communities reviving their languages, because communities may define success as more than fluency (Wiltshire et al. 2022). LVIs’ focus on intergenerational transmission also makes it difficult
for policy makers to understand communities’ changing needs along their language revival journey.
The categories in existing LVIs may not reflect the perception of a language by its speakers. In our experience, Aboriginal communities’ concept of “strength” with regards to languages is broader than as applied in LVIs. Indigenous epistemologies understand language revival as broader than increasing speaker numbers (Marmion et al. 2014); “language makes culture strong” (Hosking et al. 2000, p.5). Language stakeholders we have worked with clearly articulate that their “language
is strong” or they are “strong in [their] language”, even where an outsider perspective informed by an existing LVI may classify the language as “endangered” or even “extinct”. We must find a “meeting point” (Couzens et al. 2014) for Indigenous and Western conceptions of language strength
and vitality, if we are to make LVIs and surveys which use them relevant, useful, and culturally responsive to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
In response to these challenges, we propose a Language Revival Index (LRI) to sit alongside traditional LVIs. The LRI is fit for purpose to measure the gradual strengthening of revival languages. While traditional LVIs privilege intergenerational transmission as the major factor in language endangerment, the LRI privileges (1) domain expansion and (2) governance as the major factors in measuring the strength of languages in a state of revival. The LRI also accounts for language revival contexts where intergenerational transmission is inverted; specifically, when
children learn the language at school and bring it home to their parents. The LRI will be of use to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities in their “language revival journeying” (VACL nd). The LRI will help policy and decision-makers understand the diverse needs of language communities across Indigenous Australia, and fine-tune policy and funding programs as a result.
Books by Lauren W Reed
On 26–27 September 2022, AIATSIS co-hosted a Language Policy Symposium with the Australian Research Council (ARC) Centre of Excellence for the Dynamics of Language (CoEDL) in Canberra. The theme of the symposium was: ‘Strengthening Australian languages: between policy and practice’. The event brought together Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander language workers to share their experiences strengthening and supporting their languages with one another, with policy makers and with other stakeholders.
In this report, we synthesise key themes that emerged from the various presentations, amplifying Indigenous voices and providing guidance to Australian policymakers and the public.
You can learn more about the event and access copies of selected presentations at https://aiatsis.gov.au/whats-new/events/2022-language-policy-symposium