Icônico ou arbitrário? Motivado ou imotivado? O signo linguístico na Língua Brasileira de Sinais

Abstract

According to Saussure (2006), the linguistic sign is essentially arbitrary, which means there is no relation of motivation between the signifier of a sign and the meaning it conveys. Yet, this does not seem to be the case when it comes to sign languages, especially when considering their gestural-visual modality. Strobel and Fernandes (1998), and Quadros and Karnopp (2004) are authors that state and argue that sign languages are essentially arbitrary. However, there are other authors such as Ferreira- Brito (1995), Klima and Bellugi (1979), Sherman Wilcox (2004), Taub (2001), Xavier (2006), among others, who consider iconicity as being significantly present in these languages. Moreover, discussing the notions of arbitrariness and iconicity in sign languages is not an easy task. In fact, when it comes to accepting sign languages as natural languages, iconicity has represented (and in some cases it probably still represents) an issue since, on one hand, it is significantly present in these languages, and on the other hand, arbitrariness consists in a linguistic principle common to all languages. In this sense, the main objective of this thesis is to discuss and to question the notions of arbitrariness and iconicity in sign languages and more specifically in Brazilian Sign Language (Libras). To do so, we verified how the existing literature approaches these concepts in relation to sign languages, and analyzed the signs within the letter 'A' in Capovilla et al. (2017) concerning their possible motivation(s). We have detected and classified six types of motivations, which are: (1) classifiers; (2) gestuality; (3) spatiality; (4) linguistic borrowing from Portuguese; (5) non-manual markers and (6) movement. We noticed that there is a frequent systematization of these motivations and we also realized that they do not always confer iconicity to the signs. Furthermore, in this paper, we assume and argue that arbitrariness and iconicity are not opposing notions, and they are concepts of different orders. We demonstrate that arbitrariness and immotivation, and iconicity and motivation, although related, are not synonymous. We also point out that signs of Libras are highly motivated and, in most cases, are made up from more than one motivation. Coming up with proposals for the analysis of iconicity in Libras from a certain type of gradation can be quite a complex task. Nevertheless, we argue that a less problematic proposal could involve the nature of the aforementioned types of motivation in regards to iconicity. Finally, we demonstrate that classifiers are very productive in Libras, and that they are the most recurrent type of motivation in our data. Moreover, they have an essentially imagery character, which confers iconicity to the linguistic signs they form. This confirms that they are in fact part of the lexical nucleus of the language.