Submitted by Ann Hunchinson Guest - December 2, 2002
a) another similar movement of that part of the body.
b) a back to normal sign when there is an understood normal situation or condition for that part of the body.
c) a composite turn sign for rotations, twists of parts of the body.
d) the inverted V sign when none of the above is applicable and when the result of a previous indication should no longer be in effect. (Ex. 1)
The idea of “No longer in existence,” “Forget about it,” “It has disappeared,” “The previous has gone away” says nothing about what the state of that part of the body should be. It cancels the result of a previous indication, it results in no new position, situation, etc.
It is important that we do not have redundancy by making use of the inverted V to mean a total return to normal.
Usage in KIN
When Knust decided against using the back to normal sign, already used by Leeder and the DNB notators (thereby missing an opportunity for unification), he chose the ‘away’ sign, the inverted V to mean a complete return to normal for that part. It was Maria Szentpal who questioned this, as the sign gives no indication of how far ‘away’ the movement should go.
The sign has been taken up by Labanotators as being valuable. I am, however, uncertain as to how each individual notator is understanding it, how each is using it.
This is the time for this matter to be made very clear. In revising the basic Labanotation textbook I need to be quite clear about this sign and its usage. I therefore welcome hearing from each of you. To what extent do you agree with the above presentation of the meaning and use of this sign?
It appears that some Labanotators are using this sign for that meaning.