<< Click to Display Table of Contents >> Navigation:  Forms and Sets > Form 4 > Execution > The Salutation and Signifying > Signifying Variations

A lesser-known variation to the signification is whether the signifying hand touches or hovers over the backstop hand. If the signifying hand touched the backstop hand, this was originally designed to indicate that the form being executed was stylized execution, and therefore modified from the idealized style of execution. In contrast, if the signifying hand hovered over the backstop hand, this was originally designed to indicate that the form was to be executed without any modification and in an idealized execution style.

 

This variation is considered lesser-known because many practitioners are never taught the true meaning of this physical variation. And, coupled with the fact that some forms touch and some don't, by default, only adds to the confusion of the meaning; with many practitioners just discontinuing the practice altogether.

 

Another lesser-known, but often discarded, variation is to signify on both sides of the body; or just a single side. Originally, signifying on both sides was done to further expand the display of the signification to a broad audience of observers. But later, this morphed into a different meaning. Signifying on a single side of the body transformed into indicated that the form would be executed on only that side. For instance, if the signification was only given on the right side, then only the right side of the form would be executed. But if given on both sides of the body, then both sides of the form would be executed.

 

This variation is specifically indicative of Short Form One - which is commonly executed on both the right and left side for competition (mostly for the purpose of making this very short form longer). Like other variations, the historic meaning of this signification attribute was almost entirely lost with the new meaning superseding the original meaning. This change in meaning can often create conflict and/or confusion between the practitioner and observer.

 

This variation can also be further confusing for Long forms. Does one signify both sides for long forms since the self-defense techniques are being executed on both sides? Or, does one take the broader perspective of the entire form's execution to mean "only one side"? And, as one would expect, opinions do vary.

 

Consider this example scenario: if the practitioner signifies on both sides for the specific purpose of broader visual indication, yet the observer interprets the signification as an indication of execution on both sides; confusion may arise as the practitioner only executes a single side of the form. This is especially true if the observer is not privy to the historical and original meaning to this particular variation - one which the practitioner purposely used. This can only be resolved by a clarification of meaning between the practitioner and observer. This clarification can sometimes lead to a disagreement as to 'true' meaning. When in actuality both parties are correct.

 

Historical confusion from a lack of a consistent agreement on a definitive standard has generally relegated these signing variations more to the fringes of universal acceptance and knowledge. Although, many lineages and practitioners continue to use them and rely upon them in a consistent manner. The manner they have chosen to adopt. And therefore, these variations needed be documented in their entirety; without making a decision as to correct, accepted, policy. That is left up to the individual reader.