Italian Sign Language (LIS) is currently undergoing significant changes, both in terms of legislation—following the much-anticipated legal recognition (Law 69/2021)—and in terms of media visibility on social media platforms, websites, and events. Additionally, there is an increased institutional presence, partly due to the Covid-19 pandemic (Tomasuolo et al., 2021), as well as phenomena of language contact, borrowing, and cross-linguistic influences. These aspects not only represent fascinating areas of linguistic study but also offer a privileged viewpoint on internal attitudes towards LIS within the Deaf community itself.

While research on sign languages over the years has contributed to establishing their status as fully-fledged languages, distinct from spoken languages (Wilkinson & Morford, 2024), the growing public visibility of sign languages has sparked new debates about their relationship with the Deaf community, as well as the role, recognition, and acceptance of those involved in their promotion, teaching, translation, and performance.

To bring these discussions to light and explore perceptions of these phenomena, an online opinion survey was conducted, gathering approximately 300 responses on the topic of LIS teaching and promotion. Subsequent online public meetings allowed for further exploration of linguistic attitudes and professions related to LIS (interpreters, etc.).

Building on studies of linguistic attitudes (Cooper & Fishman, 1974; Dragojevic et al., 2021) and linguistic ideologies, particularly those related to sign languages (Krausneker, 2015; Kusters et al., 2020), a qualitative approach was taken to analyze the data that emerged. Similar to other minority languages, the presence of LIS in the public sphere leads to a redefinition and renegotiation of the language’s representation, raising awareness and revitalization, but also sparking conflicts (Gorter et al., 2012), and power dynamics, especially when certain demands, such as those for the recognition of sign languages, rarely yield the expected results (De Meulder et al., 2019; Snoddon & Wilkinson, 2019).