{"title":"Strong pronominals in ASL and LSF?","authors":"P. Schlenker","doi":"10.1075/SLL.00025.SCH","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/SLL.00025.SCH","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Theories of pronominal strength (e.g., Cardinaletti & Starke 1999)\u0000 lead one to expect that sign language, just like spoken language, can have morphologically distinct strong pronominals. We suggest\u0000 that American Sign Language (ASL) and French Sign Language (LSF) might have such pronominals, characterized here by the fact that\u0000 they may associate with only even in the absence of prosodically marked focus.","PeriodicalId":43398,"journal":{"name":"Sign Language & Linguistics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2018-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44870107","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"R-impersonal interpretation in Italian Sign Language (LIS)","authors":"L. Mantovan, C. Geraci","doi":"10.1075/SLL.00019.MAN","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/SLL.00019.MAN","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 In this paper, we examine agent backgrounding in Italian Sign Language (LIS). Specifically, we are interested in\u0000 identifying and describing the strategies used by LIS signers to reduce referentiality. On the basis of low-referential contexts\u0000 (cf. questionnaire in the Introduction chapter), we recorded target sentences containing potential markers of agent backgrounding\u0000 and asked three LIS native signers to provide felicity judgments on them using a 7-point scale. We discuss agent-backgrounding\u0000 strategies of different types: (i) manual, (ii) non-manual, and (iii) syntactic. Overall, our study shows that the combination of\u0000 raised eyebrows and mouth-corners down associated with the existential quantifier someone and the sign person\u0000 makes the agent-backgrounding reading more prominent. Other strategies that can be used in LIS to reduce referentiality are free\u0000 relatives, perspective shift, and null subject. We also investigate in more detail the semantic status of someone,\u0000 person, and the null subject through well-established tests from the literature.","PeriodicalId":43398,"journal":{"name":"Sign Language & Linguistics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2018-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46780001","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Agent-backgrounding in Catalan Sign Language (LSC)","authors":"Gemma Barberà, P. C. Hofherr, J. Quer","doi":"10.1075/SLL.00023.BAR","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/SLL.00023.BAR","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This paper examines backgrounding strategies for human agents in Catalan Sign Language, that is, constructions\u0000 featuring human agents that are non-referential. We identify and analyze four types of agent-backgrounding strategies: subjectless\u0000 constructions, indefinite pronouns, the impersonal axis, and general nouns. Extending on previous work, we offer a description and\u0000 a semantico-pragmatic analysis of each construction.","PeriodicalId":43398,"journal":{"name":"Sign Language & Linguistics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2018-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44314523","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Meltem Kelepir, Asli Özkul, Elvan Tamyürek Özparlak
{"title":"Agent-backgrounding in Turkish Sign Language (TİD)","authors":"Meltem Kelepir, Asli Özkul, Elvan Tamyürek Özparlak","doi":"10.1075/SLL.00020.KEL","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/SLL.00020.KEL","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This paper investigates agent-backgrounding constructions in Turkish Sign Language (TİD). TİD displays many of the\u0000 agent-backgrounding strategies reported in the literature that signed (and spoken) languages employ (Barberà & Cabredo Hofherr, this volume). Use of non-specific indefinite pronominals is a major\u0000 strategy, and this paper is the first study that identifies these forms in TİD. Moreover, we show that TİD has ways of marking\u0000 clusivity distinctions of indefinite arguments, and has a special sign that derives exclusive indefinite pronominals,\u0000 other. We argue that (i) whereas lateral-high R-locus is unambiguously associated with non-specificity, non-high\u0000 (lateral and central) loci are underspecified in terms of specificity; (ii) the R-locus of indefinite arguments observed in\u0000 agent-backgrounding contexts in TİD consists of two spatial features [+high] and [+lateral] which express non-specificity and\u0000 exclusivity. This study further shows that clusivity, usually associated with personal pronouns, must be extended to indefinite\u0000 pronouns.","PeriodicalId":43398,"journal":{"name":"Sign Language & Linguistics","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2018-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41701633","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Cross-linguistic variation in space-based distance for size depiction in the lexicons of six sign\u0000 languages","authors":"Victoria Nyst","doi":"10.1075/SLL.00024.NYS","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/SLL.00024.NYS","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This paper presents a semiotic study of the distribution of a type of size depiction in lexical signs in six sign\u0000 languages. Recently, a growing number of studies are focusing on the distribution of two representation techniques, i.e. the use\u0000 of entity handshapes and handling handshapes for the depiction of hand-held tools (e.g. Ortega\u0000 et al. 2014). Padden et al. (2013) find that there is cross-linguistic\u0000 variation in the use of this pair of representation techniques. This study looks at variation in a representation technique that\u0000 has not been systematically studied before, i.e. the delimitation of a stretch of space to depict the size of a referent, or\u0000 space-based distance for size depiction. It considers the question whether the cross-linguistic variation in\u0000 the use of this representation technique is governed by language-specific patterning as well (cf. Padden et al. 2013).\u0000 This study quantifies and compares the occurrence of space-based distance for size depiction in\u0000 the lexicons of six sign languages, three of Western European origin, and three of West African origin. It finds that sign\u0000 languages differ significantly from each other in their frequency of use of this depiction type. This result thus corroborates\u0000 that the selection and distribution of representation techniques does not solely depend on features of the depicted image, but\u0000 also on language-specific patterning in the distribution of representation techniques, and it adds another dimension of iconic\u0000 depiction in which sign languages may vary from each other (in addition to the entity/handling handshape distinction). Moreover,\u0000 the results appear to be areally defined, with the three European languages using this representation technique significantly more\u0000 often than the three African languages.","PeriodicalId":43398,"journal":{"name":"Sign Language & Linguistics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2018-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46775568","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}