Strategies of relativization in Italian Sign Language

Natural Language and Linguistic Theory

Volumn 24, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 945-975

  Cecchetto, Carlo ^a   Geraci, Carlo ^a   Zucchi, Sandro ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MILANO BICOCCA   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MILAN   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33751564512     PISSN: 0167806X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11049-006-9001-x     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Bach, E., & Cooper, R. (1978). The NP-S analysis of relative clauses and compositional semantics. Linguistics and Philosophy, 2, 145-150.
2. Boutla, M., Supalla, T., Newport, E. L., & Bavelier, D. (2004). Short-term memory span: insights from sign language. Nature Neuroscience, 7, 997-1002.
3. Basilico, D. (1996). Head position and internally-headed relative clauses. Language, 72, 498-532.
4. Bhatt, R. (2003). Locality in correlativization. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 21, 485-541.
5. Chomsky, N. (1995). Categories and transformations, chapter 4 of The Minimalist Program. pp. 219-394. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
6. Cecchetto, C., & Zucchi, S. (2004). Why is Spec,CP on the right in sign languages? Glow Newsletter, Spring (2004).
7. Cinque, G. (1999). Adverbs and functional heath: A cross-linguistic perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
8. Cole, P. (1987). The structure of internally-headed relative clauses. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 5, 277-302.
9. Coulter, G. R. (1983). A conjoined analysis of American sign language relative clauses. Discourse Processes, 6, 305-318.
10. Dayal, V. (1996). Locality in WH quantification: Questions and relative clauses in hindi. Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
11. Downing, B. (1973). Corelative relative clauses in universal grammar. Minnesota Working Papers in Linguistics and Philosophy of Language, 2, 1-17.
12. Fontana, J. (1990). Is ASL like Diegueño or Diegueño like ASL? A study of internally-headed relative clauses in ASL. In C. Lucas (Ed.), Sign language research: Theoretical issues (pp. 238-255). Washington: Gallaudet University Press.
13. Geraci, C. (2005). Negation in LIS (Italian Sign Language). In L. Bateman, & C. Ussery (Eds.), Proceedings of NELS 35 (pp. 217-229). Amherst, MA: GLSA.
14. Grosu, A. (2000). The semantic diversity of internally-headed relative clauses. In C. Schaner-Wolles, J. R. Rennison, & F. Neubarth (Eds.),Linguistic studies in honour of Wolfgang Ulrich Dressler presented on his 60th Birthday, (pp. 143-152). Torino: Rosenberg & Sellier.
15. Heim, I. (1990). E-type pronouns and donkey anaphora. Linguistics and Philosophy, 13, 137-177.
16. Kayne, R. (1994). The antisymmetry of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
17. Keenan, E. L. (1985). Relative clauses. In T. Shopen (Ed.), Language typology and syntactic description II: Complex constructions (pp. 141-170). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
18. Liddell, S. K. (1980). American sign language syntax. The Hague: Mouton.
19. McCawley, J. D. (1988). The syntactic, phenomena of English (vol. 2). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
20. Miller, D. (1990). ASL relative clauses and their interaction with null categories. In C. Lucas (Ed.), Sign language research: Theoretical issues (pp. 228-237). Washington: Gallaudet University Press.
21. Neale, S. (1990). Descriptions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
22. Neidle, C. (2002). Language across modalities: ASL focus and question constructions. In P. Pica, & J. Rooryck (Eds.), Linguistic variation yearbook 2, (pp. 71-98). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
23. Neidle, C., Kegl, J., MacLaughlin, D., Bahan, B., & Lee, Robert G. (2000). The syntax of American sign language: Functional categories and hierarchical structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
24. Neidle, C., Sclaroff, S., & Athitsos, V. (2001). SignStream™: A tool for linguistic and computer vision research on visual-gestural language data. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 33, 311-320.
25. Nunes, J., & de Quadros, R. M. (2004). Phonetic realization of multiple copies in brazilian sign languages. Paper Presented at the Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research (TISLR 8). Universitat de Barcelona, 9/31-10/2/(2004).
26. Pfau, R., & Quer, J. (2005). V-to-Neg raising and negative concord in three sign languages. Rivista di Grammatica Generativa, 27, 73-86.
27. Pfau, R., & Steinbach, M. (2005). Restrictive relative clauses in German sign language: Extraposition and reconstruction. In L. Bateman, & C. Ussery (Eds.), Proceedings of NELS 35 (pp. 507-521). Amherst, MA: GLSA.
28. Padden, C. (1988). Interaction of morphology and syntax in American sign language. Outstanding Dissertations in Linguistics, Series IV. New York: Garland Press.
29. Partee, B. H. (1975). Montague grammar and transformational grammar. Linguistic Inquiry, 6, 203-300.
30. Petronio, K., & Lillo-Martin, D. (1997). Wh-movement and the position of SPEC CP: evidence from American sign language. Language, 73, 18-57.
31. Shimoyama, J. (1999). Internally-headed relative clauses in Japanese and E-type anaphora. Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 8, 147-182.
32. Srivastav, V. (1991). The syntax and semantics of correlatives. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 9, 637-686.
33. Wilbur, R. B., & Patschke, C. (1999). Syntactic correlates of browraise in ASL. Sign Language and Linguistics, 2, 3-40.
34. Wilson, M., & Emmorey, K. (2003). The effect of irrelevant visual input on working memory for sign language. Journal of Deaf Studies and Education, 8, 97-103.
35. Zucchi, S. (2003). Time, tense and adverbs in Italian sign language. Ms., University of Milan.