On the linguistic status of 'agreement' in sign languages

Theoretical Linguistics

Volumn 37, Issue 3-4, 2011, Pages 95-141

  Lillo Martin, Diane ^a   Meier, Richard P ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 80155135548     PISSN: 03014428     EISSN: 16134060     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1515/THLI.2011.009     Document Type: Article

References (93)

1. Ahlgren, Inger. 1990. Deictic pronouns in Swedish and Swedish Sign Language. In Susan D. Fischer and Patricia Siple (eds.), Theoretical issues in sign language research. Volume 1: Linguistics, 167-174. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
2. Alibašic Ciciliani, Tamara & Ronnie B. Wilbur. 2006 Pronominal system in Croatian Sign Language. Sign Language and Linguistics 9. 95-132.
3. Aronoff, Mark, Carol Padden, Irit Meir & Wendy Sandler. 2004. Morphological universals and the sign language type. In Geert Booij and Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 2004, 19-40. Dordrecht/ Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
4. Aronoff, Mark, Irit Meir & Wendy Sandler. 2005. The paradox of sign language morphology. Language 81. 301-344.
5. Bahan, Benjamin, Judy Kegl, Robert G. Lee, Dawn MacLaughlin & Carol Neidle. 2000. The licensing of null arguments in American Sign Language. Linguistic Inquiry 31. 1-27.
6. Baker, Charlotte & Dennis Cokely. 1980. American Sign Language: A teacher's resource text on grammar and culture. Silver Spring, MD: TJ Publishers.
7. Barlow, Michael & Charles A. Ferguson (eds.). 1988. Agreement in natural language: Approaches, theories, descriptions. Stanford, CA: Center for the Study of Language and Literature.
8. Battison, Robbin. 1978. Lexical borrowing in American Sign Language. Silver Spring, MD: Linstok Press.
9. Berenz, Norine. 2002. Insights into person deixis. Sign Language and Linguistics 5. 203-227.
10. Berk, Stephanie. 2003. Sensitive period effects on the acquisition of language: A study of language development. Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut dissertation.
11. Bos, Heleen. 1990. Person and location marking in SLN: Some implications of a spatially expressed syntactic system. In S. Prillwitz & T. Vollhaber (eds.), Sign language research and application: Proceedings of the International Congress on Sign Language Research and Application, March 23-25, 1990, Hamburg, 231-246. Hamburg: Signum Press.
12. Bos, Heleen. 1994. An auxiliary in Sign Language of the Netherlands. In Inger Ahlgren, Brita Bergman & Mary Brennan (eds.), Perspectives on sign language structure: Papers from the Fifth International Symposium on Sign Language Research, 37-53. University of Durham: International Sign Linguistics Association.
13. Brennan, Mary. 1981. Grammatical processes in British Sign Language. In Bencie Woll, Jim Kyle & Margaret Deuchar (eds.), Perspectives on British Sign Language, 120-135. London: Croom Helm.
14. Casey, Shannon. 2003a. "Agreement" in gestures and signed languages: The use of directionality to indicate referents involved in actions. San Diego, CA: University of California San Diego dissertation.
15. Casey, Shannon. 2003b. Relationships between gestures and signed languages: Indicating participants in actions. In Anne E. Baker, Beppie van den Bogaerde & Onno Crasborn (eds.), Crosslinguistic perspectives in sign language research. Selected papers from TISLR 2000, 95-117. Seiten: Signum.
16. Chen, Hai-chen. 2007. Lexical borrowing in Taiwan Sign Language - Focus on Chinese character signs. University of Texas at Austin M.A. thesis.
17. Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
18. Comrie, Bernard. 1989. Language universals and linguistic typology: Syntax and morphology, 2nd edn. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
19. Corbett, Greville. 2006. Agreement. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
20. Cormier, Kearsy. 2007. Do all pronouns point? Indexicality of first person plural pronouns in BSL and ASL. In Pamela Perniss, Roland Pfau, and Markus Steinbach (eds.), Visible variation: Comparative studies on sign language structure, 63-101. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
21. Cormier, Kearsy. 2010. Pronouns and pointing: Where do sign languages fit in? Paper presented at Between you and me: Local pronouns across modalities, Radboud University Nijmegen, 7-8 June.
22. Cormier, Kearsy, Stephen Wechsler & Richard Meier. 1998. Locus agreement in American Sign Language. In Gert Webelhuth, Jean-Pierre Koenig, and Andreas Kathol (eds.), Lexical and constructional aspects of linguistic explanation, 215-229. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
23. Cysouw, Michael. 2005. What it means to be rare: The case of person marking. In: Zygmund Frajzyngier & David Rood (eds.), Linguistic diversity and language theories, 235-258. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
24. Engberg-Pedersen, Elisabeth. 1993. Space in Danish Sign Language. Hamburg: Signum-Verlag.
25. Farnell, Brenda. 1995. Do you see what I mean? Plains Indian Sign Talk and the embodiment of action. Austin: University of Texas Press.
26. Fischer, Susan D. 1975. Influences on word order change in American Sign Language. In Charles Li (ed.), Word order and word order change, 1-25. Austin: University of Texas Press.
27. Fischer, Susan. 1996. The role of agreement and auxiliaries in sign language. Lingua 98. 103-120.
28. Fischer, Susan D. & Bonnie Gough. 1978. Verbs in American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies 7. 17-48.
29. Forchheimer, Paul. 1953. The category of person in language. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
30. Grosz, Barbara, Aravind Joshi & Scott Weinstein. 1995. Centering: A framework for modeling the local coherence of discourse. Computational Linguistics 21. 203-226.
31. Haspelmath, Martin. 2005. Argument marking in ditransitive alignment types. Linguistic Discovery 3. 1-21.
32. Janis, Wynne. 1995. A crosslinguistic perspective on ASL verb agreement. In Karen Emmorey & Judy Reilly (eds.), Language, gesture, and space, 195-223. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
33. Japan Sign Language Research Institute ( Nihon syuwa kerkyuusho) (ed.). 1997. Japanese Sign Language dictionary ( Nihongo-syuwa diten). Tokyo: Japan Federation of the Deaf.
34. Johnston, Trevor. 2010. Points and pronouns in face-to-face language. Paper presented at Between you and me: Local pronouns across modalities, Radboud University Nijmegen, 7-8 June.
35. Johnston, Trevor & Adam Schembri. 2007. Testing language description through language documentation, archiving and corpus creation: The case of indicating verbs in the Auslan archive corpus. In Peter K. Austin, Oliver Bond & David Nathan (eds.), Proceedings of conference on Language Documentation & Linguistic Theory. http://www.hrelp.org/publications/ldlt/papers/ ldltproceedings.html
36. Kegl, Judy. 2003. Pronominalization in American Sign Language. Sign Language and Linguistics 6. 245-265.
37. Kendon, Adam. 2004. Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
38. Klima, Edward S. & Ursula Bellugi. 1979. The signs of language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
39. Koulidobrova, Elena. 2010. Agreement ⋯ or not ⋯ in ASL: Evidence from pro. Presented at Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research, Purdue University, 30 September-2 October.
40. Lacy, Richard. 2003. Putting some of the syntax back into semantics. Sign Language and Linguistics 6. 211-243.
41. Langacker, Ronald W. 1991. Foundations of cognitive grammar. Volume II: Descriptive application. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
42. Liddell, Scott K. 1984. THINK and BELIEVE: Sequentiality in American Sign Language. Language 60. 372-392.
43. Liddell, Scott K. 1990. Four functions of a locus: Reexamining the structure of space in ASL. In Ceil Lucas (ed.), Sign language research: Theoretical issues, 176-198. Washington, D.C.: Gallaudet University Press.
44. Liddell, Scott K. 1994. Tokens and surrogates. In Inger Ahlgren, Brita Bergman & Mary Brennan (eds.), Perspectives on sign language structure: Papers from the fifth International Symposium on Sign Language Research, 105-119. Durham, UK: The International Sign Linguistics Association.
45. Liddell, Scott K. 1995. Real, surrogate, and token space: Grammatical consequences in ASL. In Karen Emmorey & Judy Reilly (eds.), Language, gesture, and space, 19-41. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
46. Liddell, Scott K. 2000. Indicating verbs and pronouns: Pointing away from agreement. In Karen Emmorey & Harlan Lane (eds.), The signs of language revisited: An anthology to honor Ursula Bellugi and Edward Klima, 303-320. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
47. Liddell, Scott K. 2003. Grammar, gesture, and meaning in American Sign Language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
48. Lillo-Martin, Diane. 1986. Two kinds of null arguments in American Sign Language. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 4. 415-444.
49. Lillo-Martin, Diane. 1991. Universal grammar and American Sign Language: Setting the null argument parameters. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
50. Lillo-Martin, Diane & Edward S. Klima. 1990. Pointing out differences: ASL pronouns in syntactic theory. In Susan D. Fischer & Patricia Siple (eds.), Theoretical issues in sign language research. Volume 1: Linguistics, 191-210. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
51. Lillo-Martin, Diane. 2002. Where are all the modality effects? In Richard P. Meier, Kearsy Cormier, & David Quinto-Pozos (eds.), Modality and structure in signed language and spoken language, 241-262. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
52. Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
53. MacLaughlin, Dawn. 1997. The structure of determiner phrases: Evidence from American Sign Language. Boston, MA: Boston University dissertation.
54. Marsaja, I. Gede. 2008. Desa Kolok: A deaf village and its sign language in Bali, Indonesia. Nijmegen: Ishara Press.
55. Mathur, Gaurav. 2000. Verb agreement as alignment in signed languages. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology dissertation.
56. Mathur, Gaurav, & Christian Rathmann. 2010. Verb agreement in sign language morphology. In Diane Brentari (ed.), Sign languages, 173-196. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
57. McBurney, Susan. 2002. Pronominal reference in signed and spoken language: Are grammatical categories modality-dependent? In Richard P. Meier, Kearsy Cormier and David Quinto-Pozos (eds.), Modality and structure in signed and spoken languages, 329-369. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
58. Meier, Richard P. 1982. Icons, analogues, and morphemes: The acquisition of verb agreement in ASL. San Diego, CA: University of California San Diego dissertation.
59. Meier, Richard P. 1990. Person deixis in American Sign Language. In Susan D. Fischer & Patricia Siple (eds.), Theoretical issues in sign language research. Volume 1: Linguistics, 175-190. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
60. Meier, Richard P. 2002. The acquisition of verb agreement: Pointing out arguments for the linguistic status of agreement in signed languages. In Gary Morgan & Bencie Woll (eds.), Current developments in the study of signed language acquisition, 115-141. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
61. Meier, Richard P. & Diane Lillo-Martin. 2010. Does spatial make it special? On the grammar of pointing signs in American Sign Language. In Donna B. Gerdts, John Moore & Maria Polinsky (eds.), Hypothesis A/Hypothesis B: Linguistic explorations in honor of David M. Perlmutter, 345-360. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
62. Meir, Irit. 1998. Thematic structure and verb agreement in Israeli Sign Language. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem dissertation.
63. Meir, Irit, Carol Padden, Mark Aronoff & Wendy Sandler. 2007. Body as subject. Journal of Linguistics 43. 531-563.
64. Nyst, Victoria. in press. Shared sign languages. In Roland Pfau, Markus Steinbach & Bencie Woll (eds.), Sign language - An international handbook. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
65. Neidle, Carol, Judy Kegl, Dawn MacLaughlin, Benjamin Bahan & Robert G. Lee. 2000. The syntax of American Sign Language: Functional categories and hierarchical structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
66. Nevins, Andrew. 2009. Contributions of ASL agreement to the agreement/cliticization distinction. Presented at the Linguistic Society of America Annual Meeting, Chicago, January.
67. Newport, Elissa L. & Ted Supalla. 2000. Sign language research at the millennium. In Karen Emmorey & Harlan Lane (eds.), The signs of language revisited: An anthology to honor Ursula Bellugi and Edward Klima, 103-114. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
68. Okrent, Arika. 2002. A modality-free notion of gesture and how it can help us with the morpheme vs. gesture question in sign language linguistics (Or at least give us some criteria to work with). In Richard P. Meier, Kearsy Cormier & David Quinto-Pozos (eds.), Modality and structure in signed and spoken languages, 175-198. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
69. Padden, Carol A. 1983. Interaction of morphology and syntax in American Sign Language. San Diego, CA: University of California, San Diego dissertation. (Also published in 1988 in the series Outstanding Dissertations in Linguistics. New York: Garland.)
70. Padden, Carol A. 1990. The relation between space and grammar in ASL verb morphology. In Ceil Lucas (ed.), Sign language research: Theoretical issues, 118-132. Washington, D.C.: Gallaudet University Press.
71. Padden, Carol A. 1998. The ASL lexicon. Sign Language and Linguistics 1, 39-60.
72. Pfau, Roland & Markus Steinbach. 2006. Modality-independent and modality-specific aspects of grammaticalization in sign languages. Linguistics in Potsdam 24, 5-98.
73. Pizzuto, Elena, Enza Giuranna & Giuseppe Gambino. 1990. Manual and non-manual morphology in Italian Sign Language: Grammatical constraints and discourse processes. In Ceil Lucas (ed.), Sign language research: Theoretical issues, 83-102. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
74. Quadros, Ronice Müller de. 1999. Phrase structure of Brazilian Sign Language. Porto Alegre: Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul dissertation.
75. Pizzio, Aline, P. Rezende, & Ronice Müller de Quadros. 2009. Língua Brasileira de Sinais V. Licenciatura e Bacharelado em Letras-Libras na Modalidade a Distância. Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, Brazil.
76. Quadros, Ronice Müller de & Diane Lillo-Martin. 2007. Gesture and the acquisition of verb agreement in sign languages. In H. Caunt-Nulton, S. Kulatilake, and I. Woo (eds.), Proceedings of the 31st annual Boston University conference on language development, 520-531. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
77. Quadros, Ronice Müller de & Diane Lillo-Martin. 2010. Clause structure. In Diane Brentari (ed.), Sign languages: A Cambridge language survey. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
78. Quadros, Ronice Müller de & Josep Quer. 2008. Back to back(wards) and moving on: On agreement, auxiliaries and verb classes in sign languages. In Ronice Müller de Quadros (ed.), Sign languages: Spinning and unraveling the past, present and future, 530-551. Petrópolis, Brazil: Editora Arara Azul.
79. Quadros, Ronice Müller de & Josep Quer. 2010. A caracterização da concordância nas línguas de sinais. In Heloisa Maria Moreira Lima-Salles & Rozana Reigota Naves (Eds.), Estudos Gerativos de Língua de Sinais Brasileira e de aquisição de Português (L2) por Surdos, 33-58. Goiânia, Brasil: Cânone Editoração.
80. Rathmann, Christian. 2000. The optionality of agreement phrase: Evidence from signed languages. Austin, TX: University of Texas M.A. Report.
81. Rathmann, Christian & Gaurav Mathur. 2002. Is verb agreement the same cross-modally? In Richard P. Meier, Kearsy Cormier & David Quinto-Pozos (eds.), Modality and structure in signed and spoken languages, 370-404. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
82. Reinhart, Tanya. 1983. Anaphora and semantic interpretation. London: Croon Helm.
83. Rinfret, Julie. 2009. L'association spatiale du nom en Langue des Signes Québécoise: Formes, fonctions et sens [The spatial association of nouns in Langue des Signes Québécoise: Form, function and meaning]. Montreal, Quebec: Université du Québec à Montréal dissertation.
84. Sandler, Wendy. 1989. Phonological representation of the sign: Linearity and non-linearity in sign language phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.
85. Sandler, Wendy & Diane Lillo-Martin. 2006. Sign language and linguistic universals. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
86. Schlenker, Philippe. 2010. Donkey anaphora: The view from sign language (ASL and LSF). Ms, available at https://files.nyu.edu/pds4/public/.
87. Senghas, Ann. 2003. Intergenerational influence and ontogenetic development in the emergence of spatial grammar in Nicaraguan Sign Language. Cognitive Development 18. 511-531. (Pubitemid 37468892)
88. Senghas, Ann & Marie Coppola. 2001. Children creating language: How Nicaraguan Sign Language acquired a spatial grammar. Psychological Science 12. 323-328. (Pubitemid 33653289)
89. Siewierska, Anna. 2004. Person. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
90. Smith, Wayne. 1990. Evidence for auxiliaries in Taiwan Sign Language. In Susan D. Fischer & Patricia Siple (eds.), Theoretical issues in sign language research. Volume 1: Linguistics, 211-28. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
91. Smith, Wayne & L. F. Ting. 1979. Shou neng sheng chyau, Vol. 1 ( Your hands can become a bridge). Taipei: Deaf Sign Language Research Association of the Republic of China.
92. Steinbach, Markus & Roland Pfau. Grammaticalization of auxiliaries in sign languages. In Pamela Perniss, Roland Pfau & Markus Steinbach (Eds.), Visible variation: Comparative studies on sign language structure, 303-339. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
93. Washabaugh, William. 1986. Five fingers for survival. Ann Arbor, MI: Karoma Publishers.