The bridge of iconicity: From a world of experience to the experience of language

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

Volumn 369, Issue 1651, 2014, Pages

  Perniss, Pamela ^a,b   Vigliocco, Gabriella ^a,b  

^a Research Department of Cognitive Perceptual and Brain Sciences   (United Kingdom)

^b Deafness   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Co speech gesture; Iconicity; Language development; Language evolution; Language processing; Sign language

Indexed keywords

BRAIN; COMMUNICATION BEHAVIOR; HUMAN BEHAVIOR; HUMAN EVOLUTION; LANGUAGE; SENSORY SYSTEM;

EID: 84905245174     PISSN: 09628436     EISSN: 14712970     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2013.0300     Document Type: Article

References (132)

1. Pyers J, Emmorey K. 2008 The face of bimodal bilingualism: bilinguals produce ASL grammar while speaking English. Psychol Sci. 19, 1201-1206. (doi: 10. 1111/j. 1467-9280. 2008. 02119. x).
2. Quinto-Pozos D. 2007 Can constructed action be considered obligatory? Lingua 117, 1285-1314. (doi: 10. 1016/j. lingua. 2005. 12. 003).
3. Sandler W. 2009 Symbiotic symbolization by hand and mouth in sign language. Semiotica 174, 241-275. (doi: 10. 1515/semi. 2009. 035).
4. Kendon A. 1980 Gesticulation and speech: two aspects of the process of utterance. In Relationship of verbal and nonverbal communication (ed. MR Key), pp. 207-228. The Hague, The Netherlands: Mouton.
5. McClave E. 2001 The relationship between spontaneous gestures of the hearing and American Sign Language. Gesture 1, 51-72. (doi: 10. 1075/gest. 1. 1. 05mcc).
6. McNeill D. 1992 Hand and mind: what gestures reveal about thought. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
7. Swerts M, Krahmer E. 2008 Facial expressions and prosodic prominence: comparing modalities and facial areas. J. Phonet. 36, 219-238. (doi: 10. 1016/j. wocn. 2007. 05. 001).
8. Kelly SD, Özyürek A, Maris E. 2010 Two sides of the same coin: speech and gesture mutually interact to enhance comprehension. Psychol. Sci. 21, 260-267. (doi: 10. 1177/0956797609357327).
9. McGurk H, MacDonald J. 1976 Hearing lips and seeing voices. Nature 264, 746-748. (doi: 10. 1038/264746a0).
10. Özyürek A, Willems RM, Kita S, Hagoort P. 2007 On-line integration of semantic information from speech and gesture: insights from event-related brain potentials. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 19, 605-616. (doi: 10. 1162/jocn. 2007. 19. 4. 605).
11. van Wassenhove V, Grant KW, Poeppel D. 2005 Visual speech speeds up the neural processing of auditory speech. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 102, 1181-1186. (doi: 10. 1073/pnas. 0408949102).
12. Imai M, Kita S. 2014 The sound symbolism bootstrapping hypothesis for language acquisition and language evolution. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 369, 20130298. (doi: 10. 1098/rstb. 2013. 0298).
13. Perniss P, Thompson T, Vigliocco G. 2010 Iconicity as a general property of language: evidence from spoken and signed languages. Front. Psychol. 1, 1-15. (doi: 10. 3389/fpsyg. 2010. 00227).
14. Taub SF. 2001 Language from the body: iconicity and metaphor in American Sign Language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
15. Thompson RL, Vinson DP, Woll B, Vigliocco G. 2012 The road to language learning is iconic. Psychol. Sci. 23, 1443-1448. (doi: 10. 1177/0956797612459763).
16. Monaghan P, Mattock K, Walker P. 2012 The role of sound symbolism in word learning. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 38, 1152-1164. (doi: 10. 1037/a0027747).
17. Klima ES, Bellugi U. 1979 The signs of language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
18. Johnston T, Schembri A. 2007 Australian Sign Language. An introduction to sign language linguistics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
19. Pietrandrea P, Russo T. 2007 Diagrammatic and imagic hypoicons in signed and verbal language. In Verbal and signed languages. Comparing structures, constructs and methodologies (eds E Pizzuto, P Pietrandrea, R Simone), pp. 35-56. Berlin, Germany: De Gruyter.
20. Tolar TD, Lederberg AR, Gokhale S, Tomasello M. 2008 The development of the ability to recognize the meaning of iconic signs. J. Deaf Stud. Deaf Educ. 13, 225-240. (doi: 10. 1093/deafed/enm045).
21. Shintel H, Nusbaum HC, Okrent A. 2006 Analog acoustic expression in speech communication. J. Mem. Lang. 55, 165-177. (doi: 10. 1016/j. jml. 2006. 03. 002).
22. Gasser M. 2004 The origins of arbitrariness in language. In Proc. of the 26th Annual Conf. of the Cognitive Science Society, Chicago, IL, USA, 5-7 August 2004, pp. 434-439. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
23. Thompson RL, Vinson DP, Vigliocco G. 2010 The link between form and meaning in British sign language: lexical processing effects in a phonological decision task. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 36, 1017-1027. (doi: 10. 1037/a0019339).
24. Meir I. 2010 Iconicity and metaphor: constraints on metaphorical extension of iconic forms. Language 86, 865-896. (doi: 10. 1353/lan. 2010. 0044).
25. Dingemanse M. 2012 Advances in the crosslinguistic study of ideophones. Lang. Linguist. Compass 6, 654-672. (doi: 10. 1002/lnc3. 361).
26. Emmorey K. 2014 Iconicity as structure mapping. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 369, 20130301. (doi: 10. 1098/rstb. 2013. 0301).
27. Fitch T. 2010 The evolution of language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
28. Stout D. 2011 Stone toolmaking and the evolution of human culture and cognition. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 366, 1050-1059. (doi: 10. 1098/rstb. 2010. 0369).
29. Levinson SC. 2006 On the human 'interaction engine'. In Roots of human sociality: culture, cognition and interaction (eds SC Levinson, N Enfield), pp. 39-69. Oxford, UK: Berg.
30. Tomasello M. 2008 Origins of human communication. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
31. Hockett CF. 1960 The origin of speech. Sci. Am. 203, 89-97. (doi: 10. 1038/scientificamerican0960-88).
32. Bickerton D. 2009 Adam's tongue: how humans made language, how language made humans. New York, NY: Hill & Wang.
33. Kendon A. 1991 Some considerations for a theory of language origins. Man 26, 199-221. (doi: 10. 2307/2803829).
34. Davidson I, Noble W. 1989 The archaeology of perception: traces of depiction and language. Curr. Anthropol. 30, 125-155. (doi: 10. 1086/203723).
35. Donald M. 2005 Imitation and mimesis. In Perspectives on imitation (eds S Hurley, N Chater), pp. 283-300. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
36. Arbib M. 2005 From monkey-like action recognition to a human language: an evolutionary framework for neurolinguistics. Behav. Brain Sci. 28, 105-167. (doi: 10. 1017/S0140525X05000038).
37. Corballis MC. 2003 From mouth to hand: gesture, speech, and the evolution of right-handedness. Behav. Brain Sci. 26, 199-260. (doi: 10. 1017/S0140525X03000062).
38. Fay N, Arbib M, Garrod S. 2013 How to bootstrap a human communication system. Cogn. Sci. 37, 1356-1367. (doi: 10. 1111/cogs. 12048).
39. Levinson SC, Holler J. 2014 The origin of human multi-modal communication. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 369, 20130302. (doi: 10. 1098/rstb. 2013. 0302).
40. Seyfarth RM, Cheney DL, Marler P. 1980 Monkey responses to three different alarm calls: evidence of predator classification and semantic communication. Science 210, 801-803. (doi: 10. 1126/science. 7433999).
41. Collias NE. 1987 The vocal repertoire of the red junglefowl: a spectrographic classification and the code of communication. Condor 89, 510-524. (doi: 10. 2307/1368641).
42. Dunbar R. 1993 Coevolution of neocortical size, group size and language in humans. Behav. Brain Sci. 16, 681-735. (doi: 10. 1017/S0140525X00032325).
43. Dediu D, Levinson SC. 2013 On the antiquity of language: the reinterpretation of Neandertal linguistic capacities and its consequences. Front. Psychol. 4, 1-17. (doi: 10. 3389/fpsyg. 2013. 00397).
44. Henrich J. 2004 Demography and cultural evolution: how adaptive cultural processes can produce maladaptive losses-the Tasmanian Case. Am. Antiquity 69, 197-214. (doi: 10. 2307/4128416).
45. Kobayashi H, Kohshima S. 2001 Unique morphology of the human eye and its adaptive meaning: comparative studies on external morphology of the primate eye. J. Hum. Evol. 40, 419-435. (doi: 10. 1006/jhev. 2001. 0468).
46. Tomasello M, Hare B, Lehmann H, Call J. 2007 Reliance on head versus eyes in the gaze following of great apes and human infants: the cooperative eye hypothesis. J. Hum. Evol. 52, 314-320. (doi: 10. 1016/j. jhevol. 2006. 10. 001).
47. Garrod S, Fay N, Lee J, Oberlander J, MacLeod T. 2007 Foundations of representation: where might graphical symbol systems come from? Cogn. Sci. 31, 961-987. (doi: 10. 1080/03640210701703659).
48. Givón T. 1991 Isomorphism in the grammatical code: cognitive and biological considerations. Stud. Lang. 1, 85-114. (doi: 10. 1075/sl. 15. 1. 04giv).
49. Haiman J. 1980 The iconicity of grammar: isomorphism and motivation. Language 56, 515-540. (doi: 10. 2307/414448).
50. Herulano-Houzel S, Collins CE, Wong P, Kaas JH. 2007 Cellular scaling rules for primate brains. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104, 3562-3567. (doi: 10. 1073/pnas. 0611396104).
51. Roth G, Dicke U. 2005 Evolution of the brain and intelligence. Trends Cogn. Sci. 9, 250-257. (doi: 10. 1016/j. tics. 2005. 03. 005).
52. Rizzolatti G, Camarda R, Fogassi L, Gentilucci M, Luppino G, Matelli M. 1988 Functional organization of inferior area 6 in the Macaque monkey: II. Area F5 and the control of distal movements. Exp. Brain Res. 71, 491-507. (doi: 10. 1007/BF00248742).
53. Rizzolatti G, Arbib MA. 1998 Language within our grasp. Trends Neurosci. 21, 188-194. (doi: 10. 1016/S0166-2236(98)01260-0).
54. Frank M, Goodman N, Tenenbaum J. 2009 Using speakers' referential intentions to model early crosssituational word learning. Psychol. Sci. 20, 578-585. (doi: 10. 1111/j. 1467-9280. 2009. 02335. x).
55. Quine W. 1964 Word and object. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
56. Smith LB, Yu C. 2008 Infants rapidly learn wordreferent mappings via cross-situational statistics. Cognition 106, 1558-1568. (doi: 10. 1016/j. cognition. 2007. 06. 010).
57. Snedeker J, Gleitman L. 2004 Why it is hard to label our concepts. In Weaving a lexion (eds DG Hall, SR Waxman), pp. 255-293. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
58. Waxman S, Booth A. 2001 Seeing pink elephants: fourteen-month-olds' interpretations of novel nouns and adjectives. Cogn. Psychol. 43, 217-242. (doi: 10. 1006/cogp. 2001. 0764).
59. Waxman S, Leddon EM. 2003 Early word-learning and conceptual development. Everything had a name, and each name gave birth to a new thought. In The Wiley-Blackwell Handbook of Childhood Cognitive Development (ed. U Goswami), pp. 180-208. Chichester, UK: Blackwell Publishers.
60. Akhtar N, Tomasello M. 2000 The social nature of words and word learning. In Becoming a word learner: a debate on lexical acquisition (eds RM Golinkoff, K Hirsh-Pasek, L Bloom, L Smith, A WoodwardN Akhtar, M Tomasello, G Hollich), pp. 115-135. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
61. Baldwin D. 1993 Early referential understanding: infants' ability to recognize referential acts for what they are. Dev. Psychol. 29, 832-843. (doi: 10. 1037/0012-1649. 29. 5. 832).
62. Baldwin DA, Baird JA. 1999 Action analysis: a gateway to intentional inference. In Early social cognition: understanding others in the first months of life (ed. P Rochat), pp. 215-240. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
63. Yu C, Smith LB. 2007 Rapid word learning under uncertainty via cross-situational statistics. Psychol. Sci. 18, 414-420. (doi: 10. 1111/j. 1467-9280. 2007. 01915. x).
64. Smith LB, Yu C, Pereira AF. 2011 Not your mother's view: the dynamics of toddler visual experience. Dev. Sci. 14, 9-17. (doi: 10. 1111/j. 1467-7687. 2009. 00947. x).
65. Yoshida H, Smith LB. 2008 What's in view for toddlers? Using a head camera to study visual experience. Infancy 13, 229-248. (doi: 10. 1080/15250000802004437).
66. Yu C, Smith L. 2012 Embodied attention and word learning by toddlers. Cognition 125, 244-262. (doi: 10. 1016/j. cognition. 2012. 06. 016).
67. Glenberg AM, Gallese V. 2011 Action-based language: a theory of language acquisition, comprehension, and production. Cortex 48, 905-922. (doi: 10. 1016/j. cortex. 2011. 04. 010).
68. Kalagher H, Yu C. 2006 The effects of deictic pointing in word learning. In Proc. of the 5th Int. Conf. of Development and Learning, May 31-June 3 2006, Bloomington, IN, USA. Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA: Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences. (ISBN: 0-9786456-0-X).
69. O'Neill M, Bard K, Linnell M, Fluck M. 2005 Maternal gestures with 20-month-old infants in two contexts. Dev. Sci. 8, 352-359. (doi: 10. 1111/j. 1467-7687. 2005. 00423. x).
70. Pulvermüller F. 1999 Words in the brain's language. Behav. Brain Sci. 22, 253-336. (doi: 10. 1017/S0140525X9900182X).
71. Ozturk O, Krehm M, Vouloumanos A. 2013 Sound symbolism in infancy: evidence for sound-shape cross-modal correspondences in 4-month-olds. J. Exp. Child Psychol. 114, 173-186. (doi: 10. 1016/j. jecp. 2012. 05. 004).
72. Peña M, Mehler J, Nespor M. 2011 The role of audiovisual processing in early conceptual development. Psychol. Sci. 22, 1419-1421. (doi: 10. 1177/0956797611421791).
73. Imai M, Kita S, Nagumo M, Okada H. 2008 Sound symbolism facilitates early verb learning. Cognition 109, 54-65. (doi: 10. 1016/j. cognition. 2008. 07. 015).
74. Maurer D, Pathman T, Mondloch CJ. 2006 The shape of boubas: sound-shape correspondences in toddlers and adults. Dev. Sci. 9, 316-322. (doi: 10. 1111/j. 1467-7687. 2006. 00495. x).
75. Namy LL, Campbell AL, Tomasello M. 2004 The changing role of iconicity in non-verbal symbol learning: a U-shaped trajectory in the acquisition of arbitrary gestures. J. Cogn. Dev. 5, 37-57. (doi: 10. 1207/s15327647jcd0501_3).
76. Goodrich W, Hudson Kam CL. 2009 Co-speech gesture as input in verb learning. Dev. Sci. 12, 81-87. (doi: 10. 1111/j. 1467-7687. 2008. 00735. x).
77. Özçali{dotless}şkan Ş, Goldin-Meadow S. 2009 When gesture-speech combinations do and do not index linguistic change. Lang. Cogn. Process. 24, 190-217. (doi: 10. 1080/01690960801956911).
78. Liddell SK. 1980 American sign language syntax. New York, NY: Mouton.
79. Lillo-Martin D, Klima ES. 1990 Pointing out differences: ASL Pronouns in Syntactic Theory. In Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research (eds SD Fischer, P Siple), pp. 191-210. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
80. Padden CA. 1990 The relation between space and grammar in ASL verb morphology. In Sign language research: theoretical issues (ed. C Lucas), pp. 118-132. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
81. Vinson D, Cormier K, Denmark T, Schembri A, Vigliocco G. 2008 The British Sign Language (BSL) norms for age of acquisition, familiarity, and iconicity. Behav. Res. Methods 40, 1079-1087. (doi: 10. 3758/BRM. 40. 4. 1079).
82. Woolfe T, Herman R, Roy P, Woll B. 2010 Early lexical development in native signers: a BSL adaptation of the MacArthur-Bates CDI. J. Child Psychol. Psychiat. 51, 322-331. (doi: 10. 1111/j. 1469-7610. 2009. 02151. x).
83. Fernald A, Taeschner T, Dunn J, Papousek M, de Boysson-Bardies B, Fukui I. 1989 A cross-language study of prosodic modifications in mothers' and fathers' speech to preverbal infants. J. Child Lang. 16, 477-501. (doi: 10. 1017/S0305000900010679).
84. Grieser DL, Kuhl PK. 1988 Maternal speech to infants in a tonal language: support for universal prosodic features in motherese. Dev. Psychol. 24, 14-20. (doi: 10. 1037/0012-1649. 24. 1. 14).
85. Holzrichter AS, Meier RP. 2000 Child-directed signing in American Sign Language. In Language acquisition by eye (eds C Chamberlain, JP Morford, RI Mayberry), pp. 25-40. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
86. Maestas y Moores J. 1980 Early language environment: interactions of deaf parents with their infants. Sign Lang. Stud. 26, 1-13. (doi: 10. 1353/sls. 1980. 0003).
87. Masataka N. 1992 Motherese in a signed language. Infant Behav. Dev. 15, 453-460. (doi: 10. 1016/0163-6383(92)80013-K).
88. Masataka N. 2000 The role of modality and input in the earliest stage of language acquisition: studies of Japanese Sign Language. In Language acquisition by eye (eds C Chamberlain, JP Morford, RI Mayberry), pp. 3-24. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
89. Saji N, Imai M. 2013 Onomatope kenkyu no shatei-chikadzuku oto to imi [Sound Symbolism and Mimetics]. In Goishutoku ni okeru ruizousei no kouka no kentou (eds K Shinohara, R Uno), pp. 151-166. Tokyo, Japan: Hituji Syobo.
90. Perniss P, Lu J, Özyürek O, Campisi E, Morgan G, Vigliocco G. In preparation. The role of iconicity in linking language to the world: caregivers' use of iconicity in supporting the referential mapping process.
91. Gogate L, Bahrick L, Watson J. 2000 A study of multimodal motherese: the role of temporal synchrony between verbal labels and gestures. Child Dev. 71, 878-894. (doi: 10. 1111/1467-8624. 00197).
92. Goldin-Meadow S, Goodrich W, Sauer E, Iverson J. 2007 Young children use their hands to tell their mothers what to say. Dev. Sci. 10, 778-785. (doi: 10. 1111/j. 1467-7687. 2007. 00636. x).
93. Iverson JM, Goldin-Meadow S. 2005 Gesture paves the way for language development. Psychol. Sci. 16, 368-371. (doi: 10. 1111/j. 0956-7976. 2005. 01542. x).
94. Özçali{dotless}şkan Ş, Goldin-Meadow S. 2005 Do parents lead their children by the hand? J. Child Lang. 32, 481-505. (doi: 10. 1017/S0305000905007002).
95. Rowe M, Özçali{dotless}şkan Ş, Goldin-Meadow S. 2008 Learning words by hand: gesture's role in predicting vocabulary development. First Lang. 28, 185-203. (doi: 10. 1177/0142723707088310).
96. Rowe M, Goldin-Meadow S. 2009 Differences in early gesture explain SES disparities in child vocabulary size at school entry. Science 323, 951-953. (doi: 10. 1126/science. 1167025).
97. Iverson JM, Capirci O, Longobardi E, Caselli M. 1999 Gesturing in mother-child interactions. Cogn. Dev. 14, 57-75. (doi: 10. 1016/S0885-2014(99) 80018-5).
98. Puccini D, Hassemer M, Salomo D, Liszkowski U. 2010 The type of shared activity shapes caregiver and infant communication. Gesture 10, 279-297. (doi: 10. 1075/gest. 10. 2-3. 08puc).
99. Puccini D, Liszkowski U. 2012 15-month-old infants fast map words but not representational gestures of multimodal labels. Front. Psychol. 3, 1-8. (doi: 10. 3389/fpsyg. 2012. 00101).
100. Puccini D. 2012 The use of deictic versus representational gestures in infancy. PhD dissertation. MPI Series in Psycholinguistics, 75, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
101. Gleitman L. 1990 Structural sources of verb learning. Lang. Acquisit. 1, 1-63. (doi: 10. 1207/s15327817la0101_2).
102. Barsalou LW. 1999 Perceptual symbol systems. Behav. Brain Sci. 22, 577-660. (doi: 10. 1017/S0140525X990021491).
103. Glenberg AM, Kaschak MP. 2002 Grounding language in action. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 93, 558-565. (doi: 10. 3758/BF03196313).
104. Stanfield RA, Zwaan RA. 2001 The effects of implied orientation derived from verbal context on picture recognition. Psychol. Sci. 12, 153-156. (doi: 10. 1111/1467-9280. 00326).
105. Gallese V, Lakoff G. 2005 The brain's concepts: the role of the sensory-motor system in reason and language. Cogn. Neuropsychol. 22, 455-479. (doi: 10. 1080/02643290442000310).
106. Zwaan RA. 2004 The immersed experiencer: toward an embodied theory of language comprehension. In The psychology of learning and motivation, vol. 44 (ed. BH Ross), pp. 35-62. New York, NY: Academic Press.
107. Meteyard L, Rodriguez Cuadrado S, Bahrami B, Vigliocco G. 2012 Coming of age: a review of embodiment and the neuroscience of semantics. Cortex 48, 788-804. (doi: 10. 1016/j. cortex. 2010. 11. 002).
108. Garagnani M, Wennekers T, Pulvermüller F. 2008 A neuroanatomically grounded Hebbian-learning model of attention-language interactions in the human brain. Eur. J. Neurosci. 27, 492-513. (doi: 10. 1111/j. 1460-9568. 2008. 06015. x).
109. Thompson RL, Vinson DP, Vigliocco G. 2009 The link between form and meaning in American sign language: lexical processing effects. J. Exp. Psychol. Lang. Mem. Cogn. 35, 550-557. (doi: 10. 1037/a0014547).
110. Kovic V, Plunkett K, Westermann G. 2010 The shape of words in the brain. Cognition 114, 19-28. (doi: 10. 1016/j. cognition. 2009. 08. 016).
111. Nygaard LC, Herold DS, Namy LL. 2009 The semantics of prosody: listeners' use of acoustic correlates to word meaning. Cogn. Sci. 33, 127-146. (doi: 10. 1111/j. 1551-6709. 2008. 01007. x).
112. Bergen BK. 2004 The psychological reality of phonaestemes. Language 80, 290-311. (doi: 10. 1353/lan. 2004. 0056).
113. Hauk O, Johnsrude I, Pulvermüller F. 2004 Somatotopic representation of action words in human motor and premotor cortex. Neuron 41, 301-307. (doi: 10. 1016/S0896-6273(03)00838-9).
114. Tettamanti M et al. 2005 Listening to action-related sentences activates fronto-parietal motor circuits. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 17, 273-281. (doi: 10. 1162/0898929053124965).
115. Kendon A. 2014 Semiotic diversity in utterance production and the concept of 'language'. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 369, 20130293. (doi: 10. 1098/rstb. 2013. 0293).
116. Liddell SK. 2003 Grammar, gesture, and meaning in American sign language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
117. Goldin-Meadow S. 2014 Widening the lens: what the manual modality reveals about language, learning and cognition. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 369, 20130295. (doi: 10. 1098/rstb. 2013. 0295).
118. Haiman J. 1985 Natural syntax. Iconicity and erosion. Cambridge Studies in Linguistics, Vol. 44. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
119. Kita S. 2008 World-view of protolanguage speakers as inferred from semantics of sound symbolic words: a case of Japanese mimetics. In The origins of language (ed. N Masataka), pp. 25-38. Tokyo, Japan: Springer.
120. Chomsky N. 1995 The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
121. Fitch T, Hauser MD, Chomsky N. 2005 The evolution of the language faculty: clarifications and implications. Cognition 97, 179-210. (doi: 10. 1016/j. cognition. 2005. 02. 005).
122. Hauser MD, Chomsky N, Fitch T. 2002 The faculty of language: what is it, who has it, and how did it evolve? Science 298, 1569-1579. (doi: 10. 1126/science. 298. 5598. 1569).
123. Givón T. 2001 Syntax: an introduction. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
124. Meir I, Padden C, Aronoff M, Sandler W. 2013 Competing iconicities in the structure of languages. Cogn. Linguist. 24, 309-343. (doi: 10. 1515/cog-2013-0010).
125. Givón T. 1995 Functionalism and grammar. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
126. Greenberg JH. 1966 Language universals: with special reference to feature hierarchies. The Hague, The Netherlands: Mouton.
127. Landsberg ME (ed.) 2011 Syntactic iconicity and linguistic freezes. Studies in anthropological linguistics 9. Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
128. Bybee J. 1985 Diagrammatic iconicity in stem-inflection relations. In Iconicity in syntax (ed. J Haiman), pp. 11-48. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
129. Aronoff M, Meir I, Sandler W. 2005 The paradox of sign language morphology. Language 81, 301-344. (doi: 10. 1353/lan. 2005. 0043).
130. Meier RP. 2002 Why different, why the same? Explaining effects and non-effects of modality upon linguistic structure in sign and speech. In Modality and structure in signed and spoken languages (eds RP Meier, K Cormier, D Quinto-Pozos), pp. 1-25. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
131. Perniss P. 2012 Use of sign space. In Sign language: an international handbook (eds R Pfau, M Steinbach, B Woll), pp. 412-431. Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
132. Meir I. 2012 The evolution of verb classes and verb agreement in signed languages. Theoret. Ling. 38, 145-152. (doi: 10. 1515/tl-2012-0008).