Classifier constructions and morphology in two sign languages

Perspectives on Classifier Constructions in Sign Languages

Volumn , Issue , 2003, Pages 52-83

  Aronoff, Mark ^a   Meir, Irit ^b   Padden, Carol ^c   Sandler, Wendy ^b  

^a STONY BROOK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF HAIFA   (Israel)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84919562366     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9781410607447     Document Type: Chapter

References (98)

1. Aissen, J. (1992). Topic and focus in Mayan. Language, 68(1), 43-77.
2. Allan, K. (1997). Classifiers. Language, 53, 285-311.
3. Aronoff, M., Meir, I.,&Sandler,W. (2000). Universal and particular aspects of sign language morphology. University of Maryland Working Papers in Linguistics, vol. 10, 1-33.
4. Aronoff, M., & Sridhar, S. N. (1987). Morphological levels in English and Kannada. In E. Gussman (Ed.), Rules and the lexicon (pp. 10-22). Lublin: Caatholic University Press.
5. Battison, R. (1978). Lexical borrowing in American Sign Language. Silver Spring, MD: Linstok Press.
6. Bellugi, U.,&Fischer, S. (1972).Acomparison of signed and spoken language. Cognition, 1, 173-200.
7. Bickerton, D. (1977). Pidginization and creolization: Language acquisition and language universals. In A.Valdman (Ed.), Pidgin and creole linguistics (pp. 49-69). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
8. Bickerton, D. (1994). The language bioprogram hypothesis. Behavior and Brain Sciences, 7, 173-221.
9. Brennan, M. (1990).Word formation in British Sign Language. Stockholm: The University of Stockholm.
10. Brentari, D. (1995). Sign language phonology: ASL. In J. Goldsmith (Ed.), A handbook of phonological theory (pp. 615-639) Oxford: Blackwell.
11. Brentari, D. (1998). A prosodic model of sign language phonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
12. Carden, G.,&Stewart,W. A. (1988). Binding theory, bioprogram, and creolization: Evidence from Haitian Creole. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, 3, 1-67.
13. Coulter,G. (1982, December). On the nature of ASL as a monosyllabic language. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, San Diego, CA.
14. DeGraff, M. (Ed.). (1999). Language creation and language change: Creolization, diachrony, and development. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
15. Emmorey, K. (1995). Processing the dynamic visual-spatial morphology of signed languages. In L. B. Feldman (Ed.), Morphological aspects of language processing: Crosslinguistic perspectives (pp. 29-54). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
16. Emmorey,K. (2002). Language, cognition, and the brain: Insights from sign language research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
17. Engberg-Pedersen, E. (1993). Space in Danish Sign Language: The semantics and morphosyntax of the use of space in a visual language. Hamburg: SIGNUM-Verlag.
18. Feldman, H., Goldin-Meadow, S.,&Gleitman, L. (1978). Beyond Herodotus: The creation of language by linguistically deprived deaf children. In A. Lock (Ed.), Action, gesture, and symbol: The emergence of language (pp. 351-414). New York: Academic Press.
19. Fischer, S. (1978). Sign languages and creoles. In P. Siple (Ed.), Understanding language through sign language research (pp. 309-331). New York: Academic Press.
20. Fischer, S. (1979). Many a slip 'twixt the hand and the lip: The application of linguistic theory to non-oral languages. Paper presented at the conference, Applications of Linguistic Theory in the Human Sciences, Michigan State University.
21. Fischer, S., & Osugi, Y. (2000, July). Thumbs up vs. giving the finger: Indexical classifiers in NS and ASL. Paper presented at the 7th International Conference on Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research, Amsterdam.
22. Frischberg, N. (1975). Arbitrariness and iconicity: Historical change in American Sign Language. Language 51, 696-719.
23. Gallaudet Research Institute. (2001, January). Regional and national summary report of data from the 1999-2000 annual survey of deaf and hard of hearing children & youth. Washington DC: Author.
24. Gee, J., & Goodhart, W. (1985). Nativization, linguistic theory, and deaf language acquisition. Sign Language Studies, 49, 291-342.
25. Gee, J.,&Goodhart,W. (1988). American Sign Language and the human biological capacity for language. In M. Strong (Ed.), Language learning and deafness (pp. 49-79). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
26. Grinevald, C. (2000). A morphosyntactic typology of classifiers. In G. Senft (Ed.). Systems of nominal classification (pp. 50-92). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
27. Gussenhoven, C. (1984). On the grammar and semantics of sentence accents. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Foris.
28. Hayes, B., & Lahiri, A. (1991). Bengali intonational phonology. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 9, 47-96.
29. Interpreting Consolidated. (1998). With Angela Petrone Stratiy, Pursuit of ASL: Interesting facts using classifiers [videotape]. (Available from Interpreting Consolidated, Box 203, Main P. O., Edmonton, Alberta, T5J 2J1, Canada).
30. Jackendoff, R. (1987). The status of thematic relations in linguistic theory. Linguistic Inquiry, 18, 369-411.
31. Jackendoff, R. (1990). Semantic structures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
32. Kegl, J.,&Wilbur,R. (1976). Where does structure stop and style begin? Syntax, morphology, and phonology vs. Stylistic variation in American Sign Language. Chicago Linguistic Society, 12, 376-396.
33. Kegl, J., Senghas, A.,&Coppola, M. (1999). Creation through contact: sign language emergence and sign language change in Nicaragua. In M. de Graff (Ed.), Language creation and language change: Creolization, diachrony, and development (pp. 179-237). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
34. Klima, E., & Bellugi, U. (1979). The signs of language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
35. Ladd, D. R. (1994). Intonational phonology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
36. Langdon, M. (1970). A grammar of Digueño. The Mesa Grande Dialect. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
37. Liddel, S. (1984). THINK and BELIEVE: Sequentiality in American Sign Language. Language 60, 372-392.
38. Liddell, S., & Johnson, R. (1989). American Sign Language: The phonological base. Sign Language Studies, 64, 197-277.
39. Lightfoot, D. (1979). Principles of diachronic syntax. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
40. Lightfoot, D. (1999). Creoles and cues. In M. de Graff, (Ed.), Language creation and language change: Creolization, diachrony, and development (pp. 431-452). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
41. Lillo-Martin, D., & Klima, E. (1990). Pointing out differences: ASL pronouns in syntactic theory. In S. Fischer&P. Siple (Eds.), Theoretical issues in sign language research (Vol. 1, pp. 191-210). Chicago, The University of Chicago Press.
42. Lumsden, J. S. (1999). Language acquisition and creolization. In M. de Graff (Ed.), Language creation and language change: Creolization, diachrony, and development (pp. 129-157). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
43. Mandel, M. (1981). Phonotactics and morphophonology in American Sign Language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
44. McCarthy, J. (1979). Formal problems in semitic phonology and morphology. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, MIT.
45. McCarthy, J. (1981).Aprosodic theory of nonconcatenative morphology. Linguistic Inquiry, 12, 373-418.
46. McDonald, B. (1982). Aspects of the American Sign Language predicate system. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Buffalo, NY: University of Buffalo.
47. McDonald, B. (1983). Levels of analysis in sign language research. In J. Kyle&B.Woll (Eds.), Language in sign. An international perspective on sign language (pp. 32-40). London: Croom Helm.
48. McWhorter, J. (1998). Identifying the creole prototype: Vindicating a typological class. Language, 74, 788-818.
49. Meir, I. (1998a). Thematic structure and verb agreement in Israeli Sign Language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
50. Meir, I. (1998b). Syntactic-semantic interaction of Israeli Sign Language verbs: The case of backwards verbs. Sign Language and Linguistics, 1(1), 3-37.
51. Meir, I. (2000). The emergence of a case marker in Israeli Sign Language. Unpublished manuscript, The University of Haifa.
52. Meir, I. (2001) Verb classifiers as noun incorporation in Israeli Sign Language. Yearbook of Morphology 1999, 295-315.
53. Meir, I. (2002). A cross-modality perspective on verb agreement. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 20, 413-450.
54. Meir, I., & Sandler,W. (in press). Language in space: A window on Israeli Sign Language. (Hebrew) University of Haifa Press.
55. Mithun, M. (1984). The evolution of noun incorporation. Language, 60(4), 847-894.
56. Mithun, M. (1986). The convergence of noun classification systems. In C. G. Craig (Ed.), Noun classes and categorization (pp. 379-397). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
57. Nespor, M., & Vogel, I. (1986). Prosodic phonology. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Foris.
58. Nespor, M., & Sandler, W. (1999). Prosody in Israeli Sign Language. Language and Speech, 42(2 & 3), 143-176.
59. Newport, E. (1999). Reduced input in the acquisition of signed languages: contributions to the study of creolization. In M. DeGraff (Ed.), Language creation and language change: Creolization, diachrony, and development (pp. 161-178). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
60. Packard, J. L. (2000). The morphology of Chinese: A linguistic and cognitive approach. New York: Cambridge University Press.
61. Padden, C. (1988). Interaction of morphology and syntax in American Sign Language. NewYork: Garland Publishers.
62. Perlmutter, D. (1992). Sonority and syllable structure in American Sign Language. Linguistic Inquiry, 23, 407-442.
63. Rathmann, C. (2000, July). Does the presence of a person agreement marker predict word order in SLs? Paper presented at the 7th International Conference on Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research, Amsterdam.
64. Rosenstein, O. (2001). ISL as a topic prominent language. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Haifa.
65. Sachs, O. (1989). Seeing voices: A journey into the world of the deaf. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
66. Sandler,W. (1989). Phonological representation of the sign: Linearity and nonlinearity in American Sign Language. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Foris.
67. Sandler,W. (1990). Temporal aspects and American Sign Language morphology. In S. Fischer & P. Siple (Eds.), Theoretical issues in sign language research (Vol. I, pp. 7-35). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
68. Sandler, W. (1993). A sonority cycle in ASL. Phonology, 10(2), 243-280.
69. Sandler,W. (1995). Markedness in the handshapes of sign language:Acomponential analysis. In H. van der Hulst&J. van deWeyer (Eds.), Leiden in last: HIL phonology papers I (pp. 369-399). The Hague: Holland Academie Graphics.
70. Sandler,W. (1996a, September). A negative suffix in ASL. Paper presented at conference on Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research, Montreal.
71. Sandler, W. (1996b). Representing handshapes. International Journal of Sign Linguistics, 1, 115-158.
72. Sandler,W. (1999a). Cliticization and prosodic words in a sign language. In T. Hall&U. Kleinhenz (Eds.), Studies on the phonological word (pp. 223-254). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
73. Sandler,W. (1999b). The medium is the message: Prosodic interpretation of linguistic content in sign language. Sign Language and Linguistics, 2(2), 187-216.
74. Sankoff, G. (1979). The genesis of a language. In K. Hill (Ed.), The genesis of language (pp. 23-24). Ann Arbor, MI: Karoma.
75. Schembri, A. (2003). Rethinking 'classifiers' in signed languages. In K. Emmorey (Ed.), Perspectives on Classifier Constructions in Sign Languages (pp. 3-34). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
76. Selkirk, E. (1984). Phonology and syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
77. Senft, G. (2000a). Systems of nominal classification. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
78. Senft, G. (2000b). What do we really know about nominal classification systems? In G. Senft (Ed.), Systems of nominal classification (pp. 11-49). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
79. Senghas, A. (1995). Children's contribution to the birth of Nicaraguan Sign Language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, MIT.
80. Shepard-Kegl, J. (1985). Locative relations in American Sign Language:Word formation, syntax, and discourse. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, MIT.
81. Singleton, J. (1989). Restructuring of language from impoverished input: Evidence for linguistic compensation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois.
82. Siple, P. (1978).Visual constraints for sign language communication. Sign Language Studies ,19, 95-110.
83. Supalla, T. (1982). Structure and acquisition of verbs of motion and location in ASL. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, San Diego.
84. Supalla, T. (1986). The classifier system in American Sign Language. In C. Craig (Ed.), Noun classes and categorization: Typological studies in language, Vol. 7 (pp. 181-214). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
85. Supalla, T. (1990). Manually coded English: The modality question in signed language development. In P. Siple & S. Fischer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in sign language research, Vol. 2: Acquisition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
86. Supalla, T. (1998, November). Reconstructing early ASL grammar through historical films. A talk presented at the Sixth International Conference on Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Linguistics, Gallaudet University, Washington DC.
87. Sweetser, E. (1990). From etymology to pragmatics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
88. Talmy, L. (1983). How language structures space. In H. Pick & L. Acredolo (Eds.), Spatial orientation: Theory, research and application (pp. 225-282). New York: Plenum.
89. Thomason, S. G.,&Kaufman, T. (1988). Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
90. Thompson, L. C. (1965). A Vietnamese grammar. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
91. van der Hulst, H. (1993). Units in the analysis of signs. Phonology, 10(2), 209-242.
92. van der Hulst, H., Gijn, I.,&Kita, S. (2000).Howphonological is the symmetry condition in sign language? Unpublished manuscript, University of Amsterdam, Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, and Leiden University.
93. van der Kooij, E. (2001). The phonology of Nederland Gebarentaal. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Leiden University.
94. van Gijn, I., Kita, S., & van der Hulst, H. (2000). How phonological is the symmetry condition in sign language? Unpublished manuscript, University of Amsterdam, Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, and Leiden University .
95. Wallin, L. (1994). Polymorphemic predicates in Swedish Sign Language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Stockholm.
96. Wilbur, R. (1999). Stress in ASL: Empirical evidence and linguistic issues. Language and Speech 42, 229-250.
97. Zeshan, U. (2002). 'Classificatory' Constructions in Indo-Pakistani Sign Language: Grammaticalization and Lexicalization Processes. In K. Emmorey (Ed.), Perspectives on Classifier Constructions in Sign Languages (pp. 111-139). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
98. Zwicky,A. M.,&Pullum, G. K. (1983). Cliticization versus inflection: English n't. Language 59, 502-513.