Metrical structure, morphological gaps, and possible grammaticalization in ASL

Sign Language and Linguistics (Online)

Volumn 2, Issue 2, 1999, Pages 217-244

  Wilbur, Ronnie ^a  

^a PURDUE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84989382531     PISSN: 13879316     EISSN: 1569996X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1075/sll.2.2.05wil     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Aarons, D. (1994). Aspects of the syntax of ASL. Doctoral dissertation, Boston University.
2. Aarons, D., B. Bahan, J. Kegl & C. Neidle (1992). “Clausal structure and a tier for grammatical marking in ASL.” Nordic Journal of Linguistics 15: 103-42.
3. Allen, G. D., R. B. Wilbur & B. Schick (1991). “Determining the rhythm of ASL.” Sign Language Studies 72: 297-320.
4. Auger, J. (1993). “More evidence for verbal agreement-marking in Colloquial French.” In W Ashby, M. Mithun, G. Perissinotto & E. Rapossa (eds.), Linguistic perspectives on the Romance languages, pp. 177-198. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
5. Battison, R., H. Markowicz & J. Woodward (1975). “A good rule of thumb: Variable phonology in ASL.” In R. Shuy & R. Fasold (eds.), New ways of analyzing variation in English, pp. 291-302. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
6. Bolinger, D. (1985). “Two views of accent.” Journal of Linguistics 21: 79-123.
7. Bos, H. F. (1995). “Pronoun copy in sign language of The Netherlands.” In H. Bos & Trude Schermer (eds.), Sign language research 1994: Proceedings of the fourth European Congress on Sign Language Research, pp. 121-147. Hamburg: Signum.
8. Chafe, W. (1976). “Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics, and point of view.” In C. Li (ed.), Subject and topic, pp. 25-55. New York: Academic Press.
9. Coulter, G. (1982). “On the nature of ASL as a monosyllabic language.” LSA, San Diego.
10. Coulter, G. (1990). “Emphatic stress in ASL.” In S. Fischer & P. Siple (eds.), Theoretical issues in sign language research: Linguistics, pp.109-26. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
11. Covington, V (1973). “Features of stress in American Sign Language.” Sign Language Studies 2: 39-58.
12. Cruttenden, A. (1986). Intonation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13. Delin, J. (1992). “Properties of it-cleft presupposition.” Journal of Semantics 9: 289-306.
14. Friedman, L. (1976). Phonology of a soundless language: Phonological structure of American Sign Language. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
15. Gussenhoven, C. (1983). “Focus, mode and the nucleus.” Journal of Linguistics 19: 377-417.
16. Gussenhoven, C. (1985). “Two views of accent: A reply.” Journal of Linguistics 21: 125-138.
17. Halle, M. & J.-R.Vergnaud (1987). An essay on stress. Cambridge: MIT Press.
18. Hayes, B. (1982). “Extrametricality and English stress.” Linguistic Inquiry 13: 227-276.
19. Janis, W (1992). Morphosyntax of the ASL verb phrase. Doctoral dissertation, SUNY at Buffalo.
20. Johnson, J. K. (1997). Morphological and syntactic grammaticalization in the history of French. Doctoral dissertation, Purdue University.
21. Kegl, J. (1990). “Predicate argument structure and verb class in the ASL lexicon.” In C. Lucas (ed.), Sign language research: Theoretical issues, pp. 149-175. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
22. Ladd, D. R. (1990). “An introduction to intonational phonology.” In G. Docherty & R. Ladd (eds.), Gesture, segment, prosody: Papers in laboratory phonology, pp. 321-334. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
23. Ladd, DR., Jr. (1996). Intonational phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
24. Lambrecht, K. (1994). Information structure and sentence form: Topic, focus, and the mental representations of discourse referents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25. Liddell, S. (1978). “Nonmanual signals and relative clauses in American Sign Language.” In P Siple (ed.), Understanding language through sign language research, pp. 59-90. New York: Academic Press.
26. Meir, I. (1998). “Syntactic-semantic interaction in Israeli Sign Language verbs: The case of backwards verbs.” Sign Language & Linguistics 1: 3-37.
27. Padden, C. (1983). Interaction of morphology and syntax in American Sign Language. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, San Diego.
28. Padden, C. (1990). “The relation between space and grammar in ASL verb morphology.” In C. Lucas (ed.), Sign language research: Theoretical issues, pp. 118-132. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
29. Petronio, K. (1991). “A focus position in ASL.” In J. Bobalijk & T. Bures (eds.), Papers from the third Student Conference in Linguistics, MIT Working Paper #14, pp. 211-225. Cambridge, MA: MITWPL.
30. Petronio, K. (1993). Clause structure in ASL. Doctoral dissertation, University ofWashing-ton, Seattle.
31. Prince, E. (1978). “A comparison of wh-clefts and it-clefts in discourse.” Language 94: 883-906.
32. Prince, E. (1986). “On the syntactic marking of presupposed open propositions.” Chicago Linguistic Society 22: 208-222.
33. Supalla, T. & E. Newport (1978). “How many seats in a chair? The derivation of nouns and verbs in American Sign Language.” In P Siple (ed.), Understanding language through sign language research, pp. 91-132. New York: Academic Press.
34. Vallduvi, E. (1991). “The role of plasticity in the association of focus and prominence.” In Y No & M. Libucha (eds.), ESCOL’90-Proceedings of the seventh eastern states conference on linguistics, pp. 295-306. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press.
35. Vallduvi, E. (1992). The informational component. New York: Garland Press.
36. Wilbur, R. B. (1990a). “Why syllables? What the notion means for ASL research.” In S. Fischer & P Siple (eds.), Theoretical issues in sign language research, pp. 81-108. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
37. Wilbur, R. B. (1990b). “An experimental investigation of stressed sign production.” International Journal of Sign Linguistics 1: 41-59.
38. Wilbur, R. B. (1991). “Intonation and focus in American Sign Language.” In Y. No & M. Libucha (eds.), ESCOL’90: Proceedings of the seventh eastern states conference on linguistics, pp. 320-331. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press.
39. Wilbur, R. B. (1994a). Focus structures in ASL. Paper presented at the Pragmatics of ASL Conference, Georgetown University.
40. Wilbur, R.B. (1994b). “Arguments for sentential subjects in ASL.” In I. Ahlgren, B. Bergman & M. Brennan (eds.), Perspectives on sign language structure: Proceedings of the fifth Symposium on Sign Language Research, pp. 215-235. Durham: ISLA.
41. Wilbur, R. B. (1994c). “Eyeblinks and ASL phrase structure.” Sign Language Studies 84: 221-240.
42. Wilbur, R. B. (1994d). “Foregrounding structures in ASL.” Journal of Pragmatics 22: 647-672.
43. Wilbur, R. B. (1995a). “What the morphology of operators looks like: A formal analysis of ASL brow-raise.” In L. Gabriele, D. Hardison & R. Westmoreland (eds.), FLSM VI: Formal Linguistics Society of Mid-America: Vol. 2. Syntax II & semantics/pragmatics, pp. 67-78. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club Publications.
44. Wilbur, R. B. (1995b). “Why so-called ‘rhetorical questions’ (RHQs) are neither rhetorical nor questions.” In H. Bos & T. Schermer (eds.), Sign language research 1994: fourth European congress on sign language research, Munich [International Studies on Sign Language and Communication of the Deaf, Vol. 29], pp. 149-169. Hamburg: Signum.
45. Wilbur, R. B. (1996). “Evidence for function and structure of wh-clefts in ASL.” International Review of Sign Linguistics 1: 209-256.
46. Wilbur, R. B. (1997). “A prosodic/pragmatic explanation for word order variation in ASL with typological implications.” In K. Lee, E. Sweetser & M. Verspoor (eds.), Lexical and syntactic constructions and the construction of meaning, pp. 89-104. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
47. Wilbur, R.B. (1999a). “Typological similarities between American Sign Language and Spanish.” Actas de VI simposio internacional de comunicación social (Santiago de Cuba) 1: 438-443.
48. Wilbur, R. B. (1999b). “Stress in ASL: Empirical evidence and linguistic issues.” Language & Speech 42: 229-250.
49. Wilbur, R. B. & G. Allen (1991). “Perceptual evidence against internal structure in ASL syllables.” Language & Speech 34: 27-46.
50. Wilbur, R. B., E. Klima & U. Bellugi (1983). “Roots: On the search for the origins of signs in ASL.” Chicago Linguistic Society 19: 314-36.
51. Wilbur, R. B. & C. Patschke (1999). “Syntactic correlates of brow raise in ASL.” Sign Language & Linguistics 2: 3-40.
52. Wilbur, R.B. & L. Petersen (1997). “Backwards signing and ASL syllable structure.” Language & Speech 40: 63-90.
53. Wilbur, R. B. & B. Schick (1987). “The effects of linguistic stress on sign movement in ASL.” Language & Speech 30: 301-323.
54. Wilbur, R. B. & H. N. Zelaznik (1997). Kinematic correlates of stress and position in ASL. Paper presented at the Linguistic Society ofAmerica, Chicago, IL.
55. Wood, S. K. (1999). Semantic and syntactic aspects of negation in American Sign Language. Master’s thesis, Purdue University.
56. Zimmer, J. & C. Patschke (1990). “A class of determiners in American Sign Language.” In C. Lucas (ed.), Sign language research: Theoretical issues, pp. 201-210. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.