Finding frequency effects in the usage of NOT collocations in American Sign Language

This study explores whether American Sign Language (ASL) users exhibit frequency effects on two-sign combinations as observed in spoken languages. Studies on spoken languages have demonstrated that frequency of usage influences the emergence of grammatical constructions; however, there has been less investigation of this question for signed languages. To examine frequency effects in ASL, this study analyzes patterns of a grammatical manual negation morpheme glossed as NOT produced sequentially with other signs. Findings reveal that NOT is produced with specific signs, demonstrating that the grammaticalization of NOT increases as frequency does in ASL collocations. The analysis shows that a few signs are highly phonologically fused with the negation marker, providing emerging evidence that these collocations have experienced chunking , as they are schematic, fused constituent structures in ASL. Given frequency effects found in the study, chunking appears to be a domain-general cognitive processing mechanism independent of modality effects.

[1]  Paul J. Hopper,et al.  On some principles of grammaticization , 1991 .

[2]  Roland Pfau,et al.  Grammaticalization in sign languages , 2011 .

[3]  Jill P. Morford,et al.  Frequency Characteristics of American Sign Language , 2003 .

[4]  Roland Pfau,et al.  Visible Variation: Comparative studies on sign language structure , 2007 .

[5]  Carol Neidle,et al.  The Syntax of American Sign Language: Functional Categories and Hierarchical Structure , 1999 .

[6]  Diane E. Anderson,et al.  The puzzle of negation: How children move from communicative to grammatical negation in ASL , 1997, Applied Psycholinguistics.

[7]  T. Humphries,et al.  A Basic Course in American Sign Language , 1981 .

[8]  Manuel Carreiras,et al.  Lexical processing in Spanish Sign Language (LSE) , 2008 .

[9]  Trevor Johnston,et al.  Phonological variation and change in Australian and New Zealand Sign Languages: The location variable , 2009, Language Variation and Change.

[10]  Ronnie B. Wilbur,et al.  A Linguistic Analysis of the Negative Headshake in American Sign Language , 1990 .

[11]  Carol Padden,et al.  How the Alphabet Came to Be Used in a Sign Language , 2003 .

[12]  Joan L. Bybee,et al.  Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure , 2001 .

[13]  M. Haspelmath,et al.  Pre-established categories don't exist: Consequences for language description and typology , 2007 .

[14]  U. Zeshan.  Hand, head and face - negative constructions in sign languages , 2004 .

[15]  R. Battison,et al.  Phonological Deletion in American Sign Language , 2013 .

[16]  William Croft,et al.  Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic Theory in Typological Perspective , 2001 .

[17]  Trevor Johnston,et al.  Lexical frequency in sign languages. , 2012, Journal of deaf studies and deaf education.

[18]  Jason M. Brenier,et al.  Predictability Effects on Durations of Content and Function Words in Conversational English , 2009 .

[19]  Elizabeth Closs Traugott,et al.  Subjectivity and subjectivisation: Subjectification in grammaticalisation , 1995 .

[20]  David McKee,et al.  The Distribution of Signs in New Zealand Sign Language , 2006 .

[21]  Barbara Shaffer,et al.  CAN'T: The Negation of Modal Notions in ASL , 2002 .

[22]  Joan L. Bybee.  Phonology and Language Use , 2004, Phonetica.

[23]  Scott K. Liddell.  American Sign Language Syntax , 1981 .

[24]  Charlotte Lee Baker-Shenk,et al.  American Sign Language : A Teacher's Resource Text on Grammar and Culture , 1991 .

[25]  Sherman Wilcox,et al.  The Gestural Expression of Modality in ASL , 1995 .

[26]  M. Aronoff,et al.  The Paradox of Sign Language Morphology , 2005, Language.

[27]  E. Traugott.  On the Rise of Epistemic Meanings in English: An Example of Subjectification in Semantic Change , 1989 .

[28]  K. Petronio,et al.  Yes, No, Visibility, and Variation in ASL and Tactile ASL , 2006 .