The emerging grammar of nouns in a first generation sign language: Specification, iconicity, and syntax

A first generation family homesign system, dubbed “Z”, from the Tzotzil-speaking township of Zinacantan, in Chiapas, Mexico, provides insight into how a new sign language can begin to distinguish formally different “part-of-speech” categories. After describing the small signing community, consisting of 3 deaf sibling and their intermediate hearing sister, plus a younger cousin — the entire set of fluent adult signers — plus the hearing child of the oldest deaf signer, and setting out some of the theoretical issues surrounding the nature of “part-of-speech” in sign languages, the paper considers three sorts of mechanisms the language has developed to help distinguish signs that refer to objects from signs that refer to actions. These include a set of size-shape specifiers that co-occur with presumed nominal signs, an iconic contrast between different sign formational elements that somewhat inconsistently signal a noun/verb distinction, and, perhaps most interestingly, a construction involving a clearly grammaticalized locative or copular element that allows Z signers to make clear that they are referring to (physical) objects rather than actions. The paper concludes by considering the overall effect of these quite different formal strategies on the evolving language structure.

[1]  William Washabaugh Five Fingers For Survival , 1986 .

[2]  E. Schegloff,et al.  A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation , 2015 .

[3]  C. Butcher,et al.  Nouns and Verbs in A Self-Styled Gesture System: What′s in A Name? , 1994, Cognitive Psychology.

[4]  A. Kendon Gesture: Visible Action as Utterance , 2004 .

[5]  Adam Kendon,et al.  Sign languages of aboriginal Australia : cultural, semiotic and communicative perspectives , 1988 .

[6]  William Washabaugh Hearing and Deaf Signers on Providence Island , 1979 .

[7]  Marie Coppola,et al.  Sign Languages: Deixis in an emerging sign language , 2010 .

[8]  付伶俐 打磨Using Language,倡导新理念 , 2014 .

[9]  P. Brown The INs and ONs of Tzeltal locative expressions: the semantics of static descriptions of location , 1994 .

[10]  J. Kegl Creation through contact : Sign language emergence and sign language change in Nicaragua , 1999 .

[11]  C. Macleod,et al.  A DEAF MAN’S SIGN LANGUAGE — ITS NATURE AND POSITION RELATIVE TO SPOKEN LANGUAGES , 1973 .

[12]  W. So,et al.  Abstract and Object-Anchored Deixis: Pointing and Spatial Layout in Adult Homesign Systems in Nicaragua , 2005 .

[13]  Barbara Hunger,et al.  Noun/Verb Pairs in Austrian Sign Language (ÖGS) , 2006 .

[14]  Olivier Le Guen,et al.  An exploration in the domain of time: From Yucatec Maya time gestures to Yucatec Maya Sign Language time signs , 2012 .

[15]  O. Van Word and Object , 1960 .

[16]  Irit Meir,et al.  Iconicity and metaphor: Constraints on metaphorical extension of iconic forms , 2010 .

[17]  David Bamman,et al.  The Seeds of Spatial Grammar : Spatial Modulation and Coreference in Homesigning and Hearing Adults , 2010 .

[18]  Edward Sapir,et al.  Language: An Introduction to the Study of Speech , 1955 .

[19]  Sridhar Reddy,et al.  What is the Sign , 2015 .

[20]  Marvin B. Sallop,et al.  The Silent Inventor: The Creation of a Sign Language by the Only Deaf-Mute on a Polynesian Island. , 2013 .

[21]  K. Cormier,et al.  Predicate Structures, Gesture, and Simultaneity in the Representation of Action in British Sign Language: Evidence From Deaf Children and Adults , 2013, Journal of deaf studies and deaf education.

[22]  Cornelia Müller 12. Gestures as a medium of expression: The linguistic potential of gestures , 2013 .

[23]  Sarah Florence Taub,et al.  Language from the Body: Iconicity and Metaphor in American Sign Language , 2001 .

[24]  Ronald W. Langacker,et al.  Nouns and Verbs , 1987 .

[25]  C. Müller Wie Gesten bedeuten. Eine kognitiv-linguistische und sequenzanalytische Perspektive , 2010 .

[26]  E. Klima The signs of language , 1979 .

[27]  Jill P. Morford,et al.  Insights to language from the study of gesture: A review of research on the gestural communication of non-signing deaf people , 1996 .

[28]  Susan Goldin-Meadow,et al.  26. Homesign: gesture to language , 2012 .

[29]  Bernd Heine,et al.  Possession: Cognitive Sources, Forces, and Grammaticalization , 1997 .

[30]  Susan Goldin-Meadow,et al.  When does a system become phonological? Handshape production in gesturers, signers, and homesigners , 2011, Natural Language & Linguistic Theory.

[31]  Terry Janzen,et al.  34. Lexicalization and grammaticalization , 2012 .

[32]  Susan Goldin The resilience of language : what gesture creation in deaf children can tell us about how all children learn language , 2003 .

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

[34]  Waldemar Schwager,et al.  Word classes in sign languages: Criteria and classifications , 2008 .

[35]  Jana Bressem,et al.  45. Towards a grammar of gestures: A form-based view , 2013 .

[36]  Jürgen Streeck,et al.  Gesturecraft: The manu-facture of meaning , 2009 .

[37]  Connie De Vos,et al.  Sign-spatiality in Kata Kolok: How a village sign language in Bali inscribes its signing space , 2012 .

[38]  Carol A. Padden,et al.  Against all expectations : Encoding subjects and objects in a new language , 2007 .

[39]  Jill P. Morford,et al.  Language and Gesture: Gestural precursors to linguistic constructs: how input shapes the form of language , 2000 .

[40]  Marie Coppola,et al.  Grammatical Subjects in home sign: Abstract linguistic structure in adult primary gesture systems without linguistic input. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[41]  Irit Meir,et al.  Body as subject1 , 2007, Journal of Linguistics.

[42]  Pamela M. Perniss,et al.  Possessive and existential constructions in Kata Kolok , 2008 .

[43]  The Manu-Facturing of a Language , 2013 .

[44]  M. Engelmann The Philosophical Investigations , 2013 .

[45]  Shun-chiu Yau,et al.  Création de langues gestuelles chez des sourds isolés. , 1988 .

[46]  Nancy J. Frishberg ARBITRARINESS AND ICONICITY: HISTORICAL CHANGE IN AMERICAN SIGN LANGUAGE , 1975 .

[47]  B. Woll,et al.  The development of complex verb constructions in British Sign Language , 2002, Journal of Child Language.

[48]  A. Kendon,et al.  A description of a deaf-mute sign language from the Enga Province of Papua New Guinea with some comparative discussion , 1980 .

[49]  Ivani Fusellier-Souza,et al.  Emergence and Development of Signed Languages: From a Semiogenetic Point of View , 2006 .

[50]  John W. Du Bois The Discourse Basis of Ergativity , 1987 .

[51]  Christian Cuxac Les langues des signes : analyseurs de la faculté de langage , 2001 .

[52]  C. Padden,et al.  The emergence of grammar: systematic structure in a new language. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[53]  William Washabaugh,et al.  The Organization and Use of Providence Island Sign Language , 2013 .

[54]  Vadim Kimmelman,et al.  Parts of speech in Russian Sign Language: The role of iconicity and economy , 2009 .