................................................................................ 1 Chapter 1: Overview Introduction............................................................................ 5 1.1. Properties of agreement..................................................... 8 1.2. Agreement in Sign Language research.................................. 11 1.3. The analysis of verb agreement in ISL: Overview.................... 16 1.3.1. Agreement verbs as complex verbs................................ 17 1.4. General theoretical framework............................................. 22 1.4.1. The structure of the Lexicon....................................... 22 1.4.2. Lexical-semantic theory: Jackendoff (1990a).................... .27 1.4.3. Predicate Argument Structure...................................... 33 1.4.4. The phonology of signs............................................. 36 1.5. The structure of the thesis................................................. 43 Chapter 2: Reference and agreement in ISL Introduction............................................................................ 48 2.1. The referential system of ISL................................................50 2.1.1. Establishing reference points.......................................51 2.1.2. The referential morpheme.......................................... 56 2.1.3. Agreement as a copying procedure................................ 57 2.1.4. Pronominal vs. locative use of the referential system........... 62 2.1.4.1. The differences between locative and personal pronouns........................................................... 63 2.1.4.2. Problems with the distinction............................. 66 2.1.5. Summary...............................................................70 2.2. Verb agreement in ISL..................................................... 70 2.2.1. Verb classes in ISL: plain, agreement and spatial.................71 2.2.1.1. Plain verbs......................................................72 2.2.1.2. Agreement verbs and spatial verbs..........................73 Irit Meir, Dissertation, 1998 viii 2.2.2. The physical realization of agreement...............................84 2.2.2.1. Orientation vs. facing..........................................84 2.2.2.2. Non-manual agreement markers............................89 2.2.3. ‘Single argument agreement’. ........................................92 2.2.3.1. Verbs marked for initial body contact.......................93 2.2.3.2. Plain verbs articulated in different loci in space............94 2.2.4. Summary................................................................103 Chapter 3: Agreement mechanisms: Direction of Path and Facing of the Hands Introduction...............................................................................105 3.1. Agreement verbs: regular vs. backwards verbs..............................107 3.1.1. General description.....................................................107 3.1.2. The syntactic and semantic structure of agreement verbs.........110 3.2. Previous analyses...............................................................113 3.3. Proposed analysis: Two agreement mechanisms in a verb................121 3.4. Spatial thematic roles and agreement.........................................129 3.5. Facing an agreement marker or a Case marker?........................... 135 3.6. Consequences and implications................................................137 3.6.1. The double marking of the arguments.................................138 3.6.2. The problems of thematic agreement.................................140 3.7. Summary..........................................................................143 Chapter 4: The analysis of verbs agreement in ISL Introduction.................................................................................146 4.1. The Thematic Structure Agreement Analysis................................151 4.1.1. The derivation of agreement verbs.....................................151 4.1.2. Thematic Structure Agreement Analysis and the agreement puzzles in ISL............................................................157 4.2. The basic predicates of agreement verbs....................................163 4.2.1. PATH...................................................................163 4.2.2. TRANSFER............................................................171 4.2.2.1. Motivation for positing a TRANSFER predicate........171 4.2.2.2. The properties of TRANSFER.............................177 Irit Meir, Dissertation, 1998 ix 4.3. The TRANSFER+PATH merger............................................180 4.3.1. Argument structure merger...........................................181 4.3.2. A syntactic movement analysis (Larson 1988)....................191 4.3.3. A phonological merger...............................................196 4.4. The advantages of the analysis...............................................199 4.4.1. Explaining thematic agreement......................................199 4.4.2. Predicting the agreement pattern of ISL verbs.....................201 4.4.2.1. Properties of verbs of transfer..............................206 4.4.2.2. Agreement in spatial verbs vs. agreement verbs..........218 4.5. Summary........................................................................223 Chapter 5: Where do all the different agreement verbs come from? Introduction..............................................................................225 5.1. The derivation of monotransitive agreement verbs........................226 5.1.1. The LCS and PAS of monotransitive agreement verbs...........227 5.1.2. Monotransitive agreement verbs as Noun Incorporation ........230 5.2. The derivation of di-transitive agreement verbs...........................236 5.3. The phonological properties of agreement verbs..........................240 5.3.1. The phonological representation of agreement verbs.............242 5.3.2. Various phonological manifestations, as a result of phonological clashes.....................................................................246 5.4. Summary........................................................................253 Chapter 6: Predictions Introduction.............................................................................254 6.1. What might constitute counterexamples for the analysis?..............254 6.2. ‘Frighten’-type Psych Verbs...............................................260 Chapter 7: Comparison with other approaches Introduction.............................................................................263 7.1. The Locative Approach (Gee and Kegl 1982, Shepard-Kegl 1985)... 266 7.2. The Direction Approach (Brentari 1988, forthcoming).................273 7.3. The Controller Feature Analysis (Janis 1992)...........................279 Irit Meir, Dissertation, 1998 x 7.4. Summary: The Thematic Structure Agreement Theory vs. other approaches.................................................286 Chapter 8: Agreement in Broader Context: Sign Languages vs. Spoken Languages Reconsidered Introduction.............................................................................288 8.1. In what ways do sign languages differ from spoken languages?........292 8.1.1. The nature of the agreeing element.................................292 8.1.2. The relative ordering of the agreement process in the morphology....................................................295 8.2. The modality impact: Iconicity of spatial predicates....................298 8.2.1. Iconicity and arbitrariness in language: spoken vs. sign languages...............................................299 8.2.2. Iconicity in verb agreement..........................................304 8.2.2.1. Iconicity and modality: iconicity as the preferred strategy.......................................305 8.2.2.2. ‘Conceptual onomatopoeia’: semantic perspicuity in sign language verb morphology........................311 8.3. Methodology for future research: the facing of the hands...............313 8.4. Conclusions.....................................................................316 References..............................................................................321 Appendix A: A list of agreement verbs in ISL.......................................333 Appendix B: A list of plain verbs in ISL.............................................337 Appendix C: Subject-Object asymmetry in ISL.....................................339 Transcription conventions .............................................................341 Abbreviations............................................................................342 Irit Meir, Dissertation, 1998 xi Irit Meir, Dissertation, 1998 1 Thematic Structure and Verb Agreement In Israeli Sign Language
[1]
Ken Hale,et al.
The syntactic character of thematic structure
,
1992
.
[2]
Carol Neidle,et al.
Clausal Structure and a Tier for Grammatical Marking in American Sign Language
,
1992,
Nordic Journal of Linguistics.
[3]
F. Saussure,et al.
Course in General Linguistics
,
1960
.
[4]
John M. Anderson,et al.
The Grammar of Case: Towards a Localistic Theory
,
1976
.
[5]
Diane Brentari,et al.
A Prosodic Model of Sign Language Phonology
,
1999
.
[6]
Diane C. Lillo-Martin,et al.
WH-MOVEMENT AND THE POSITION OF SPEC-CP : EVIDENCE FROM AMERICAN SIGN LANGUAGE
,
1997
.
[7]
J. Zwart.
The Minimalist Program
,
1998,
Journal of Linguistics.
[8]
Stephen R. Anderson,et al.
A-Morphous morphology
,
1992
.
[9]
Wendy Sandler.
One phonology or two? Sign language and phonological theory
,
2000
.
[10]
Irene Greftegreff,et al.
Orientation in Inedxical Signs in Norwegian Sign language
,
1992,
Nordic Journal of Linguistics.
[11]
P. Bouissac.
Syntactic iconicity and connectionist models of language and cognition
,
1995
.
[12]
Y. Falk.
Case Typology and Case Theory
,
1997
.
[13]
J. Haiman,et al.
Iconicity in Syntax
,
1987
.
[14]
Mark C. Baker,et al.
Incorporation: A Theory of Grammatical Function Changing
,
1988
.
[15]
H. Woodbury.
Onondaga Noun Incorporation: Some Notes on the Interdependence of Syntax and Semantics
,
1975,
International Journal of American Linguistics.
[16]
W. Stokoe,et al.
Sign language structure: an outline of the visual communication systems of the American deaf. 1960.
,
1961,
Journal of deaf studies and deaf education.
[17]
B. Levin,et al.
What to do with theta-roles
,
1986
.
[18]
H. Bos.
Pronoun copy in Sign Language of The Netherlands
,
1995
.
[19]
Lynn A. Friedman,et al.
Space, Time, and Person Reference in American Sign Language.
,
1975
.
[20]
À. Keith,et al.
The role of argument structure in grammar
,
1996
.
[21]
E. Klima.
The signs of language
,
1979
.
[22]
Nigel A. Brown,et al.
On the other hand
,
1993,
Nature.
[23]
G. Miller,et al.
Language and Perception
,
1976
.
[24]
C. Huang.
On the distribution and reference of empty pronouns
,
1984
.
[25]
Carson T. Schütze.
Towards a Minimalist Account of Quirky Case and Licensing in Icelandic
,
1993
.
[26]
R. S. Jackendo,et al.
Toward an Explanatory Semantic Representation
,
1976
.
[27]
Barbara B. Levin,et al.
English verb classes and alternations
,
1993
.
[28]
M. Mithun.
The evolution of noun incorporation
,
1984
.
[29]
M. Nespor,et al.
Prosody in Israeli Sign Language
,
1999
.
[30]
H. Clark,et al.
In cognitive development and the acquisition of language
,
1973
.
[31]
Ray Jackendoff,et al.
Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar
,
1972
.
[32]
H. Bos,et al.
An auxiliaty verb in Sign Language of the Netherlands
,
1994
.
[33]
Joan Bresnan,et al.
On Topic, Pronoun, and Agreement in Chichewa.
,
1985
.
[34]
H. H. Clark.
SPACE, TIME, SEMANTICS, AND THE CHILD
,
1973
.
[35]
S. Thompson,et al.
Transitivity in Grammar and Discourse
,
1980
.
[36]
M. Baker.
The mirror principle and morphosyntactic explanation
,
1985
.
[37]
Scott K. Liddell.
THINK AND BELIEVE: SEQUENTIALITY IN AMERICAN SIGN LANGUAGE
,
1984
.
[38]
Irit Meir,et al.
Verb classifiers as noun incorporation in Israeli sign language
,
2001
.
[39]
Ke Zou.
Resultative V-V compounds in chinese
,
1994
.
[40]
Clayton Valli,et al.
Linguistics of American Sign Language: A Resource Text for Asl Users
,
1992
.
[41]
Judy Anne Shepard-Kegl,et al.
Locative relations in American Sign Language word formation, syntax and discourse
,
1985
.
[42]
益子 真由美.
Argument Structure
,
1993,
The Lexicon.
[43]
Harry van der Hulst,et al.
Units in the analysis of signs
,
1993,
Phonology.
[44]
Sherman Wilcox,et al.
Gesture and the Nature of Language
,
1995
.
[45]
Elena Antinoro Pizzuto,et al.
Noun morphology in Italian sign language (LIS)
,
1996
.
[46]
Joan L. Bybee.
Diagrammatic iconicity in stem-inflection relations
,
1985
.
[47]
Masayoshi Shibatani,et al.
Three Reasons for Not Deriving ‘Kill’ from ‘Cause to Die’ in Japanese
,
1972
.
[48]
Benjamin Bahan,et al.
Non-manual realization of agreement in American sign language
,
1996
.
[49]
Wendy Sandler,et al.
Phonological features and feature classes: The case of movements in sign language
,
1996
.
[50]
John Haiman,et al.
THE ICONICITY OF GRAMMAR: ISOMORPHISM AND MOTIVATION
,
1980
.
[51]
Sara Thomas Rosen,et al.
Argument structure and complex predicates
,
1990
.
[52]
W. Sandler.
A sonority cycle in American Sign Language
,
1993,
Phonology.
[53]
H. Bos,et al.
Agreement and prodrop in Sign Language of the Netherlands
,
1993
.
[54]
R. Jackendoff.
The Status of Thematic Relations in Linguistic Theory
,
1987
.
[55]
Iggy Roca.
Thematic structure : its role in grammar
,
1992
.
[56]
Geert Booij,et al.
Against split morphology
,
1993
.
[57]
Diane Lil' Lo-Martin.
Two kinds of null arguments in American Sign Language
,
1986
.
[58]
S. T. Rosen.
TWO TYPES OF NOUN INCORPORATION: A LEXICAL ANALYSIS
,
1989
.
[59]
R. Battison,et al.
Lexical Borrowing in American Sign Language
,
1978
.
[60]
James Paul Gee,et al.
Semantic Perspicuity and the Locative Hypothesis
,
1982
.
[61]
Yukio Oba,et al.
ON THE DOUBLE OBJECT CONSTRUCTION
,
1993
.
[62]
R. Jackendoff.
On Larson's treatment of the double object construction
,
1990
.
[63]
Alex Alsina,et al.
On the argument structure of causatives
,
1992
.
[64]
S. Anderson,et al.
A-morphous morphology
,
1992
.
[65]
Maria Luisa Zubizarreta,et al.
The Lexical Encoding of Scope Relations among Arguments
,
1992
.
[66]
K. Hale,et al.
Linguistic Inquiry 27:1–68 (Winter 1996) THE STRUCTURAL DETERMINATION OF CASE AND AGREEMENT
,
2022
.
[67]
Talmy Givón,et al.
Iconicity, isomorphism, and non-arbitrary coding in syntax
,
1985
.
[68]
Linda Uyechi,et al.
The geometry of visual phonology
,
1996
.
[69]
Wendy Sandler,et al.
Sign language and modularity
,
1993
.
[70]
Rochelle Lieber,et al.
On the organization of the lexicon
,
1981
.
[71]
Karl E. Zimmer.
Some Constraints on Turkish Causativization
,
1976
.
[72]
Linda R. Waugh,et al.
Iconicity in the lexicon and its relevance for a theory of morphology
,
1995
.
[73]
Elizabeth Thompson,et al.
Look... and See
,
1973
.
[74]
J. Kyle,et al.
Sign Language Research: Theoretical Issues
,
1990
.
[75]
Leonard Talmy,et al.
How Language Structures Space
,
1983
.
[76]
P. Siple,et al.
Theoretical issues in sign language research
,
1990
.
[77]
Refractor.
Vision
,
2000,
The Lancet.
[78]
Irit Meir,et al.
Syntactic-Semantic Interaction in Israeli Sign Language Verbs The Case of Backwards Verbs
,
1998
.
[79]
M. Baltin,et al.
The Mental representation of grammatical relations
,
1985
.
[80]
A. Senghas,et al.
Children's contribution to the birth of Nicaraguan sign language
,
1995
.
[81]
Michael Strong,et al.
Language Learning and Deafness
,
1988
.
[82]
Roy K. Sedge,et al.
American Sign Language and Sign Systems
,
1980
.
[83]
Bonnie Gough,et al.
Verbs in American Sign Language
,
2013
.
[84]
Elisabeth Engberg-Pedersen,et al.
Space in Danish sign language : the semantics and morphosyntax of the use of space in a visual language
,
1993
.
[85]
J. Kegl.
Creation through contact : Sign language emergence and sign language change in Nicaragua
,
1999
.
[86]
Scott K. Liddell,et al.
American Sign Language: The Phonological Base
,
2013
.
[87]
Mark Aronoff,et al.
Word Formation in Generative Grammar
,
1979
.
[88]
Marianne Mithun,et al.
Active/agentive case marking and its motivations
,
1991
.
[89]
Geert Booij.
Morphology, semantics and argument structure
,
1992
.
[90]
David M. Perlmutter.
SONORITY AND SYLLABLE STRUCTURE IN AMERICAN SIGN LANGUAGE
,
1993
.
[91]
Diane C. Lillo-Martin,et al.
Universal Grammar and American Sign Language: Setting the Null Argument Parameters
,
1991
.
[92]
Ted Suppalla,et al.
The Classifier System in American Sign Language
,
1986
.
[93]
Wendy K. Wilkins,et al.
Control, PRO, and the Projection Principle
,
1986
.
[94]
J. Gee,et al.
Language Learning and Deafness: American Sign Language and the human biological capacity for language
,
1988
.