A classification of compounds in American Sign Language: an evaluation of the Bisetto and Scalise framework

Cross-linguistic comparisons of compounds are difficult because of the varied criteria and terms used by different linguists (Scalise and Bisetto 2009). To address this problem, Scalise and Bisetto proposed a universal three-level classification of compound types. Although several researchers have shown that American Sign Language (ASL) has compound signs, a classification of compound types in ASL has not been completed. All of the potential compounds in an ASL dictionary (Costello 1994) were identified, then verified as compounds with the help of a fluent deaf signer by applying standard tests for composition. These compounds were then classified using the Scalise and Bisetto classification. We found that Scalise and Bisetto’s three-level hierarchical classification successfully captured cross-category relationships among subtypes of compounds but fails to predict the existence of one type of compound attested in ASL. In our revised classification, a consistent set of criteria is used at each level, resulting in a classification that is both conceptually simpler and empirically more adequate. The second tier category for hierarchical compounds are bifurcated into the categories expressed predicate and unexpressed predicate, according to whether each predicate in a compound’s semantic structure is expressed by one of the overt constituents. The revision has the further advantage of allowing us to avoid any reference to word class/grammatical category in applying our taxonomy, a goal that we show to be desirable on both theoretical and empirical grounds.

[1]  G. Arcodia,et al.  Coordination in compounding , 2010 .

[2]  L. Kornfeld IE, Romance: Spanish , 2011 .

[3]  Geert Booij,et al.  The grammar of words , 2005 .

[4]  Ceil Lucas,et al.  The Sociolinguistics of Sign Languages , 2001 .

[5]  Antonietta Bisetto,et al.  The Classification of Compounds , 2011 .

[6]  E. Costello,et al.  Random House American Sign Language Dictionary , 1994 .

[7]  Robert Bayley,et al.  The Sociolinguistics of Sign Languages: Sociolinguistic variation , 2001 .

[8]  Ceil Lucas,et al.  Language Contact in the American Deaf Community , 1992 .

[9]  Heidi Harley,et al.  Compounding in Distributed Morphology , 2011 .

[10]  Sharon Inkelas,et al.  Reduplication: Doubling in Morphology , 2005 .

[11]  Antonietta Bisetto,et al.  Universals of language today , 2009 .

[12]  W. Stokoe Sign language structure: an outline of the visual communication systems of the American deaf. 1960. , 1961, Journal of deaf studies and deaf education.

[13]  Bernhard Wälchli,et al.  Co-compounds and natural coordination , 2005 .

[14]  Scott K. Liddell THINK AND BELIEVE: SEQUENTIALITY IN AMERICAN SIGN LANGUAGE , 1984 .

[15]  Rochelle Lieber IE, Germanic: English , 2011 .

[16]  Martin L. A. Sternberg,et al.  American Sign Language , 1998 .

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

[18]  K. Emmorey Language, Cognition, and the Brain: Insights From Sign Language Research , 2001 .

[19]  Jan Don IE, Germanic: Dutch , 2011 .

[20]  Ceil Lucas,et al.  Sign Language Research: Theoretical Issues , 1990 .

[21]  P. Lacy,et al.  Papers in optimality theory , 1995 .

[22]  Sharon Inkelas,et al.  Reduplication: Abbreviations used in morpheme glosses , 2005 .

[23]  Laurie Bauer,et al.  Typology of Compounds , 2011 .

[24]  Jean Ann,et al.  The Sociolinguistics of Sign Languages: Bilingualism and language contact , 2001 .

[25]  Ronnie B. Wilbur,et al.  American sign language and sign systems , 1979 .

[26]  Irit Meir,et al.  A Cross-Modality Perspective On Verb Agreement , 2002 .

[27]  Robert E. Johnson,et al.  American Sign Language compound formation processes, lexicalization, and phonological remnants , 1986 .

[28]  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.

[29]  Ceil Lucas,et al.  Linguistics of American Sign Language: An Introduction , 1995 .

[30]  A. Zwicky,et al.  The handbook of morphology , 2001 .

[31]  N. Grandi When Morphology 'Feeds'Syntax: Remarks on Noun > Adjective Conversion in Italian AppositiveCompounds , 2009 .

[32]  Scott K. Liddell,et al.  American Sign Language: The Phonological Base , 2013 .

[33]  M. Mithun The evolution of noun incorporation , 1984 .

[34]  Maria Rosenberg Classification, headedness and pluralization: Corpus evidence from French compounds , 2007 .

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

[36]  Sharon Inkelas,et al.  Reduplication: Index of subjects , 2005 .

[37]  Laurie Bauer,et al.  Introducing Linguistic Morphology , 1988 .

[38]  Bianca Basciano,et al.  Compound headedness in Chinese: an analysis of neologisms , 2007 .

[39]  H. Marchand The categories and types of present-day English word-formation : a synchronic-diachronic approach , 1960 .

[40]  Rochelle Lieber,et al.  The Oxford handbook of compounding , 2011 .

[41]  Karen Emmorey,et al.  Perspectives on Classifier Constructions in Sign Languages , 2003 .

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

[43]  John O. Isenhath The Linguistics of American Sign Language , 1990 .

[44]  Sergio Scalise,et al.  Searching for Universals in Compounding , 2009 .

[45]  Irene Vogel,et al.  Cross-disciplinary issues in compounding , 2010 .

[46]  Wendy Sandler,et al.  Sign Language and Linguistic Universals: Entering the lexicon: lexicalization, backformation, and cross-modal borrowing , 2006 .

[47]  Einar Haugen,et al.  The analysis of linguistic borrowing. , 1950 .

[48]  A. L. Sexton Grammaticalization in American sign language , 1999 .

[49]  Alan S. Prince,et al.  Faithfulness and reduplicative identity , 1995 .

[50]  Patricia Siple,et al.  Understanding language through sign language research , 1978 .