Rathman, Christian. 2000. The optional nature of the agreement, sentence: evidence from signed languages. Austin, TX: University of Texas at Austin MA Thesis. Michael Cysouw. 2011. Very atypical agreement in fact. Theoretical linguistics 37 (3/4). 153-160. DOI: doi.org/10.1515/thli.2011.011 13The fact that in LS, the relevant characteristics (i.e. R-loci) are not lexical characteristics of the controller, such as.
B sex in many spoken languages, but are flexible and depend on the context of the speech (cf. Steinbach – Onea 2016). While a DP may be related to the ipsilateral zone of the horizontal plane in the context of speech A, the same DP may be related to the contralateral zone in another context of speech B. The relevant features therefore have transient properties. This flexibility in the allocation of R-loci to speech speakers is a characteristic specific to the modality of gestinated languages, which can be compared to the flexibility of the allocation of thematic markers to DPS in Asian languages, the marking of the differential object in many spoken languages (Aissen 2003) or the obviatory markers in the algonquian languages directly discussed below. Strickland, Brent, Carlo Geraci, Emmanuel Chemla, Philippe Schlenker, Meltem Kelepir and Roland Pfau. 2015. Event representations limit the structure of language: sign language as a window on universally accessible linguistic prejudices. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) 112 (19). 5968-5973. DOI: doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1423080112 38An alternative to a person function would be the [uIdent] feature, proposed in Costello (2015), which argues that the postulation of a function [uPerson] for sign language causes certain complications.
As this question is orthogonal on the issues we follow here, we stick to the traditional feature of ease of use. Janis, Wynne D. 1995. An inter-linguistic perspective on the ASL verb convention. In Karen Emmorey – Judy Reilly (note), Language, Gesture and Space, 195-223. NJ Hillsdale: Erlbaum. Benjamin Bahan. 1996. Non-manual implementation of the agreement in ASL. Boston, MA: Boston University thesis.
What is it, Josep? 2011. If one accepts a disagreement, this is not enough: other arguments in favour of the linguistic status of a sign language agreement. Theoretical linguistics 37 (3/4). 189-196. DOI: doi.org/10.1515/thli.2011.014 Another proposal sees the emergence of a concordance in sign languages established as a result of air conditioning or the inclusion of pronouns – a means of grammaticizing flexining in many spoken languages (Fischer 1975; Pfau and Steinbach 2006). The review of management as a coriification could be useful, given some of the non-canonical features of the arrangement referred to in Section 6.1 (see Nevins 2009). However, the existence of retrograde verbs in well-established and youthd sign languages (Aronoff et al. 2004) is a challenge for such an approach. In these types of verbs, the pronoun of the subject that appears before the verb (for S-O languages) does not share a place with the beginning of the verb; similarly, the final place of the verb is not the same as the place of the object. A possible explanation for the different evolution of upside-down direction was proposed by Quadros and Quer (2010). They suggested that upside-down verbs are the result of the manipulation of verbs and that they do mark local agreement rather than object agreement. Robin Thompson, Karen Emmorey and Robert Kluender.
2006. The relationship between the eye and the verb chord in American sign language: a follow-up study of the eyes. Language and Natural Language Theory 24-571-604. DOI: doi.org/10.1007/s11049-005-1829-y In almost all signed languages described to date (see section 6.2 to examine exceptions), at least three classes of verbs have been identified. The first class contains verbs indicating direction to indicate a human subject/object, for example. B GIVE, HELP and ASK. These verbs, often called simple verbs (person) agree, are alleged to show agreement in person (first vs.