1887
Volume 21, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1387-9316
  • E-ISSN: 1569-996X
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This paper contains the first description of impersonal reference in Russian Sign Language (RSL). Impersonal reference has been investigated using a variety of elicitation techniques. It has been found that RSL uses a variety of strategies, namely pro-drop, an indefinite pronoun a plural pronoun , and probably a second-person pronoun in impersonal contexts. The impersonal strategies in RSL follow the general typological tendencies previously identified for spoken languages (Gast & Van der Auwera 2013), and do not show obvious modality effects (such as described by Barberà & Quer 2013). Some impersonal strategies show evidence of influence of spoken/written Russian in the form of borrowing and/or code-switching.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/sll.00018.kim
2019-03-22
2019-12-11
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bank, Richard
    2014The ubiquity of mouthings in NGT. Nijmegen: Radboud UniversityPhD dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Barberà, Gemma
    2012a A unified account of specificity in Catalan Sign Language (LSC). InRick Nouwen, Anna Chernilovskaya & Ana Aguilar-Guevara (eds.), Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 16. Volume1. 43–55. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. 2012bThe meaning of space in Catalan Sign Language (LSC). Reference, specificity and structure in signed discourse. Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu FabraPhD dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Barberà, Gemma & Patricia Cabredo Hofherr
    2017 Backgrounded agents in Catalan Sign Language (LSC): passives, middles, or impersonals?Language93(4). 767–798. 10.1353/lan.2017.0057
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2017.0057 [Google Scholar]
  5. Barberà, Gemma & Josep Quer
    2013 Impersonal reference in Catalan Sign Language (LSC). InLaurence Meurant, Aurélie Sinte, Mieke van Herreweghe & Miriam Vermeerbergen (eds.), Sign language research, uses and practices: Crossing views on theoretical and applied sign language linguistics, 237–258. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9781614511472.237
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9781614511472.237 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bates, Douglas, Martin Maechler, Ben Bolker & Steve Walker
    2015 Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software67(1). 1–48. 10.18637/jss.v067.i01
    https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01 [Google Scholar]
  7. Burkova, Svetlana I.
    2012 Uslovnyje kosntruktsii russkogo zhestovogo jazyka [Conditional constructions in Russian Sign Language]. InOlga V. Fedorova (ed.), Russkij zhestovyj jazyk: pervaja lingvisticheskaja konferentsija: sbornik statej, 50–81. Moscow: Buki Vedi.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. 2015Russian Sign Language: general information. Russian Sign Language Corpus. Novosibirsk, 2012–2015. Project leader: Svetlana Burkova. rsl.nstu.ru/site/signlang
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Burkova, Svetalana I. & Elizaveta V. Filimonova
    2014 Reduplikatsija v russkom zhestovom jazyke [Reduplication in Russian Sign Language]. Russkij yazyk v nauchnom osveshchenii28. 202–258.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Cabredo Hofherr, Patricia
    2006 ‘Arbitrary’ pro and the theory of pro-drop. InPeter Ackema, Patrick Brandt, Maaike Schoorlemmer & Fred Weerman (eds.), Agreement and arguments, 230–258. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Caponigro, Ivano & Kathryn Davidson
    2011 Ask, and tell as well: clausal question-answer pairs in ASL. Natural Language Semantics19(4). 323–371. 10.1007/s11050‑011‑9071‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11050-011-9071-0 [Google Scholar]
  12. Davidson, Kathryn & Deanne Gagne
    2014 Vertical representation of quantifier domains. InUrtzi Etxeberria, Anamaria Fălăuș, Artiz Irurtzun & Bryan Leferman (eds.), Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 18, 110–127. Bayonne and Vitoria-Gasteiz.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Gast, Volker & Johan van der Auwera
    2013 Towards a distributional typology of human impersonal pronouns, based on data from European languages. InDik Bakker & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), Languages across boundaries. Studies in memory of Anna Siewierska, 31–56. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110331127.119
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110331127.119 [Google Scholar]
  14. Gries, Stefan Th
    2013Statistics for linguistics with R: a practical introduction (2nd revised edition). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110307474
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110307474 [Google Scholar]
  15. Haspelmath, Martin
    2013 Indefinite pronouns. InMatthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. (Available online atwals.info/chapter/46, accessed on2017-08-17).
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Kimmelman, Vadim
    2014Information structure in Russian Sign Language and Sign Language of the Netherlands. Amsterdam: University of AmsterdamPhD dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. 2015 R-impersonals in Sign Language of the Netherlands. Presentation atWorkshop on sign languages and R-impersonal pronouns, Paris, February 2015.
  18. 2017 Quantifiers in Russian Sign Language. InEdward L. Keenan & Denis Paperno (eds.), Handbook of quantifiers in natural languages, vol.2, 803–855. Berlin: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑44330‑0_16
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44330-0_16 [Google Scholar]
  19. Liddell, Scott
    1990 Four functions of a locus: Re-examining the structure of space in ASL. InCeil Lucas (ed.), Sign language research: theoretical issues, 176–198. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Nyst, Victoria
    2007A descriptive analysis of Adamorobe Sign Language (Ghana). Amsterdam: University of AmsterdamPhD dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Schütze, Carson T. & Jon Sprouse
    2014 Judgment data. InRobert J. Podesva & Devyani Sharma (eds.), Research methods in linguistics, 27–50. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139013734.004
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139013734.004 [Google Scholar]
  22. Siewierska, Anna
    2008 Impersonalization from a subject-centred vs. agent-centred perspective. Transactions of the Philological Society106. 1–23. 10.1111/j.1467‑968X.2008.00211.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-968X.2008.00211.x [Google Scholar]
  23. 2011 Overlap and complementarity in reference impersonals: Man constructions vs. third person plural-impersonals in the languages of Europe. InAndrej Malchukov & Anna Siewierska (eds.), Impersonal constructions. A cross-linguistic perspective, 57–90. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.124.03sie
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.124.03sie [Google Scholar]
  24. Siewierska, Anna & Maria Papastathi
    2011 Third person plurals in the languages of Europe: Typological and methodological issues. Linguistics49. 575–610.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. R Core Team
    R Core Team 2016R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL:https://www.R-project.org/
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Wilbur, Ronnie B.
    1996 Evidence for the function and structure of wh-clefts in American Sign Language. InWilliam Edmondson & Ronnie B. Wilbur (eds.), International review of sign linguistics, 209–256. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/sll.00018.kim
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/sll.00018.kim
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): impersonal reference , pro-drop and Russian Sign Language
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error