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

Abstract

Abstract

In this paper, we examine agent backgrounding in Italian Sign Language (LIS). Specifically, we are interested in identifying and describing the strategies used by LIS signers to reduce referentiality. On the basis of low-referential contexts (cf. questionnaire in the Introduction chapter), we recorded target sentences containing potential markers of agent backgrounding and asked three LIS native signers to provide felicity judgments on them using a 7-point scale. We discuss agent-backgrounding strategies of different types: (i) manual, (ii) non-manual, and (iii) syntactic. Overall, our study shows that the combination of raised eyebrows and mouth-corners down associated with the existential quantifier and the sign makes the agent-backgrounding reading more prominent. Other strategies that can be used in LIS to reduce referentiality are free relatives, perspective shift, and null subject. We also investigate in more detail the semantic status of , , and the null subject through well-established tests from the literature.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/sll.00019.man
2019-03-22
2019-10-23
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Barattieri, Chiara
    2006Il periodo ipotetico in LIS. Siena: Università degli Studi di SienaPhD dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Barberà, Gemma
    2015The meaning of space in sign language. Reference, specificity and structure in Catalan Sign Language discourse. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton and Ishara Press. 10.1515/9781614518815
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9781614518815 [Google Scholar]
  3. Barberà, Gemma & Patricia Cabredo Hofherr
    2017a Backgrounded agents in Catalan Sign Language (LSC) – passives, middles or impersonals?Language93. 767–798. 10.1353/lan.2017.0057
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2017.0057 [Google Scholar]
  4. 2017b Two indefinite pronouns in Catalan Sign Language (LSC). Sinn und Bedeutung21. 89–105.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bertone, Carmela & Anna Cardinaletti
    2011 ll sistema pronominale della lingua dei segni italiana. InAnna Cardinaletti, Carlo Cecchetto & Caterina Donati (eds.), Grammatica, lessico e dimensioni di variazione nella LIS, 145–160. Milan: Franco Angeli.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Branchini, Chiara
    2009 Relative libere e interrogative wh- in LIS. InAlcuni capitoli della grammatica della LIS. Atti dell’incontro di studio ‟La grammatica della Lingua dei Segni Italiana”, 101–115. Venice: Editrice Cafoscarina.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Branchini, Chiara & Caterina Donati
    2009 Relatively different: Italian Sign Language relative clauses in a typological perspective. InAnikó Lipták (ed.), Correlatives cross-linguistically, 157–191. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/lfab.1.07bra
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lfab.1.07bra [Google Scholar]
  8. Branchini, Chiara & Carlo Geraci
    2011 L’ordine dei costituenti in LIS: risultati preliminari. InAnna Cardinaletti, Carlo Cecchetto & Caterina Donati (eds.), Grammatica, lessico e dimensioni di variazione nella LIS, 113–126. Milan: Franco Angeli.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Cabredo Hofherr, Patricia
    2008 Les pronoms impersonnels humains: syntaxe et interprétation. Modèles linguistiques vol. XXIX-157. 35–56.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Cecchetto, Carlo, Carlo Geraci & Sandro Zucchi
    2006 Strategies of relativization in LIS. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory24. 945–975. 10.1007/s11049‑006‑9001‑x
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-006-9001-x [Google Scholar]
  11. Davidson, Kathryn & Deanna Gagne
    . In prep.‟More is up”, pragmatic intuitions are grammaticalized in ASL as overt contextual domain restrictions. Manuscript.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Eugeni, Carlo
    2008 Una panoramica della situazione dei sordi italiani in generale e della lingua dei segni italiana in particolare. Version updated after amendments byDino Gigliolipresident of theNational interpreters’ association (ANIMU).
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Geraci, Carlo
    2012 Language policy and planning: The case of Italian Sign Language. Sign Language Studies12(4). 494–518. 10.1353/sls.2012.0006
    https://doi.org/10.1353/sls.2012.0006 [Google Scholar]
  14. 2014 Spatial syntax in your hands. InJyoti Iyer & Leland Kusmer (eds.), NELS 44: Proceedings of the Forty-Fourth Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society, vol.1, 123–134. Amherst: GLSA.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Geraci, Carlo & Valentina Aristodemo
    2016 An in-depth tour into sentential complementation in Italian Sign Language. InRoland Pfau, Markus Steinbach & Annika Herrmann (eds.), A matter of complexity: Subordination in sign languages, 95–150. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9781501503238‑006
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501503238-006 [Google Scholar]
  16. Geraci, Carlo, Carlo Cecchetto & Sandro Zucchi
    2008 Sentential complementation in Italian Sign Language. InMichael Grosvald & Dionne Soares (eds.), Proceedings of the Thirty-eighth Western Conference on Linguistics (WECOL), 46–58.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. von Heusinger, Klaus
    2002 Specificity and definiteness in sentence and discourse structure. Journal of Semantics19(3). 245–274. 10.1093/jos/19.3.245
    https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/19.3.245 [Google Scholar]
  18. Liddell, Scott K.
    2003Grammar, gesture, and meaning in American Sign Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511615054
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511615054 [Google Scholar]
  19. Mantovan, Lara
    2017Nominal modification in Italian Sign Language (LIS). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9781501504853
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501504853 [Google Scholar]
  20. Mantovan, Lara & Carlo Geraci
    2015 The syntax of cardinal numerals in Italian Sign Language (LIS). InProceedings of the Forty-Fourth Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society, vol.2, 155–165.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Schlenker, Philippe
    2003 A plea for monsters. Linguistics and Philosophy26(1). 29–120. 10.1023/A:1022225203544
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022225203544 [Google Scholar]
  22. 2011 Donkey anaphora: the view from sign language (ASL and LSF). Linguistics and Philosophy34(4). 341–395. 10.1007/s10988‑011‑9098‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-011-9098-1 [Google Scholar]
  23. 2016 Iconic pragmatics. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory36(3). 877–936. 10.1007/s11049‑017‑9392‑x
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-017-9392-x [Google Scholar]
  24. Siewierska, Anna
    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]
  25. Zucchi, Sandro
    2004Monsters in the visual mode?Manuscript, Università degli Studi di Milano, www.filosofia.unimi.it/zucchi/NuoviFile/LISmonsters.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  26. 2009 Along the time line. Tense and time adverbs in Italian Sign Language. Natural Language Semantics17(2). 99–139. 10.1007/s11050‑008‑9032‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11050-008-9032-4 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/sll.00019.man
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/sll.00019.man
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): agent backgrounding , impersonals , indefinite pronouns , Italian Sign Language and referentiality
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