1887
Volume 22, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1387-9316
  • E-ISSN: 1569-996X
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes
Preview this article:
Zoom in
Zoomout

Verb agreement in Brazilian Sign Language, Page 1 of 1

| /docserver/preview/fulltext/sll.00036.lou-1.gif

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/sll.00036.lou
2020-02-10
2020-08-12
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bergman, Brita
    1980 On localization in the Swedish Sign Language. InInger Ahlgren & Brita Bergman (eds.), Papers from the First International Symposium on Sign Language Research, 81–92. Stockholm: Swedish Deaf Association.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Brentari, Diane
    1998A prosodic model of sign language phonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Capovilla, Fernando C., Walkiria Duarte Raphael, Janice Temoteo & Antonielle Cantarelli Martins
    2017Dicionário da Língua de Sinais do Brasil: A Libras em Suas Mãos. São Paulo: Edusp.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Costello, Brendan
    2015Language and modality: Effects of the use of space in the agreement system of Lengua de Signos Española (Spanish Sign Language). Amsterdam & Vitoria: University of Amsterdam and University of the Basque Country PhD dissertation. Utrecht: LOT.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Klima, Edward S. & Ursula Bellugi
    1979The signs of language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Lillo-Martin, Diane & Richard P. Meier
    2011 On the linguistic status of “agreement” in sign languages. Theoretical Linguistics37(3–4). 95–141.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Meir, Irit
    2002 A cross-modality perspective on verb agreement. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory20(2). 413–450. 10.1023/A:1015041113514
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015041113514 [Google Scholar]
  8. Quer, Josep
    2011 When agreeing to disagree is not enough: Further arguments for the linguistic status of sign language agreement. Theoretical Linguistics37(3–4). 189–196.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Strickland, Brent, Carlo Geraci, Emmanuel Chemla, Philippe Schlenker, Meltem Kelepir & Roland Pfau
    2015 Event representations constrain the structure of language: Sign language as a window into universally accessible linguistic biases. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)112(19). 5968–5973. doi:  10.1073/pnas.1423080112
    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1423080112 [Google Scholar]
  10. Wilbur, Ronnie B.
    2000 Phonological and prosodic layering of nonmanuals in American Sign Language. InKaren Emmorey & Harlan Lane (eds.), The signs of language revisited: An anthology to honor Ursula Bellugi and Edward Klima, 213–241. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. 2003 Modality and the structure of language: Sign languages versus signed systems. InMark Marschark & Patricia E. Spencer (eds.), Oxford handbook of deaf studies, language, and education, 332–346. New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. 2008 Complex predicates involving events, time, and aspect: Is this why sign languages look so similar?InJosep Quer (ed.), Signs of the time: Selected papers from TISLR 2004, 217–250. Hamburg: Signum Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. 2010 The semantics-phonology interface. InDiane Brentari (ed.), Sign languages: A Cambridge language survey, 355–380. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511712203.017
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511712203.017 [Google Scholar]
  14. 2013 The point of agreement: Changing how we think about sign language, gesture, and agreement. Sign Language & Linguistics16(2). 221–258. 10.1075/sll.16.2.05wil
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sll.16.2.05wil [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/sll.00036.lou
Loading
  • Article Type: Abstract
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