From a demonstrative to a relative clause marker

References

1. Aarons, Debra
   1996 Topics and topicalization in American sign language. Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics30. 65–106.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Bahan, Benjamin, Judy Kegl, Dawn MacLaughlin & Carol Neidle
   1995 Convergent evidence for the structure of determiner phrases in American Sign Language. InLeslie Gabriele, Debra Hardison & Robert Hoffmeister (Eds.), FLSM VI: Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Meeting of the Formal Linguistics Society of Mid-America: Vol. 2: Syntax II & Semantics/Pragmatics, 1–12. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Bellugi, Ursula & Edward Klima
   1982 From gesture to sign: Deixis in a visuo-gestural language. InRobert Jarvella & Wolfgang Klein (Eds.), Speech, place, and action: studies in deixis and related topics, 279–313. Chichester, NY: Wiley.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Branchini, Chiara
   2007 Relatives and related constructions in LIS. Urbino: Università di UrbinoPhD dissertation.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Branchini, Chiara
   2014 On relativization and clefting: an analysis of Italian Sign Language. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9781501500008
   https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501500008 [Google Scholar]
6. Branchini, Chiara & Caterina Donati
   2009 Italian Sign Language relatives: a contribution to the typology of relativization strategies. InAnikó Liptak (Ed.), Correlatives: theory and typology, 157–191. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Brunelli, Michele
   2011 Antisymmetry and sign languages: a comparison between NGT and LIS. Amsterdam: University of AmsterdamPhD dissertation.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Brugmann, Karl
   1904 Demonstrativpronomina der Indogermanischen Sprachen. Leipzig: Teubner.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Bühler, Karl
   1934 Sprachtheorie (Vol.2). Jena: Fischer.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Butterworth, George Esmond
    1998 What is special about pointing in babies?InFrancesca Simion & George Esmond Butterworth (Eds.), The development of sensory, motor and cognitive capacities in early infancy. From perception to cognition, 171–190. Hove: Psychology Press.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Cecchetto, Carlo, Carlo Geraci & Alessandro Zucchi
    2006 Strategies of relativization in Italian Sign Language. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory24(4). 945–975. 10.1007/s11049‑006‑9001‑x
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-006-9001-x [Google Scholar]
12. Cecchetto, Carlo & Caterina Donati
    2016 Relativization in Italian Sign Language: the missing link of relativization. InRoland Pfau, Markus Steinbach & Annika Herrmann (Eds.), A matter of complexity: Subordination in sign languages, 182–203. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9781501503238‑008
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501503238-008 [Google Scholar]
13. Clark, Eve
    1978 From gesture to word: On the natural history of deixis in language acquisition. InJerome Bruner & Alison Garton (Eds.), Human growth and development, 85–120. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Coppola, Marie
    2002 The emergence of the grammatical category of Subject in home sign: Evidence from family-based gesture systems in Nicaragua. Rochester, NY: University of RochesterPhD dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Coppola, Marie & Ann Senghas
    2010 Deixis in an emerging sign language. InDiane Brentari (Ed.), Sign languages: A Cambridge language survey, 543–569. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511712203.025
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511712203.025 [Google Scholar]
16. Coppola, Marie & Wing Chee So
    2006 The seeds of spatial grammar: Spatial modulation and coreference in homesigning and hearing adults. Proceedings of the 30th Annual Boston Conference on Language Development30, 119–130.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Crasborn, Onno & Han Sloetjes
    2008 Enhanced ELAN functionality for sign language corpora. Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on the Representation and Processing of Sign Languages: Construction and Exploitation of Sign Language Corpora, 39–43. Paris: ELRA.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Dachkovsky, Svetlana
    2016 The development of a RC marker from a deictic gesture in Israeli Sign Language. Talk presented at theWorkshop Sign Language Agreement Revisited: New Theoretical and Experimental Perspectives, University of Konstanz, February, 24–26
    [Google Scholar]
19. Dachkovsky, Svetlana
    2018 Grammaticalization of intonation in Israeli Sign Language: From information structure to relative clause relations. Haifa: University of HaifaPhD dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Dachkovsky, Svetlana, Christina Healy & Wendy Sandler
    2013 Visual intonation in two sign languages. Phonology30(2). 211–252. 10.1017/S0952675713000122
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0952675713000122 [Google Scholar]
21. Dachkovsky, Svetlana & Wendy Sandler
    2009 Visual intonation in the prosody of a sign language. Language and Speech52(2–3). 287–314. 10.1177/0023830909103175
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0023830909103175 [Google Scholar]
22. Diessel, Holger
    1999 Demonstratives: Form, function and grammaticalization. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.42
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.42 [Google Scholar]
23. Diessel, Holger
    2005 Distance contrasts in demonstratives.‏InMartin Haspelmath, Matthew S. Dryer, David Gil & Bernard Comrie (Eds.), The world atlas of language structures, 170–173. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Diessel, Holger
    2006 Demonstratives, joint attention, and the emergence of grammar. Cognitive Linguistics17(4), 463–489. 10.1515/COG.2006.015
    https://doi.org/10.1515/COG.2006.015 [Google Scholar]
25. Diessel, Holger
    2012 Deixis and demonstratives. An international handbook of natural language meaning. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Diessel, Holger
    2013 Where does language come from? Some reflections on the role of deictic gesture and demonstratives in the evolution of language. Language and Cognition5(2–3). 239–249. 10.1515/langcog‑2013‑0017
    https://doi.org/10.1515/langcog-2013-0017 [Google Scholar]
27. Eckardt, Regine
    2006 Meaning change in grammaticalization: an enquiry into semantic reanalysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199262601.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199262601.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
28. Emmorey, Karen
    2002 Language, cognition, and the brain: Insights from sign language research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Engberg-Pedersen, Elizabeth
    1993 Space in Danish Sign Language: The semantics and morphosyntax of the use of space in a visual language. Hamburg: Signum Press.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Fischer, Olga, Ans van Kemenade, Willem Koopman & Wim van der Wurff
    2000 The syntax of Early English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Fusellier-Souza, Ivani
    2006 Emergence and development of signed languages: From a semiogenetic point of view. Sign Language Studies7(1). 30–56. 10.1353/sls.2006.0030
    https://doi.org/10.1353/sls.2006.0030 [Google Scholar]
32. Givón, Talmy
    2009 The genesis of syntactic complexity: Diachrony, ontogeny, neuro-cognition, evolution. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/z.146
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.146 [Google Scholar]
33. Hopper, Paul J. & Elizabeth Closs Traugott
    2003 Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139165525
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139165525 [Google Scholar]
34. Iverson, Jana M. & Susan Goldin-Meadow
    2005 Gesture paves the way for language development. Psychological Science16(5). 367–371. 10.1111/j.0956‑7976.2005.01542.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.01542.x [Google Scholar]
35. Kendon, Adam
    2004 Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511807572
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511807572 [Google Scholar]
36. Kita, Sotaro
    2003 Pointing. A foundational building block of human communication. InSotaro Kita (Ed.), Pointing: Where language, culture, and cognition meeet, 1–8. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 10.4324/9781410607744
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410607744 [Google Scholar]
37. Kita, Sotaro & Aslı Özyürek
    2003 What does cross-linguistic variation in semantic coordination of speech and gesture reveal?: Evidence for an interface representation of spatial thinking and speaking. Journal of Memory and Language48(1). 16–32. 10.1016/S0749‑596X(02)00505‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-596X(02)00505-3 [Google Scholar]
38. Kubus, Okan
    2014 Relative clause constructions in Turkish Sign Language. Hamburg: University of HamburgPhD dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
39. Labov, William
    1963 The social motivation of a sound change. Word19(3). 273–309. 10.1080/00437956.1963.11659799
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1963.11659799 [Google Scholar]
40. Lehmann, Christian
    1985 Grammaticalization: Synchronic variation and diachronic change. Lingua e stile20(3). 303–318.
    [Google Scholar]
41. Lehmann, Christian
    2008 Information structure and grammaticalization. InElena Seoane & María José López-Couso (Eds.), Theoretical and empirical issues in grammaticalization, 207–229. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.77.12leh
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.77.12leh [Google Scholar]
42. Levinson, Stephen
    2004 Deixis. InLaurence Horn & Gregory Ward (Eds.), The handbook of pragmatics, 97–121. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
43. Liddell, Scott K.
    1978 Non-manual signals and relative clauses in American Sign Language. InPatricia Siple (Ed.), Understanding language through sign language research, 59–90. New York: Academic.
    [Google Scholar]
44. Liddell, Scott K.
    1980 American Sign Language syntax. The Hague: Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
45. Liddell, Scott K.
    1996 Spatial representations in discourse: Comparing spoken and signed language. Lingua98(1). 145–167. 10.1016/0024‑3841(95)00036‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(95)00036-4 [Google Scholar]
46. Liddell, Scott K.
    2003 Grammar, gesture and meaning in American Sign Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511615054
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511615054 [Google Scholar]
47. Lillo-Martin, Diane & Edward Klima
    1990 Pointing out differences: ASL pronouns in syntactic theory. InSusan D. Fischer & Patricia Siple (Eds.), Theoretical issues in sign language research, 191–210. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
48. Liszkowski, Ulf, Malinda Carpenter, Ann Henning, Tricia Striano & Michael Tomasello
    2004 Twelve-month-olds point to share attention and interest. Developmental Science7(3). 297–307. 10.1111/j.1467‑7687.2004.00349.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2004.00349.x [Google Scholar]
49. McBurney, Susan Lloyd
    2002 Pronominal reference in signed and spoken language. InRichard P. Meier, Kearsy Cormier & David Quinto-Pozos (Eds.), Modality and structure in signed and spoken languages, 329–369. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511486777.017
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486777.017 [Google Scholar]
50. McNeill, David
    1992 Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
51. Meier, Richard P.
    1990 Person deixis in American Sign Language. InSusan D. Fischer & Patricia Siple (Eds.), Theoretical issues in sign language research, 175–190. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
52. Meier, Richard P.
    2002 The acquisition of verb agreement: pointing out arguments for the linguistic status of agreement in sign languages. InGary Morgan & Bencie Woll (Eds.), Current developments in the study of signed language acquisition, 115–141. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
53. Meir, Irit
    1998 Syntactic-semantic interaction in Israeli Sign Language verbs: The case of backwards verbs. Sign Language & Linguistics, 1(1). 3–37. 10.1075/sll.1.1.03mei
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sll.1.1.03mei [Google Scholar]
54. Meir, Irit
    2016 Grammaticalization is not the full story: a non-grammaticalization account of the emergence of sign language agreement morphemes. InMediterranean Morphology Meeting10. 112–124.
    [Google Scholar]
55. Meir, Irit, Carol A. Padden, Mark Aronoff & Wendy Sandler
    2007 Body as subject. Journal of Linguistics43(3). 531–563. 10.1017/S0022226707004768
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226707004768 [Google Scholar]
56. Meir, Irit & Wendy Sandler
    2008 A language in space: The story of Israeli Sign Language. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
57. Nespor, Marina & Wendy Sandler
    1999 Prosody in Israeli Sign Language. Language and Speech42(2–3). 143–176. 10.1177/00238309990420020201
    https://doi.org/10.1177/00238309990420020201 [Google Scholar]
58. Padden, Carol
    1988 Interaction of morphology and syntax in American Sign Language. New York: Garland Press.
    [Google Scholar]
59. Pfau, Roland & Markus Steinbach
    2005 Relative clauses in German Sign Language: Extraposition and reconstruction. InLeah Bateman & Cherlon Ussery (Eds.), Proceedings of the North East Linguistic Society (NELS 35), Vol.2, 507–521. Amherst, MA: GLSA.
    [Google Scholar]
60. Pfau, Roland & Markus Steinbach
    2006 Modality-independent and modality-specific aspects of grammaticalization in sign languages (Linguistics in Potsdam 24). Potsdam: Universitäts-Verlag. Available atopus.kobv.de/ubp/volltexte/2006/1088/
    [Google Scholar]
61. Sandler, Wendy
    1999 Cliticization and prosodic words in a sign language. InTraci Hall & Ursula Kleinhenz (Eds.), Studies on the phonological word, 223–255. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.174.09san
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.174.09san [Google Scholar]
62. Sandler, Wendy & Diane Lillo-Martin
    2006 Sign language and linguistic universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139163910
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139163910 [Google Scholar]
63. Sankoff, Gillian & Penelope Brown
    1976 The origins of syntax in discourse: A case study of Tok Pisin relatives. Language52(3). 631–666. 10.2307/412723
    https://doi.org/10.2307/412723 [Google Scholar]
64. Sheldon, Amy
    1974 The role of parallel function in the acquisition of relative clauses in English. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior13(3). 272–281. 10.1016/S0022‑5371(74)80064‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(74)80064-2 [Google Scholar]
65. Shepard-Kegl, Judy
    1985 Locative relations in ASL word formation, syntax, and discourse. Cambridge, MA: MITPhD dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
66. Supalla, Ted
    1982 Structure and acquisition of verbs of motion and location in American Sign Language. San Diego, CA: University of CaliforniaPhD dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
67. Tang, Gladys, Prudence Lau & Jafi Lee
    2010 Strategies for relativization in HKSL. Paper presented atTheoretical Issues in Sign Language Research (TISLR 10), Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
    [Google Scholar]
68. Tomasello, Michael
    1999 The cultural origins of human cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
69. Traugott, Elizabeth C.
    1992 Syntax. InRichard Hogg (Ed.), The Cambridge history of the English language, volI, 168–229. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 10.1017/CHOL9780521264747.005
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CHOL9780521264747.005 [Google Scholar]
70. Wilbur, Ronnie
    2017 Internally-headed relative clauses in sign languages. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics2(1): 25. 1–34. 10.5334/gjgl.183
    https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.183 [Google Scholar]
71. Zimmer, June & Cynthia G. Patschke
    1990 A class of determiners in ASL. InCeil Lucas (Ed.), Sign language research: Theoretical issues, 201–210. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
72. Zukowski, Andrea
    2009 Elicited production of relative clauses in children with Williams syndrome. Language and Cognitive Processes24(1). 1–43. 10.1080/01690960801966118
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960801966118 [Google Scholar]