Phonological contrast and feature inventories in sign language

References

1. Baker, Stephanie A., William J. Idsardi, Roberta Michnick Golinkoff & Laura-Ann Petitto
   2005 The perception of handshapes in American Sign Language. Memory & Cognition33(5). 887–904. 10.3758/BF03193083
   https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193083 [Google Scholar]
2. Battison, Robbin
   1978 Lexical borrowing in American Sign Language. Silver Spring. MD: Linstok Press.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Best, Catherine T., Gaurav Mathur, Karen A. Miranda & Diane Lillo-Martin
   2010 Effects of sign language experience on categorical perception of dynamic ASL pseudosigns. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics72(3). 747–762. 10.3758/APP.72.3.747
   https://doi.org/10.3758/APP.72.3.747 [Google Scholar]
4. Boutora, Leila
   2008 Fondements historiques et implications théoriques d’une phonologie des langues des signes-Etude de la perception catégorielle des configurations manuelles en LSF et réflexion sur la transcription des langues des signes. Université Paris VIII Vincennes-Saint Denis PhD Thesis.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Brentari, Diane
   1998 A prosodic model of sign language phonology. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Browman, Catherine P. & Louis Goldstein
   1992 Articulatory phonology: An overview. Phonetica49(3–4). 155–180. 10.1159/000261913
   https://doi.org/10.1159/000261913 [Google Scholar]
7. Clements, George N.
   1985 The geometry of phonological features. Phonology Yearbook2(1). 225–252. 10.1017/S0952675700000440
   https://doi.org/10.1017/S0952675700000440 [Google Scholar]
8. Crasborn, Onno & Els van der Kooij
   1997 Relative orientation in sign language phonology. Linguistics in the Netherlands 1997 37–48. 10.1075/avt.14.06cra
   https://doi.org/10.1075/avt.14.06cra [Google Scholar]
9. Emmorey, Karen, Rain Bosworth & Tanya Kraljic
   2009 Visual feedback and self-monitoring of sign language. Journal of Memory and Language61(3). 398–411. 10.1016/j.jml.2009.06.001
   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2009.06.001 [Google Scholar]
10. Emmorey, Karen, Stephen McCullough & Diane Brentari
    2003 Categorical perception in American Sign Language. Language and Cognitive Processes18(1). 21–45. 10.1080/01690960143000416
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960143000416 [Google Scholar]
11. Finger, Holger, Caspar Goeke, Dorena Diekamp, Kai Standvoß & Peter König
    2017 LabVanced: a unified JavaScript framework for online studies. In2017 International Conference on Computational Social Science IC2S2 (Cologne).
    [Google Scholar]
12. Liddell, Scott K. & Robert E. Johnson
    1989 American Sign Language: The phonological base. Sign Language Studies64(1). 195–277. 10.1353/sls.1989.0027
    https://doi.org/10.1353/sls.1989.0027 [Google Scholar]
13. Mertz, Justine
    2020 Représentation phonologique des signes à deux mains en LSF: faut-il reconsidérer l’orientation absolue dans les modèles phonologiques des langues des signes?InChristophe Benzitoun, Chloé Braud, Laurine Huber (eds.), 6e conférence conjointe Journées d’Études sur la Parole (JEP, 31e édition), Traitement Automatique des Langues Naturelles (TALN, 27e édition), Rencontre des Étudiants Chercheurs en Informatique pour le Traitement Automatique des Langues (RÉCITAL, 22e édition), 424–432. ATALA.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Mertz, Justine, Chiara Annucci, Valentina Aristodemo, Beatrice Giustolisi, Doriane Gras, Giuseppina Turco, Carlo Geraci & Caterina Donati
    2022 Measuring sign complexity: Comparing a model-driven and an error-driven approach. Laboratory Phonology24(1). 10.16995/labphon.6439
    https://doi.org/10.16995/labphon.6439 [Google Scholar]
15. Mertz, Justine & Carlo Geraci
    2024 Modelling contrast and feature inventory: The nature of [web] in French Sign Language. Phonology401. 1–24. 10.1017/S0952675724000095
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0952675724000095 [Google Scholar]
16. Morford, Jill P., Angus B. Grieve-Smith, James MacFarlane, Joshua Staley & Gabriel Waters
    2008 Effects of language experience on the perception of American Sign Language. Cognition109(1). 41–53. 10.1016/j.cognition.2008.07.016
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.07.016 [Google Scholar]
17. Newport, Elissa L.
    1982 Task specificity in language learning? Evidence from speech perception and American Sign Language. InEric Wanner & Lila R. Gleitman (eds.), Language acquisition: The state of the art, 450–486. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Ortega, Gerardo & Gary Morgan
    2015 Phonological development in hearing learners of a sign language: The influence of phonological parameters, sign complexity, and iconicity. Language Learning65(3). 660–688. 10.1111/lang.12123
    https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12123 [Google Scholar]
19. Sandler, Wendy
    1989 Phonological representation of the sign: Linearity and nonlinearity in American Sign Language. Dordrecht: Foris. 10.1515/9783110250473
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110250473 [Google Scholar]
20. Tartter, Vivien C. & Susan D. Fischer
    1982 Perceiving minimal distinctions in ASL under normal and point-light display conditions. Perception & Psychophysics32(4). 327–334. 10.3758/BF03206238
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206238 [Google Scholar]
21. Uyechi, Linda
    1994 Local and global signing space in American Sign Language. NELS24(2).
    [Google Scholar]
22. van der Hulst, Harry
    1993 Units in the analysis of signs. Phonology10(2). 209–241. 10.1017/S095267570000004X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S095267570000004X [Google Scholar]
23. van der Kooij, Els
    2002 Phonological categories in Sign Language of the Netherlands: The role of phonetic implementation and iconicity. Leiden: University of Leiden PhD dissertation. Utrecht: LOT.