Multisensory iconicity in Finnish Sign Language going beyond visuocentrism

References

1. Armstrong, David F.
   1983 Iconicity, Arbitrariness, & Duality of Patterning in Signed & Spoken Language: Perspectives on Language Evolution. Sign Language Studies(). –. 10.1353/sls.1983.0013
   https://doi.org/10.1353/sls.1983.0013 [Google Scholar]
2. Gallagher, Shaun & Dan Zahavi
   2012 The phenomenological mind. 2nd ed. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203126752
   https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203126752 [Google Scholar]
3. Hutmacher, Fabian
   2019 Why Is There So Much More Research on Vision Than on Any Other Sensory Modality?Frontiers in Psychology. . 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02246
   https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02246 [Google Scholar]
4. Mesch, Johanna, Eli Raanes & Lindsay Ferrara
   2015 Co-forming real space blends in tactile signed language dialogues. Cognitive Linguistics(). –. 10.1515/cog‑2014‑0066
   https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2014-0066 [Google Scholar]
5. Napoli, Donna Jo
   2017 Iconicity Chains In Sign Languages. InClaire Bowern, Laurence Horn & Raffaella Zanuttini (eds.), On Looking Into Words (And Beyond): Structures, Relations, Analyses (Empirically Oriented Theoretical Morphology And Syntax 3). Berlin: Language Science Press. 10.5281/zenodo.495464
   https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.495464 [Google Scholar]
6. Perniss, Pamela, Robin L. Thompson & Gabriella Vigliocco
   2010 Iconicity as a General Property of Language: Evidence from Spoken and Signed Languages. Frontiers in Psychology. 10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00227
   https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00227 [Google Scholar]
7. PlatoBenjamin Jowett
   Plato 2000 Cratylus. (Trans.) Benjamin Jowett. Infomotions, Inc..
   [Google Scholar]
8. Slonimska, Anita
   2022 The role of iconicity and simultaneity in efficient communication in the visual modality. NL: LOT. 10.48273/LOT0630. (20 May, 2024).
   https://doi.org/10.48273/LOT0630 [Google Scholar]
9. Sonesson, Göran
   2012 The Phenomenological Road to Cognitive Semiotics. InPilar Couto Cantero, Gonzalo Enríquez Veloso, Alberta Passeri & José María Paz Gago (eds.), Languages and Literature, –. La Coruña, Spain: Universidade de Coruña.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Sonesson, Göran
    2022 Iconicity and Semiosis. InJamin Pelkey (ed.), Bloomsbury Semiotics Volume 1: History and Semiosis (Bloomsbury Semiotics), –. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Stokoe, William C.
    1980 Sign Language Structure. Annual Review of Anthropology. 10.1146/annurev.an.09.100180.002053
    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.an.09.100180.002053 [Google Scholar]
12. Sutton-Spence, Rachel & Michiko Kaneko
    2016 Introducing sign language literature: folklore and creativity (Macmillan Education). London: Palgrave. 10.1007/978‑1‑349‑93179‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-93179-8 [Google Scholar]
13. The University of Jyväskylä, Sign Language Centre
    The University of Jyväskylä, Sign Language Centre 2018 Finnish Signbank. Language Bank of Finland (Kielipankki). https://signbank.csc.fi. (9 October, 2024).
14. Winter, Bodo
    2019 Sensory linguistics: language, perception and metaphor (Converging Evidence in Language and Communication Research (CELCR) volume 20). Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/celcr.20
    https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.20 [Google Scholar]
15. Winter, Bodo, Greg Woodin & Marcus Perlman
    . in press. Defining iconicity for the cognitive sciences. InOlga Fischer, Kimi Akita & Pamela Perniss eds. Oxford Handbook of Iconicity in Language. Oxford University Press. https://osf.io/5e3rc. (6 June, 2024).
    [Google Scholar]
16. Zlatev, Jordan
    2015 Cognitive Semiotics. InPeter Pericles Trifonas (ed.), International Handbook of Semiotics, –. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. 10.1007/978‑94‑017‑9404‑6_47
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9404-6_47 [Google Scholar]
17. Zlatev, Jordan
    2018 Meaning making from life to language:The Semiotic Hierarchy and phenomenology. Cognitive Semiotics(). . 10.1515/cogsem‑2018‑0001
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogsem-2018-0001 [Google Scholar]