1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Sign Language & Linguistics
  4. Volume 22, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 22, Issue 1
  • ISSN 1387-9316
  • E-ISSN: 1569-996X
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Davidson (2013) shows that in American Sign Language (ASL), conjunction and disjunction can be expressed by the same general use coordinator (cf. ‘Mary drank tea and coffee; Mary drank tea or coffee.’). To derive these two meanings, she proposes an alternative semantic analysis whereby the two interpretations arise through universal or existential quantification over a set of alternatives licensed by (non-)linguistic cues, such as contexts and prosodic or lexical material. This paper provides supportive evidence for Davidson’s analysis from two other languages, Japanese and Japanese Sign Language. These languages are shown to employ general use coordination similar to that in ASL, but the general use coordinators in the three languages differ in one important respect: the locality of lexical elements that induce a disjunctive meaning. It is suggested that this cross-linguistic variation can be attributed to language-specific properties that concern the Q-particle discussed in Uegaki (20142018).

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/sll.18003.asa
2019-10-09
2020-09-29

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/sll.18003.asa
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Asada, Yuko
    2014 On the nature of the repetitive coordinator -to in Japanese. Gengo Kenkyu145. 97–109.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Alonso-Ovalle, Luis
    2006 Disjunction in alternative semantics. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts PhD dissertation.
  3. Beck, Sigrid & Shin-Sook Kim
    2006 Intervention effects in alternative questions. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics9. 165–208. 10.1007/s10828‑006‑9005‑2
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s10828-006-9005-2 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bowler, Margit
    2014 Conjunction and disjunction in a language without ‘and’. In Todd Snider , Sarah D’Antonio & Mia Weigand (eds.), Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) 24, 137–155. Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Cable, Seth
    2010 The grammar of Q: Q-particles, wh-movement, and pied-piping. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195392265.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195392265.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  6. Crain, Stephen
    2008 The interpretation of disjunction in Universal Grammar. Language and Speech51(1–2). 151–169. 10.1177/00238309080510010901
     https://doi.org/10.1177/00238309080510010901 [Google Scholar]
  7. Davidson, Kate
    2013 ‘And’ or ‘or’: General use coordination in ASL. Semantics & Pragmatics6(4). 1–44.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. den Dikken, Marcel
    2006 Either-float and the syntax of co-or-dination. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory24. 689–749. 10.1007/s11049‑005‑2503‑0
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-005-2503-0 [Google Scholar]
  9. Fischer, Susan & Qunhu Gong
    2011 Variation in East Asian sign language structures. In Diane Brentari (ed.), Sign languages, 499–518. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Fukui, Naoki
    1986 A theory of category projection and its applications. Cambridge, MA: MIT PhD dissertation.
  11. Goro, Takuya & Sachie Akiba
    2004 The acquisition of disjunction and positive polarity in Japanese. In Gina Garding & Mimu Tsujimura (eds.), Proceedings of the 23rd West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL), 251–264. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Hagstrom, Paul
    1998 Decomposing questions. Cambridge, MA: MIT PhD dissertation.
  13. Hamblin, C. L.
    1973 Questions in Montague English. Foundations of Language10(1). 41–53.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Han, Chung-Hye & Maribel Romero
    2004 The syntax of whether/Q… or questions: Ellipsis combined with movement. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory22. 527–564. 10.1023/B:NALA.0000027674.87552.71
     https://doi.org/10.1023/B:NALA.0000027674.87552.71 [Google Scholar]
  15. Hiraiwa, Ken & Shinichiro Ishihara
    2012 Syntactic metamorphosis: Clefts, sluicing, and in-situ focus in Japanese. Syntax15(2). 142–180. 10.1111/j.1467‑9612.2011.00164.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9612.2011.00164.x [Google Scholar]
  16. Hoji, Hajime
    1990 Theories of anaphora and aspects of Japanese syntax. Unpublished manuscript, University of Southern California.
  17. Ichida, Yasuhiro
    1998 Nihon shuwa no bunpoo [The grammar of Japanese Sign Language]. Gekkan Gengo27(4). 44–51. Tokyo: Taishukan Shoten.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Kimura, Harumi
    2007 Nihon shuwa to roo bunka: Roosha wa stranger [Japanese Sign Language and Deaf culture: Deaf is a stranger]. Tokyo: Seikatsushoin.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Kishimoto, Hideki
    1992 LF pied piping: Evidence from Sinhala. Gengo Kenkyu102. 46–87.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Kotani, Katsunori
    2009 Nihon shuwa-ni okeru tooi-koozoo [Coordinate structures in Japanese Sign Language]. Paper presented at the35th Annual Meeting of Japanese Association for Sign Language Studies. 33–36. The University of Tokyo, Tokyo.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Kuroda, Sige-Yuki
    1965 Generative grammatical studies in the Japanese language. Cambridge, MA: MIT PhD dissertation.
  22. 1988 Whether we agree or not: A comparative syntax of English and Japanese. Lingvisticae Investigationes12. 1–47. 10.1075/li.12.1.02kur
     https://doi.org/10.1075/li.12.1.02kur [Google Scholar]
  23. Liddell, Scott
    2003 Grammar, gesture, and meaning in American Sign Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511615054
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511615054 [Google Scholar]
  24. Mitrovič, Moreno & Uli Sauerland
    2014 Decomposing coordination. In Jyoti Iyer & Leland Kusmer (eds.), Proceedings of the 44th North East Linguistic Society (NELS), 39–52. Amherst, MA: GLSA.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Morgan, Michael W.
    2006 Interrogatives and negatives in Japanese Sign Language. In Ulrike Zeshan (ed.), Interrogative and negative constructions in sign languages, 91–127. Nijmegen: Ishara Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Nicolae, Andreea Cristina
    2013 Any questions?: Polarity as a window into the structure of questions. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University PhD dissertation.
  27. Ohori, Toshio
    2004 Coordination in mentalese. In Martin Haspelmath (ed.), Coordinating constructions, 41–66. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.58.04oho
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.58.04oho [Google Scholar]
  28. Oka, Norie & Hitomi Akahori
    (eds.) 2011 Bunpoo ga kisokara wakaru nihon shuwa no sikumi [The structure of Japanese Sign Language: Understanding the grammar from the basics]. Tokyo: Taishukan Shoten.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Petronio, Karen & Diane Lillo-Martin
    1997 Wh-movement and the position of Spec CP: Evidence from American Sign Language. Language73. 18–57. 10.2307/416592
     https://doi.org/10.2307/416592 [Google Scholar]
  30. Podlesny, Olivia
    2015 Investigating disjunction in American Sign Language: The importance of nonmanual signals and the influence of English. Carleton, Canada: Carleton University MA thesis.
  31. Roelofsen, Floris & Sam van Gool
    2010 Disjunctive questions, intonation, and highlighting. In Maria Aloni , Harald Bastiaanse , Tikitu de Jager & Katrin Schulz (eds.), Selected Papers from the 17th Amsterdam Colloquium, 365–374. ILLC/Department of Philosophy, University of Amsterdam.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Singh, Raj , Ken Wexler , Andrea Astle , Deepthi Kamawar & Danny Fox
    2013 Children interpret disjunction as conjunction: Consequences for the theory of scalar implicature. Unpublished manuscript, Carleton University.
  33. 2016 Children interpret disjunction as conjunction: Consequences for theories of implicature and child development. Natural Language Semantics24(4). 305–352. 10.1007/s11050‑016‑9126‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11050-016-9126-3 [Google Scholar]
  34. Slade, Benjamin
    2011 Formal and philological inquiries into the nature of interrogatives, indefinites, disjunction, and focus in Sinhala and other languages. Urbana-Champaign, IL: University of Illinois PhD dissertation.
  35. Smith, Ryan Walter & Ryoichiroo Kobayashi
    2017 Focusing on coordination: The case of Japanese -toka and -tari. In Michael Yoshitaka Erlewine (ed.), Proceedings of GLOW in Asia XI–Volume II (MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 85), 205–215. Cambridge, MA: MITWPL.
  36. Szabolcsi, Anna
    2002 Hungarian disjunctions and positive polarity. In Istvan Kenesei & Peter Siptar (eds.), Approaches to Hungarian8, 217–241. The University of Szeged.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. 2004 Positive polarity – negative polarity. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory22. 409–452. 10.1023/B:NALA.0000015791.00288.43
     https://doi.org/10.1023/B:NALA.0000015791.00288.43 [Google Scholar]
  38. Uchibori, Asako & Kazumi Matsuoka
    2013 Some observations on wh-clauses in Japanese Sign Language. Journal of Japanese Linguistics29. 17–28. 10.1515/jjl‑2013‑0103
     https://doi.org/10.1515/jjl-2013-0103 [Google Scholar]
  39. 2016 Split movement of wh-elements in Japanese Sign Language: A preliminary study. Lingua183. 107–125. 10.1016/j.lingua.2016.05.008
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2016.05.008 [Google Scholar]
  40. Uegaki, Wataru
    2014 Cross-linguistic variation in the derivation of alternative questions: Japanese and beyond. In Luka Crnič & Uli Sauerland (eds.), The art and craft of semantics: A festschrift for Irene Heim, 251–274. Cambridge, MA: MIT Working Papers in Linguistics.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. 2018 A unified semantics for the Japanese Q-particle “ka” in indefinites, questions and disjunctions. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics3(1). 1–45. 10.5334/gjgl.238
     https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.238 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/sll.18003.asa
Loading
General use coordination in Japanese and Japanese Sign Language
Sign Language & Linguistics 22, 44 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1075/sll.18003.asa
/content/journals/10.1075/sll.18003.asa
/content/journals/10.1075/sll.18003.asa
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): American Sign Language , conjunction , coordination , disjunction , Japanese , Japanese Sign Language and Q-particle

Most Cited

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