Volume 22, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1387-9316
  • E-ISSN: 1569-996X
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



Little research has been conducted on interrogative constructions in Chinese Sign Language (CSL) based on naturalistic data. This paper presents a comprehensive investigation of CSL interrogative constructions. Based on findings from naturalistic data, both manual and non-manual components of these constructions are described and analyzed, revealing a complex system. Firstly, manual markers in content questions consist of two basic wh-signs, and , which form two series of wh-compounds for more specific information retrieval. As for the manual marking of CSL polar questions, three types of particles are attested, namely , , and some negators.

Non-manual markers work as interrogative markers in two ways: morphologically and prosodically. The former way is realized by mouthings, which can be equaled to suprasegmental markers like tones in spoken language. Prosodic non-manual marking is mainly realized by brow movement while head tilt, eye gaze, etc. are excluded as optional. Considering the spread of brow movement, we find that polar questions without particles are predominantly marked by brow raise spreading over the entire sentence, while in interrogatives with manual markers, brow movement seems to be optional, since its frequency is lower and its spreading behavior less regular. CSL is proposed to be a particle-rich sign language, and some speculations are offered on what may cause this behavior.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Baker-Shenk, Charlotte
    1983A micro-analysis of the nonmanual components of questions in American Sign Language. Berkeley, CA: University of California PhD dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bank, Richard
    2014The ubiquity of mouthings in NGT: a corpus study. Nijmegen: Radboud University PhD dissertation. Utrecht: LOT.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bergman, Brita
    1984 Non-manual components of signed language: Some sentence types in Swedish Sign Language. InFilip Loncke, Penny Boyes Braem & Ivan Lebrun (eds.), Recent research on European sign languages. Proceedings of the European Meeting of Sign Language Research, 49–59. Brussels: Swets & Zeitlinger B.V.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Chen, Yijun
    2012Questioning in Taiwan Sign Language conversation. National Chung Cheng University, TaiwanPhD dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Coerts, Jane
    1992Nonmanual grammatical markers: An analysis of interrogatives, negations and topicalisations in Sign Language of the Netherlands. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam PhD dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Crasborn, Onno, Els van der Kooij, Dafydd Waters, Bencie Woll & Johanna Mesch
    2008 Frequency distribution and spreading behavior of different types of mouth actions in three different sign languages. Sign Language & Linguistics11(1). 45–67. 10.1075/sll.11.1.04cra
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sll.11.1.04cra [Google Scholar]
  7. Dachkovsky, Svetlana & Wendy Sandler
    2009 Visual intonation in the prosody of a sign language. Language and Speech52. 287–314. 10.1177/0023830909103175
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0023830909103175 [Google Scholar]
  8. Ebbinghaus, Horst & Jens Heßmann
    2001 Sign language as multidimensional communication: Why manual signs, mouthings, and mouth gestures are three different things. InPenny Boyes Braem & Rachel Sutton-Spence (eds.), The hands are the head of the mouth. The mouth as articulator in sign languages, 133–151. Hamburg: Signum.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Fischer, Susan
    2006 Questions and negations in American Sign Language. InUlrike Zeshan (ed.), Interrogative and negative constructions in sign languages, 165–197. Nijmegen: Ishara Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Johnston, Trevor & Adam Schembri
    2007Australian Sign Language: an introduction to sign language linguistics. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511607479
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511607479 [Google Scholar]
  11. Li, Charles N. & Sandra Thompson
    1989Mandarin Chinese: A functional reference grammar. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Lillo-Martin, Diane & Susan Fischer
    1992Overt and covert wh-questions in ASL. Paper presented at the5th International Symposium on Sign Language Research, Salamanca, Spain.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Lucas, Ceil, Robert Bayley & Clayton Valli
    2001Sociolinguistic Variation in American Sign Language. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511612824
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511612824 [Google Scholar]
  14. McKee, Rachel
    2006 Aspects of interrogatives and negation in New Zealand Sign Language. InUlrike Zeshan (ed.), Interrogative and negative constructions in sign languages, 70–90. Nijmegen: Ishara Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. McKee, Rachel L. & Sophia Wallingford
    2011 ‘So, well, whatever’: Discourse functions of palm-up in New Zealand Sign Language. Sign Language & Linguistics14(2). 213–247. 10.1075/sll.14.2.01mck
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sll.14.2.01mck [Google Scholar]
  16. Morgan, Michael
    2006 Interrogatives and negatives in Japanese Sign Language. InUlrike Zeshan (ed.), Interrogative and negative constructions in sign languages, 91–127. Nijmegen: Ishara Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. 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]
  18. Sandler, Wendy & Diane Lillo-Martin
    2006Sign language and linguistic universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139163910
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139163910 [Google Scholar]
  19. Savolainen, Leena
    2006 Interrogatives and negatives in Finnish Sign Language: an overview. InUlrike Zeshan (ed.), Interrogative and negative constructions in sign languages, 284–302. Nijmegen: Ishara Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Schalber, Katharina
    2006 What is the chin doing? An analysis of interrogatives in Austrian Sign Language. Sign Language & Linguistics91(2). 133–150. 10.1075/sll.9.1‑2.08sch
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sll.9.1-2.08sch [Google Scholar]
  21. Sutton-Spence, Rachel & Bencie Woll
    1999The linguistics of British Sign Language: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139167048
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139167048 [Google Scholar]
  22. Sze, Felix, Connie Lo, Lisa Lo & Kenny Chu
    2013 Historical development of Hong Kong Sign Language. Sign Language Studies13. 155–185. 10.1353/sls.2013.0002
    https://doi.org/10.1353/sls.2013.0002 [Google Scholar]
  23. Tang, Gladys
    2006 Questions and negation in Hong Kong Sign Language. InUlrike Zeshan (ed.), Interrogative and negative constructions in sign languages, 198–224. Nijmegen: Ishara Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. van Loon, Esther, Roland Pfau & Markus Steinbach
    2014 The grammaticalization of gestures in sign languages. InCornelia Müller, Alan Cienki, Ellen Fricke, Silva H. Ladewig, David McNeill & Sedinha Tessendorf (eds.), Body – language – communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction, 2133–2149. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Vogt-Svendsen, Marit
    1990 Eye-gaze in Norwegian Sign Language interrogatives. InWilliam Edmondson & Fred Karlsson (eds.), SLR87: Papers from the Fourth International Symposium on Sign Language Research, 156–162. Hamburg: Signum Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Weast, Traci
    2008Questions in American Sign Language: A quantitative analysis of raised and lowered eyebrows. Arlington, TX: The University of Texas at Arlington PhD dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Yang, Junhui & Wu Anan
    2014The introduction of Chinese Sign Language. Zhengzhou: Zhengzhou University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Yang, Junhui & Susan Fischer
    2002 Expressing negation in Chinese Sign Language. Sign Language & Linguistics5(2). 167–202. 10.1075/sll.5.2.05yan
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sll.5.2.05yan [Google Scholar]
  29. Zeshan, Ulrike
    2004 Interrogative constructions in signed languages: cross-linguistic perspectives. Language80(1). 7–39. 10.1353/lan.2004.0050
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2004.0050 [Google Scholar]
  30. (ed.) 2006Interrogative and negative constructions in sign languages (Sign Language Typology Series No. 1). Nijmegen: Ishara Press. 10.26530/OAPEN_453832
    https://doi.org/10.26530/OAPEN_453832 [Google Scholar]
  31. 2013 Question particles in sign languages. InMatthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology (available online atwals.info/chapter/140;accessed on2017-12-03).
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

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