1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Sign Language & Linguistics
  4. Online First Articles
  5. Online First Article
image of The indefinite-interrogative affinity in Catalan Sign Language (LSC)
EPUB
PDF

Abstract

Abstract

This paper explores the morphology and the licensing conditions of a particular type of indefinite pronouns, referred to as quex-indefinites, which are morphologically identical or closely related to question words. We present findings from two studies investigating these forms in Catalan Sign Language (LSC). The first study is based on elicitation with three LSC consultants, while the second is an online experiment which collected judgments from 50 deaf LSC signers. Our research reveals that LSC quex-indefinites may be either identical to or resemble question words and identifies the semantic categories and environments that allow them. Specifically, quex-indefinites in LSC are possible in the categories of person, quantity, cause, and time. The licensing environments include polar questions, antecedents of conditionals, positive episodic sentences, and some modal environments. This study provides the first description of quex-indefinites in a sign language, contributing to the understanding of the affinity between indefinite and interrogative pronouns.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Available under the CC BY 4.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/sll.24002.vei
2025-03-11
2025-03-22

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/sll.24002.vei
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/10.1075/sll.24002.vei/sll.24002.vei.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/sll.24002.vei&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Aboh, Enoch O., Roland Pfau & Ulrike Zeshan
    2005 When a wh-word is not a wh-word: The case of Indian Sign Language. InTanmoy Bhattacharya (ed.), The Yearbook of South Asian Languages and Linguistics, –. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110186185.11
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110186185.11 [Google Scholar]
  2. Alba, Cèlia
    2016 Wh-questions in Catalan Sign Language. Barcelona: Pompeu Fabra University PhD dissertation.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Alonso-Ovalle, Luis & Paula Menéndez-Benito
    2015 Epistemic indefinites. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199665297.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199665297.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  4. van Alsenoy, Lauren
    2014 A new typology of indefinite pronouns, with a focus on negative indefinites. Antwerpen: Universiteit Antwerpen PhD dissertation.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. AnderBois, Scott
    2012 Focus and uninformativity in Yukatek Maya questions. Natural Language Semantics. –. 10.1007/s11050‑012‑9084‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11050-012-9084-3 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bahan, Benjamin J.
    1996 Nonmanual realization of agreement in American Sign Language. Boston, MA: Boston University PhD dissertation.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Barberà, Gemma
    2015 The meaning of space in sign language. Reference, specificity and structure in Catalan Sign Language discourse. Berlin & Nijmegen: Mouton de Gruyter & Ishara Press. 10.1515/9781614518815
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9781614518815 [Google Scholar]
  8. 2016 Indefiniteness and specificity marking in Catalan Sign Language (LSC). Sign Language & Linguistics(). –. 10.1075/sll.19.1.01bar
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sll.19.1.01bar [Google Scholar]
  9. 2021 Specificity and definiteness. InJosep Quer, Roland Pfau & Annika Herrmann (eds.), The Routledge handbook of theoretical and experimental sign language research, –. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315754499‑18
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315754499-18 [Google Scholar]
  10. Barberà, Gemma & Patricia Cabredo Hofherr
    2018 Two indefinite pronouns in Catalan Sign Language (LSC). InRobert Truswell, Chris Cummins, Caroline Heycock, Brian Rabern & Hannah Rohde (eds.), Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung, –. University of Edinburgh. 10.18148/sub/2018.v21i1.126
     https://doi.org/10.18148/sub/2018.v21i1.126 [Google Scholar]
  11. Barberà, Gemma, Patricia Cabredo Hofherr & Josep Quer
    2018 Agent-backgrounding in Catalan Sign Language (LSC). Sign Language & Linguistics(). –. 10.1075/sll.00023.bar
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sll.00023.bar [Google Scholar]
  12. Barberà, Gemma & Josep Quer
    2013 Impersonal reference in Catalan Sign Language (LSC). InLaurence Meurant, Aurélie Sinte, Mieke Van Herreweghe & Myriam Vermeerbergen (eds.), Sign language research uses and practices: Crossing views on theoretical and applied sign language linguistics, –. Berlin & Nijmegen: De Gruyter Mouton & Ishara Press. 10.1515/9781614511472.237
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9781614511472.237 [Google Scholar]
  13. Barr, Dale J., Roger Levy, Christoph Scheepers & Harry J. Tily
    2013 Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language(). –. 10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001 [Google Scholar]
  14. Bates, Douglas, Martin Mächler, Ben Bolker & Steve Walker
    2015 Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software(). –. 10.18637/jss.v067.i01
     https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01 [Google Scholar]
  15. Berthelin, Signe Rix
    2020 Semantic elicitation: A discussion of elicitation frames and their application. Semantic Fieldwork Methods(). –.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Bhat, Darbhe Narayana Shankara
    2004 The indefinite-interrogative puzzle. InPronouns, –. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199230242.003.0010
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199230242.003.0010 [Google Scholar]
  17. Bochnak, M. Ryan & Lisa Matthewson
    2020 Techniques in complex semantic fieldwork. Annual Review of Linguistics. –. 10.1146/annurev‑linguistics‑011619‑030452
     https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-011619-030452 [Google Scholar]
  18. Bohnemeyer, Jürgen
    2015 A practical epistemology for semantic elicitation in the field and elsewhere. InM. Ryan Bochnak & Lisa Matthewson (eds.), Methodologies in semantic fieldwork, –. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190212339.003.0002
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190212339.003.0002 [Google Scholar]
  19. Branchini, Chiara & Lara Mantovan
    2020 A grammar of Italian Sign Language (LIS). Venice: Edizioni Ca’ Foscari. 10.30687/978‑88‑6969‑474‑5
     https://doi.org/10.30687/978-88-6969-474-5 [Google Scholar]
  20. Bruening, Benjamin
    2007 Wh-in-situ does not correlate with wh-indefinites or question particles. Linguistic Inquiry. –. 10.1162/ling.2007.38.1.139
     https://doi.org/10.1162/ling.2007.38.1.139 [Google Scholar]
  21. Cañas Peña, Sara
    2021 Polar interrogatives in Catalan Sign Language (LSC): A comprehensive grammatical analysis. Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra PhD dissertation.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Cecchetto, Carlo
    2012 Sentence types. InRoland Pfau, Markus Steinbach & Bencie Woll (eds.), Sign language: An international handbook, –. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110261325.292
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110261325.292 [Google Scholar]
  23. Chen, Zhuo
    2018 Wh-indefinites are dependent indefinites: a study on shenme. InWm. G. Bennett, Lindsay Hracs & Dennis Ryan Storoshenko (eds.), Proceedings of the 35th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, –. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Cormier, Kearsy
    2012 Pronouns. InRoland Pfau, Markus Steinbach & Bencie Woll (eds.), Sign language: An international handbook, –. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110261325.227
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110261325.227 [Google Scholar]
  25. Crasborn, Onno & Els van der Kooij
    2013 The phonology of focus in Sign Language of the Netherlands. Journal of Linguistics. –. 10.1017/S0022226713000054
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226713000054 [Google Scholar]
  26. 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 sign languages. Sign Language & Linguistics. –. 10.1075/sll.11.1.04cra
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sll.11.1.04cra [Google Scholar]
  27. Gärtner, Hans-Martin
    2009 More on the indefinite-interrogative affinity: The view from embedded non-finite interrogatives. Linguistic Typology(). –. 10.1515/LITY.2009.001
     https://doi.org/10.1515/LITY.2009.001 [Google Scholar]
  28. Gökgöz, Kadir & Ronnie B. Wilbur
    2017 Positive bias in negative yes/no questions: Evidence for Neg-to-C in TİD. InPaweł Rutkowski (ed.), Different faces of sign language research, vol., –. Warsaw: Faculty of Polish Studies, University of Warsaw.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Gomez-Jackson, Delaney R.
    2023 Questions and indefinites in Santiago Laxopa Zapotec. Santa Cruz, CAUniversity of California MA thesis.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Haida, Andreas
    2008 The indefiniteness and focusing of question words. InTova Friedman & Satoshi Ito (eds.), SALT, –. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University. 10.3765/salt.v18i0.2510
     https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v18i0.2510 [Google Scholar]
  31. Harrell Jr, Frank E.
    2021 Package ‘hmisc’. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=Hmisc. R package version 4.5–0.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Haspelmath, Martin
    1997 Indefinite pronouns. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780198235606.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198235606.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  33. 2013 Indefinite pronouns. InMatthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The World atlas of language structures online(v2020.4) [Data set], Zenodo. 10.5281/zenodo.7385533
     https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7385533 [Google Scholar]
  34. Hengeveld, Kees, Sabine Iatridou & Floris Roelofsen
    2023 Quexistentials and focus. Linguistic Inquiry(). –. 10.1162/ling_a_00441
     https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00441 [Google Scholar]
  35. Horton, Laura, Susan Goldin-Meadow, Marie Coppola, Ann Senghas & Diane Brentari
    2015 Forging a morphological system out of two dimensions: Agentivity and number. Open Linguistics. –. 10.1515/opli‑2015‑0021
     https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2015-0021 [Google Scholar]
  36. Idiatov, Dmitry
    2007 A typology of non-selective interrogative pronominals. Antwerp: University of Antwerp PhD dissertation.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Kaneko, Makoto
    2011 DP external epistemic ‘determiners’ in Japanese. InOlivier Bonami & Patricia Cabredo Hofherr (eds.), Empirical issues in syntax and semantics, –. [Online, available atwww.cssp.cnrs.fr/eiss8/eiss8.pdf].
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Kelepir, Meltem, Aslı Özkul & Elvan Tamyürek Özparlak
    2018 Agent-backgrounding in Turkish Sign Language (TİD). Sign Language & Linguistics(). –. 10.1075/sll.00020.kel
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sll.00020.kel [Google Scholar]
  39. Kimmelman, Vadim & Roland Pfau
    2016 Information structure in sign languages. InCaroline Féry & Shinichiro Ishihara (eds.), The Oxford handbook of information structure, –. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199642670.013.001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199642670.013.001 [Google Scholar]
  40. Lackner, Andrea
    2018 Interrogativity. InFunctions of head and body movements in Austrian Sign Language, –. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9781501507779‑163
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501507779-163 [Google Scholar]
  41. Lehmann, Christian
    2015 Thoughts on grammaticalization. Berlin: Language Science Press. 10.26530/OAPEN_603353
     https://doi.org/10.26530/OAPEN_603353 [Google Scholar]
  42. Li, Yen-hui Audrey
    1992 Indefinite Wh- in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics. –. 10.1007/BF00130234
     https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00130234 [Google Scholar]
  43. Lin, Hao
    2019 Interrogative marking in Chinese Sign Language: A preliminary corpus-based investigation. Sign Language & Linguistics(). –. 10.1075/sll.19001.lin
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sll.19001.lin [Google Scholar]
  44. Mackenzie, J. Lachlan
    2009 Content interrogatives in a sample of 50 languages. Lingua(). –. 10.1016/j.lingua.2007.12.005
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2007.12.005 [Google Scholar]
  45. Matthewson, Lisa
    2004 On the methodology of semantic fieldwork. International Journal of American Linguistics(). –. 10.1086/429207
     https://doi.org/10.1086/429207 [Google Scholar]
  46. McKee, Rachel
    2006 Aspects of interrogatives and negation in New Zealand Sign Language. InUlrike Zeshan (ed.), Interrogative and negative constructions in sign languages, –. Nijmegen: Ishara Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Moravcsik, Edith A.
    1969 Determination. Working Papers on Language Universals, –. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Morgan, Michael W.
    2006 Interrogatives and negatives in Japanese Sign Language. InUlrike Zeshan (ed.), Interrogative and negative constructions in sign languages, –. Nijmegen: Ishara Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Navarrete-González, Alexandra
    2019 The notion of focus and its relation to contrast in Catalan Sign Language (LSC). Sensos-e. –.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. 2022 Focus and contrast in Catalan Sign Language: Form and interpretation. Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra PhD dissertation.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Neidle, Carol, Judy Kegl, Dawn MacLaughlin, Benjamin Bahan & Robert G. Lee
    2000 The syntax of American Sign Language: Functional categories and hierarchical structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Nuhabaoglu, Derya & Okan Kubus
    2020 Lexicon: 3.7. Pronouns. InSina Proske, Derya Nuhbalaoglu, Annika Herrmann, Jana Hosemann & Markus Steinbach (eds.), A Grammar of German Sign Language (DGS), (SIGN-HUB Sign Language Grammar Series) (www.thesignhub.eu/grammar/dgs).
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Onea, Edgar
    2021 Indefinite-interrogative affinity. InDaniel Gutzmann, Lisa Matthewson, Cecile Meier, Hotze Rullmann & Thomas E. Zimmermann (eds.), The Wiley Blackwell companion to semantics, vol., West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell. 10.1002/9781118788516.sem117
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118788516.sem117 [Google Scholar]
  54. 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]
  55. Postma, Gertjan
    1994 The indefinite reading of WH. Linguistics in the Netherlands(). –. 10.1075/avt.11.19pos
     https://doi.org/10.1075/avt.11.19pos [Google Scholar]
  56. Quer, Josep (dir.), Eva M. Rondoni (dir. tècn.), Gemma Barberà, Santiago Frigola, Delfina Aliaga, Josep Boronat, Joan M. Gil, Pilar Iglesias & Marina Martínez
    2005 Gramàtica bàsica LSC. Barcelona: FESOCA, DOMAD. blogs.iec.cat/lsc/gramatica/
     [Google Scholar]
  57. R Core Team
    R Core Team 2021 R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Sandler, Wendy
    1999 The medium and the message: Prosodic interpretation of linguistic content in Israeli Sign Language. Sign Language & Linguistics(). –. 10.1075/sll.2.2.04san
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sll.2.2.04san [Google Scholar]
  59. Savolainen, Leena
    2006 Interrogatives and negatives in Finnish Sign Language: An overview. InUlrike Zeshan (ed.), Interrogative and negative constructions in sign languages, –. Nijmegen: Ishara Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Sudo, Yasutada
    2010 Wh-Ka pronouns in Japanese and the semantics of indeterminate pronouns. Paper presented at theWorkshop on Epistemic Indefinites, University of Göttingen.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Tang, Gladys
    2006 Questions and negation in Hong Kong Sign Language. InUlrike Zeshan (ed.), Interrogative and negative constructions in sign languages, –. Nijmegen: Ishara Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Ultan, Russell
    1969 Some general characteristics of interrogative systems. Working Papers on Language Universals, –. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  63. van Valin, Robert D.
    1993 A synopsis of Role and Reference Grammar. InRobert van Valin (ed.), Advances in Role and Reference Grammar, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.82.03van
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.82.03van [Google Scholar]
  64. Veiga Busto, Raquel, Floris Roelofsen & Alexandra Navarrete-González
    2023 The indefinite-interrogative affinity in sign languages: the case of Catalan Sign Language. InValentin D. Richard & Floris Roelofsen (eds.), Proceedings of the 4th workshop on inquisitiveness below and beyond the sentence boundary, –. Nancy, France: Association for Computational Linguistics.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Wilbur, Ronnie B.
    1997 A prosodic/pragmatic explanation for word order variation in ASL with typological implications. InMarjolijn H. Vespoor, Kee Dong Lee & Eve Sweetser (eds.), Lexical and syntactical constructions and the constructions of meaning, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.150.09wil
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.150.09wil [Google Scholar]
  66. 1999 Stress in ASL: Empirical evidence and linguistic issues. Language and Speech. –. 10.1177/00238309990420020501
     https://doi.org/10.1177/00238309990420020501 [Google Scholar]
  67. Yanovich, Igor
    2005 Choice-functional series of indefinite pronouns and Hamblin semantics. InEfthymia Georgala & Jonathan Howell (eds.), SALT, –. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University. 10.3765/salt.v15i0.2921
     https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v15i0.2921 [Google Scholar]
  68. Yun, Jiwon
    2013 Wh-indefinites: meaning and prosody: Cornell University PhD dissertation.
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Zeshan, Ulrike
    2003 Indo-Pakistani Sign Language grammar: A typological outline. Sign Language Studies. –. 10.1353/sls.2003.0005
     https://doi.org/10.1353/sls.2003.0005 [Google Scholar]
  70. 2004 Interrogative constructions in signed languages: Crosslinguistic perspectives. Language(). –. 10.1353/lan.2004.0050
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2004.0050 [Google Scholar]
  71. 2006 Negative and interrogative constructions in sign languages: A case study in sign language typology. InUlrike Zeshan (ed.), Interrogative and negative constructions in sign languages, –. Nijmegen: Ishara Press. 10.26530/OAPEN_453832
     https://doi.org/10.26530/OAPEN_453832 [Google Scholar]
  72. Zeshan, Ulrike & Nick Palfreyman
    2017 Sign language typology. InAlexandra Y. Aikhenvald & R. M. W. Dixon (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of linguistic typology, –. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781316135716.007
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316135716.007 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/sll.24002.vei
Loading
The indefinite-interrogative affinity in Catalan Sign Language (LSC)
John Benjamins ; https://doi.org/10.1075/sll.24002.vei
/content/journals/10.1075/sll.24002.vei
/content/journals/10.1075/sll.24002.vei
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: indefinite-interrogative affinity ; quexistentials ; Catalan Sign Language

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