Sign Language & Linguistics - Volume 24, Issue 2, 2021

This article presents a study of errors made by hearing adult L2 learners of Swiss German Sign Language (Deutschschweizerische Gebärdensprache, DSGS). As part of a statistical analysis of single-parameter errors, movement was found to be the parameter most susceptible to errors, followed by location, orientation, and handshape. An analysis of production errors with respect to combinations of manual parameters was also conducted, something that previously has not been undertaken. The parameter combination most frequently involved in errors was movement with location. Possible aspects contributing to the higher error rate for movement are suggested, among which are the inherent complexity of the movement parameter. Finally, the article discusses factors influencing the judgment of errors.

Sign languages have been reported to have manual signs that function as perfective morphemes (Fischer & Gough 1999; Meir 1999; Rathmann 2005; Duffy 2007; Zucchi et al. 2010). Turkish Sign Language (TİD) has also been claimed to have such morphemes (Zeshan 2003; Kubuş & Rathmann 2009; Dikyuva 2011; Gökgöz 2011; Karabüklü 2016) as well as a nonmanual completive marker (‘bn’) (Dikyuva 2011). This study shows that the nonmanual ‘bn’ is in fact a perfective morpheme. We examine its compatibility with different event types and furthermore show that TİD has a manual sign bı̇t (‘finish’) that is indeed the completive marker but with possibly unusual restrictions on its use. Based on their distribution, the current study distinguishes bı̇t and ‘bn’ as different morphemes even though they can co-occur. TİD is argued to be typologically different from other sign languages since it has both a nonmanual marker (‘bn’) for a perfective morpheme and a manual sign (bı̇t) with different selectional properties than the manual signs reported for other sign languages.

Sign language assessment tools are important for professionals working with DHH children to measure sign language development and competence. Adaptation of an existing test can be a solution when initiating assessment in a sign language community; the adaptation process must adhere to key principles and procedures. We introduce the principles of test adaptation and outline the challenges we faced in adapting the British Sign Language Production Test (Herman, Grove, Holmes, Morgan, Sutherland & Woll 2004) to German Sign Language and American Sign Language. Challenges included decisions regarding the normative sample, the use of terminology, and variations in the scoring protocols to fit with each language. The steps taken throughout the test adaptation process are described, together with a comparison of parallels and differences. We conclude that test adaptation is an effective method of developing practical tools for sign language assessment and contributes to a better understanding of sign language development.

This squib documents exceptions to the main strategy of expressing sentential negation in Russian Sign Language (RSL). The postverbal sentential negation particle in RSL inverts the basic SVO order characteristic of the language turning it into SOV (Pasalskaya 2018a). We show that this reversal requirement under negation is not absolute and does not apply to prosodically heavy object NPs. The resulting picture accords well with the view of RSL word order laid out by Kimmelman (2012) and supports a model of grammar where syntactic computation has access to phonological information (Kremers 2014; Bruening 2019).