Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures
- List of tables
- List of contributors
- Acknowledgements
- 1 Why different, why the same? Explaining effects and non-effects of modality upon linguistic structure in sign and speech
- Part I Phonological structure in signed languages
- 2 Modality differences in sign language phonology and morphophonemics
- 3 Beads on a string? Representations of repetition in spoken and signed languages
- 4 Psycholinguistic investigations of phonological structure in ASL
- 5 Modality-dependent aspects of sign language production: Evidence from slips of the hands and their repairs in German Sign Language
- 6 The role of Manually Coded English in language development of deaf children
- Part II Gesture and iconicity in sign and speech
- Part III Syntax in sign: Few or no effects of modality
- Part IV Using space and describing space: Pronouns, classifiers, and verb agreement
- Index
- References
5 - Modality-dependent aspects of sign language production: Evidence from slips of the hands and their repairs in German Sign Language
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 September 2009
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures
- List of tables
- List of contributors
- Acknowledgements
- 1 Why different, why the same? Explaining effects and non-effects of modality upon linguistic structure in sign and speech
- Part I Phonological structure in signed languages
- 2 Modality differences in sign language phonology and morphophonemics
- 3 Beads on a string? Representations of repetition in spoken and signed languages
- 4 Psycholinguistic investigations of phonological structure in ASL
- 5 Modality-dependent aspects of sign language production: Evidence from slips of the hands and their repairs in German Sign Language
- 6 The role of Manually Coded English in language development of deaf children
- Part II Gesture and iconicity in sign and speech
- Part III Syntax in sign: Few or no effects of modality
- Part IV Using space and describing space: Pronouns, classifiers, and verb agreement
- Index
- References
Summary
Introduction
In the present study, we investigate both slips of the hand and slips of the tongue in order to assess modality-dependent and -independent effects in language production. As a broader framework, we adopt the paradigm of generative grammar, as it has developed over the past 40 years (Chomsky 1965; 1995, and related work of other generativists). Generative Grammar focuses on both universal and language-particular aspects of language. The universal characteristics of language are known as Universal Grammar (henceforth, UG). UG defines the format of possible human languages and delimits the range of possible variation between languages. We assume that languages are represented and processed by one and the same language module (Fodor 1983), no matter what modality they use. UG is neutral with regard to the modality in which a particular language is processed (Crain and Lillo-Martin 1999).
By adopting a psycholinguistic perspective, we ask how a speaker's or signer's knowledge of language is put to use during the production of language. So far, models of language production have mainly been developed on the basis of spoken languages ((Fromkin 1973; Garrett 1975, 1980, Butterworth 1980 Levelt 1989, Levelt, Roelofs and Meyer 1999, Dell 1986, Dell and Reich 1981, MacKay 1987, Stemberger 1985). But, even the set of spoken languages investigated so far is restricted (with a clear focus on English). Thus, Levelt, Roelofs and Meyer (1999: 36) challenge researchers to consider a greater variety of (spoken) languages in order to broaden the empirical basis for valid theoretical inductions.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Modality and Structure in Signed and Spoken Languages , pp. 112 - 142Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2002
References
, . 1987. Slips of the tongue in Arabic and their theoretical implications. Language Sciences 9:145–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baars, Bernard J., ed. 1992. Experimental slips and human error. Exploring the architecture of volition. New York: Plenum Press
and 1976. Spoonerisms as sequencer conflicts: Evidence from artificially elicited errors. American Journal of Psychology 89:467–484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and . 1975. Output editing for lexical status in artificially elicited slips of the tongue. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 14:382–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berg, Thomas. 1988. Die Abbildung des Sprachproduktionsprozesses in einem Aktivationsflussmodell. Untersuchungen an deutschen und englischen Versprechern. Linguistische Arbeiten 206. Tübingen: Niemeyer
Brentari, Diane. 1998. A prosodic model of sign language phonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Butterworth, Brian. 1980. Some constraints on models of language production. In Language production, Vol. 1: Speech and talk, ed. B. Butterworth, 423–459. London: Academic Press
1984. The logic of neuropsychological research and the problem of patient classification in aphasia. Brain and Language 21:9–20CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chomsky, Noam. 1965. Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Corina, David. 1998. The processing of sign language. Evidence from aphasia. In Handbook of neurolinguistics, ed. Brigitte Stemmer and Harry A. Whitaker, 313–329. San Diego, CA: Academic Press
Crain, Stephen and Diane Lillo-Martin. 1999. An introduction to linguistic theory and language acquisition. Oxford: Blackwell
Cutler, Anne. 1982. Speech errors: A classified bibliography. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club
1986. A spreading activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. Psychological Review 93:293–321CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
and . 1992. Stages of lexical access in language production. Cognition 42:287–314CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
and . 1981. Stages in sentence production: An analysis of speech error data. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 20:611–629CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and . 1991. On the autonomy of phonological encoding: Evidence from slips of the tongue in Spanish. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 20:161–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1995. Reliability and validity of slip-of-the-tongue corpora: A methodological note. Linguistics 33:1169–1190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fodor, Jerry A. 1983. The modularity of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Fromkin, Victoria A. 1973. Introduction. In Speech errors as linguistic evidence, ed. Victoria A. Fromkin, 11–45. The Hague: Mouton
Fromkin, Victoria A., ed. 1980. Errors in linguistic performance: slips of the tongue, ear, pen, and hand. New York: Academic Press
Garrett, Merrill F. 1975. The analysis of sentence production. In The psychology of learning and motivation, ed. Gordon H. Bower, Vol. 1, 133–175. New York: Academic Press
Garrett, Merrill F. 1980. Levels of processing in sentence production. In Language production, ed. Brian Butterworth, Vol. 1, 177–210. London: Academic Press
Gee, James and Wendy Goodhart. 1988. American Sign Language and the human biological capacity for language. In Language learning and deafness, ed. Michael Strong.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Jescheniak, Jörg D. 1999. Accessing words in speaking: Models, simulations, and data. In Representations and processes in language production, ed. Ralf Klabunde and Christiane von Stutterheim, 237–257. Wiesbaden: Deutscher Universitäts Verlag
. 1977. The linguistic interpretation of aphasic syndromes: Agrammatism in Broca's aphasia, an example. Cognition 5:9–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klima, Edward S. and Ursula Bellugi. 1979. The signs of language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
Lentz, Ella Mae, Ken Mikos, and Cheri Smith. 1989. Signing naturally. Teachers curriculum guide level 2. San Diego, CA: DawnSignPress
Leuninger, Helen. 1989. Neurolinguistik. Probleme, Paradigmen, Perspektiven. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag
Leuninger, Helen. 1996. Danke und Tschüβürs Mitnehmen. Zürich: Amman Verlag
Leuninger, Helen, Daniela Happ, and Annette Hohenberger. 2000a. Sprachliche Fehlleistungen und ihre Korrekturen in Deutscher Gebärdensprache (DGS). Modalitätsneutrale und modalitätsabhängige Aspekte der Sprachproduktion. In Sprachproduktion, ed. Christopher Habel and Thomas Pechmann. Wiesbaden: Deutscher Universitäts Verlag
Leuninger, Helen, Daniela Happ, and Annette Hohenberger. 2000b. Assessing modality-neutral and modality-dependent aspects of language production: Slips of the tongue and slips of the hand and their repairs in spoken German and German sign language M. Paper presented at the DFG-colloquium at Dagstuhl, 2000, September
Levelt, Willem J. M. 1989. Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
1992. Assessing words in speech production: Stages, processes and representationsCognition 42:1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levelt, Willem J. M. 1999. Producing spoken language: A blueprint of the speaker. In The neurocognition of language, ed. Colin M. Brown and Peter Hagoort, 83–122. Oxford: Oxford University Press
, , and . 1999. A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22:1–75CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
. 1986. Two kinds of null arguments in American Sign Language. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 4:415–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lillo-Martin, Diane. 1991. Universal Grammar and American Sign Language: Setting the null argument parameters. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic
Lillo-Martin, Diane. 1999. Modality effects and modularity in language acquisition: The acquisition of American Sign Language. In Handbook of child language acquisition, ed. William C. Ritchie and Tej K. Bhatia, 531–567. San Diego, CA: Academic Press
MacKay, Donald G. 1987. The organization of perception and action: A theory for language and other cognitive skills. New York: Springer
1998. The frame/content theory of evolution of speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21:499–511CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meringer, Rudolf and Karl Mayer. 1895. Versprechen und Verlesen. Eine psychologisch-linguistische Studie. Stuttgart: Goeschen
1992. Investigation of phonological encoding through speech error analyses: Achievements, limitations, and alternatives. Cognition 42:181–211CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
and 1976. Semantic bias effects on the outcomes of verbal slips. Cognition 4:177–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1990. Phonological primitives: Electromyographic speech error evidence. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 88:1299–1312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newkirk, Don, Edward S. Klima, Carlene C. Pedersen, and Ursula Bellugi. 1980. Linguistic evidence from slips of the hand. In Errors in linguistic performance: Slips of the tongue, ear, pen, and hand, ed. Victoria A. Fromkin, 165–197. New York: Academic Press
Odden, David. 1995. Tone: African languages. In The handbook of phonological theory, ed. John A. Goldsmith, 444–475. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell
1992. Sonority and syllable structure in American Sign LanguageLinguistic Inquiry 23:407–442Google Scholar
1997. Zur phonologischen Komponente der Deutschen Gebärdensprache: Segmente und Silben. Frankfurter Linguistische Forschungen 20:1–29Google Scholar
Poulisse, Nanda. 1999. Slips of the tongue: Speech errors in first and second language production. Amsterdam: Benjamins
1993. Hand in hand: The roles of the nondominant hand in sign language phonology. Linguistic Review 10:337–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schade, Ulrich. 1992. Konnektionismus: Zur Modellierung der Sprachproduktion. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag
Schade, Ulrich. 1999. Konnektionistische Sprachproduktion. Wiesbaden: Deutscher Universitäts Verlag
Shattuck-Hufnagel, Stephanie. 1979. Speech errors as evidence for a serial-ordering mechanism in sentence production. In Sentence processing: Psycholinguistic studies presented to Merrill Garrett, eds. W. Cooper and E. Walker, 295–342. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Slobin, Dan I. 1977. Language change in childhood and in history. In Language learning and thought, ed. John MacNamara, 185–214. New York: Academic Press
Smith, Cheri, Ella Mae Lentz, and Ken Mikos. 1988. Signing naturally. Teachers curriculum guide Level 1. San Diego, CA: DawnSignPress
1984. Structural errors in normal and agrammatic speech. Cognitive Neuropsychology 1:281–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stemberger, Joseph P. 1985. The lexicon in a model of language production. New York: Garland
1989. Speech errors in early child production. Journal of Memory and Language 28:164–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittemore, Gregory L. 1987. The production of ASL signs. Dissertation, University of Texas, Austin
Zimmer, June. 1989. Towards a description of register variation in American Sign Language. In The sociolinguistics of the Deaf community, ed. Ceil Lucas, 253–272. San Diego, CA: Academic Press
- 42
- Cited by