Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T05:31:16.783Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Order of words, signs, and gestures: A first comparison

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Alessandro Laudanna  and
Virginia Volterra
Alessandro Laudanna*
Affiliation:
Istituto di Psicologia C.N.R., Rome
*
Alessandro Laudanna, Istituto di Psicologia C.N.R., Viale Marx, 15, 00137 Roma, Italy
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The present study evaluates the contribution of visuo-gestural modality versus linguistic factors in determining the order of elements in sign language. The same picture description task was given to 12 hearing subjects using spoken Italian, 12 deaf subjects using Italian Sign Language, and 12 hearing subjects using pantomime. Nonreversible, reversible, and locative productions with two elements were elicited. The results showed that Italian Sign Language differs along significant lines from both spoken Italian and pantomime. The pattern of similarities and differences found among the three experimental conditions allows us to argue that the order of signs in the sentence is sensitive to modality as well as linguistic factors depending on the particular sentence structures considered.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 12 , Issue 2 , June 1991 , pp. 135 - 150
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bergman, B., & Wallin, L. (1985). Sentence structure in Swedish Sign Language. In Stokoe, W. & Volterra, V. (Eds.), SLR ’83. Rome: Linstok Press/I.P. CNR.Google Scholar
Beugnette, G., & Billant, J. (1981). Etude sur la structuration syntaxique de jeunes sourds français. In Harrison-Covello, A. (Ed.), Les enfants handicapes. Paris: PUF.Google Scholar
Boyes Braem, P. (1984, September). Sign structure. Paper presented at the International Sign Language Workshop, Bristol, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
Boyes Braem, P., Fournier, M. L., Rickli, F., Corazza, S., Franchi, M. L., & Volterra, V. (1989). Une comparaison de techniques pour exprimer des roles semantiques et des relations locatives dans les langues des signes suisse-française et italienne. In Quertin-mont, S. & Loncke, F. (Eds.), Etudes Européennes en langues des signes. Bruxelles: Edirsa.Google Scholar
Clark, H. H. (1973). The language-as-fixed-effect fallacy: A critique of language statistics in psychological research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 12, 335–359.Google Scholar
Corazza, S. (1990). The morphology of classifier handshapes in Italian Sign Language (LIS). In Lucas, C. (Ed.), Sign language research: Theoretical issues. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Corazza, S., Erting, C., Prezioso, C., & Volterra, V. (1988, May). Comparison of sign order in the sentences of two different sign languages. Paper presented at the II International Conference on Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Deuchar, M. (1983). Is British Sign Language an SVO language? In Kyle, J. & Woll, B. (Eds.), Language in sign. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Fischer, S. (1975). Influences on word order change in American Sign Language. In Li, C. (Ed.), Word order and word order change. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Friedman, L. (1976). The manifestation of subject, object and topic in the American Sign Language. In Li, C. (Ed.), Subject and topic. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
Kegl, J. (1976). Relational grammar and American Sign Language. Unpublished manuscript, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Klima, E., & Bellugi, U. (1979). The signs of language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Laudanna, A. (1987). Ordine dei segni nella frase. In Volterra, V. (Ed.), La Lingua Italiana dei Segni. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
Levelt, W. J. M. (1980). On-line processing constraints on the properties of sign and spoken language. In Bellugi, U. & Studdert-Kennedy, M. (Eds.), Signed and spoken language: Biological constraints on linguistic form. Berlin: Verlag Chemie.Google Scholar
Liddell, S. (1980). American Sign Language syntax. New York: Mouton.Google Scholar
McIntire, M. (1982). Constituent order and location in American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies, 37, 345–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McWhinney, B., & Bates, E. (Eds.). (1988). The cross-linguistic study of sentence processing. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pascale, E. (1983). Comunicazione pantomimica, comunicazione orale: Un confronto. Unpublished Tesi di Laurea, Universitá di Roma.Google Scholar
Pizzuto, E., Giuranna, E., & Gambino, G. (1990). Manual and nonmanual morphology in Italian Sign Language: Grammatical constraints and discourse processes. In Lucas, C. (Ed.), Sign language research: Theoretical issues. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Schlesinger, I. M. (1971). The grammar of sign language and the problems of language universals. In Morton, J. (Ed.), Biological and social factors in psycholinguistics. London: Logos Press.Google Scholar
Volterra, V., Laudanna, A., Corazza, S., Natale, F., & Radutzky, E. (1984). Italian Sign Language: The order of elements in the declarative sentence. In Loncke, F.Boyes Braem, P., & Lebrun, Y. (Eds.), Recent research on European sign languages. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger.Google Scholar
Yau, S. (1977). Constraints on basic sign order and word order universals. Paris: CNRS.Google Scholar