• In addition, Meier (2002), Lillo-Martin and Meier (2011) and Cormier (2002; 2007) argue that numeral expressions in the verbal and pronomic systems of the ASL and BSL influence interaction with expression, and that this could also affect the status of management in the languages of glicle. Here too, if a specifying verb can show and/or express the number, as it shows, what form takes phonologically and/or how it indicates the number, all conventional aspects are specific display constructs. The decisive question in deciding whether we have evidence of a system of agreement is whether the direction of the display itself (i.e. the different characteristics of the target) reflects or not the semantic or formal characteristics of a non-control sentence.9 Overall, we can see that the use of display verbs appears to have significant syntactic effects (although their role in null arguments may have been overstated). However, it does not seem at the outset that contract analysis is the only explanation, as Meier (2002), Lillo-Martin and Meier (2011) and Wilbur (2013) assert. Finally, it is only the patterns used in the use of direction patterns that indicate the verbs that are influenced by the actual situation of current speakers or imaginary places of missing references, and not other linguistic characteristics of these verbs. In fact, many elements suggest that the grammar of the different spoken languages and the co-speech broom also interacts specifically, as stated in the following sections. In a construction grammar model, the indication of verb structures is presented as a conventional cluster, comprising both morphosyticities and gestural characteristics: they are part of the grammar and, therefore, their interaction with aspects of the syntax of sign languages is not surprising. These typological characteristics are exactly what we should consider if we are to better understand the interaction between language and modality. In particular, I would like to look at the issue of classification here.

    The system of agreements described by LM-M is unique in that only one class of verbs is identified in a sign language given for the people`s convention, the class of contractual verbs. Other verbs in the language are not marked for a correspondence or marked as “ocative” (the so-called spatial verbs). Adherence to the class of concordance verbs is semantically determined; Overall, transmission, whether concrete or abstract (Meir 2001, 2002). Although languages may be different in terms of the classification of certain verbs, in all sign languages that have this system, there is a nucleus of verbs that designate transmission (. B for example GIVE, SEND, TAKE, HELP, TELL) in the class of contractual verbs. The conclusions regarding the indication of verbs and the constructed effect were clearer – that is, the auslan and BSL verbs were more likely to be modified for the object if they occurred with a designed action. As noted above, such a correlation has been established with Auslan (from Beuzeville et al. 2009) and with BSL (Cormier et al.

    2015a; Fenlon et al. 2018). Corpus-based approaches such as this will help us identify these internal and external linguistic influences, allowing us to more accurately characterize sign language grammars. Steinbach, Markus. What do the contractual assistants of the grammar of the sign language agreement reveal? Theoretical linguistics 37 (3-4). 209-21. DOI: doi.org/10.1515/thli.2011.016 LM-M indicate that some of the typological peculiarities of the word chord in sign language can be explained by observing its diachronous origins. I would like to follow this path and trace the diachronic evolution of the verbal agreement in the sign language of Israel (ISL).

Utilizzando il sito, accetti l'utilizzo dei cookie da parte nostra. maggiori informazioni

Questo sito utilizza i cookie per fornire la migliore esperienza di navigazione possibile. Continuando a utilizzare questo sito senza modificare le impostazioni dei cookie o cliccando su "Accetta" permetti il loro utilizzo.

Chiudi