Cover not available
Part of
Functionalist and Usage-based Approaches to the Study of Language: In honor of Joan L. Bybee
Edited by K. Aaron Smith and Dawn Nordquist
[Studies in Language Companion Series 192] 2018
► pp. 59–87

know and understand in ASL

A usage-based study of grammaticalized topic constructions

| University of Manitoba
Topic constructions in ASL are understood to be composed of information identifiable to the addressee that serves as the reference point from which to view the comment or comments immediately following it. This study compares the instances of use in a corpus of conversational ASL of KNOW and UNDERSTAND as lexical verbs and their grammaticalized form and function when they appear as topic markers, and with know as a discourse marker. Topic phrases introduced by know tend to have a wider domain as an identifiable reference point rather than a specific entity or event within the signer’s and addressee’s shared knowledge. Topic phrases introduced by understand tend to introduce an idea that the signer wishes to set as a reference point.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Grammaticalization in signed languages
  • 3.Topic marking and topic constructions in ASL
  • 4.Data
  • 5.Lexical know and know-topic constructions
    • 5.1 know tokens across the ASL conversational corpus
    • 5.2Lexical know
    • 5.3 know as a discourse marker
    • 5.4 know as a topic marker
    • 5.5Location variation in know tokens
  • 6.Lexical understand and understand-topic constructions
    • 6.1Lexical understand
    • 6.2 understand-topics
  • 7.The emergence of categories in ASL grammar
  • 8.Conclusion
  • Transcription key
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 1 March 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.192.03jan
References (55)
References
Baker, Charlotte & Cokely, Dennis. 1980. American Sign Language: A Teacher’s Resource Text on Grammar and Culture. Silver Spring MD: T.J. Publishers.Google Scholar
Brentari, Diane. 1998. A Prosodic Model of Sign Language Phonology. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Brouland, Joséphine. 1855. Spécimen d`un Dictionaire des Signes, suivi d’Explication du Tableau Spécimen d`un dictionaire des signes du langage mimique, mettant toute personne en état de l’apprendre seule. Paris: Boucquin, Imprimerie de l’Institution Nationale des Sourds-Muets de Paris.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan. 2001. Phonology and language use. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006. From usage to grammar: The mind’s response to repetition. Language 82(4): 711–733. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010. Language, Usage and Cognition. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan L. 2013. Usage-based theory and exemplar representation. In The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar, Thomas Hoffman & Graeme Trousdale (eds), 49–69. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan & Eddington, David. 2006. A usage-based approach to Spanish verbs of ‘becoming’. Language 82(2): 323–355. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan, Perkins, Revere & Pagliuca, William. 1994. The evolution of grammar: Tense, Aspect and Modality in the Languages of the World. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan & Scheibman, Joanne. 1999. The effect of usage on degrees of constituency: The reduction of don’t in English. Linguistics 37(4): 575–596. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Filmore, Charles J. 1982. Frame semantics. In Linguistics in the Morning Calm, Linguistic Society of Korea (ed.), 111–137. Seoul: Hanshin.Google Scholar
Frishberg, Nancy. 1975. Arbitrariness and iconicity: Historical change in American Sign Language. Language 51: 696–719. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Givón, T. 1984. Syntax: A Functional-Typological Introduction, Vol. 1. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1986. Prototypes: Between Plato and Wittgenstein. In Noun Classes and Categorization [Typological Studies in Language 7], Colette Craig (ed.), 77–102. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haiman, John. 1978. Conditionals are topics. Language 59: 781–819. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd & Kuteva, Tania. 2002. World Lexicon of Grammaticalization. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. The Genesis of Grammar: A Reconstruction. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Holmes, Janet. 1986. Functions of you know in women’s and men’s speech. Language and Society 15(1): 1–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hopper, Paul. 1991. On some principles of grammaticization. In Approaches to Grammaticalization, Vol. I: Focus on Theoretical and Methodological Issues, Elizabeth Closs Traugott & Bernd Heine (eds), 149–187. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hopper, Paul J. & Thompson, Sandra A. 1980. Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language 56: 251–299. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Janzen, Terry. 1995. The Polygrammaticalization of FINISH in ASL. MA thesis, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg.Google Scholar
. 1998a. Topicality in ASL: Information Ordering, Constituent Structure, and the Function of Topic Marking. PhD dissertation, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque NM.Google Scholar
. 1998b. Multi-level iconic relationships in American Sign Language grammar. In Proceedings of the First High Desert Linguistics Society Conference, April 3–4, 1998, Vol. 1, Catie Berkenfield, Dawn Nordquist & Angus Grieve-Smith (eds), 159–172. Albuquerque NM: High Desert Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
. 1999. The grammaticization of topics in American Sign Language. Studies in Language 23(2): 271–306. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. The expression of grammatical categories in signed languages. In Verbal and Signed Languages: Comparing Structures, Constructs and Methodologies, Elena Pizzuto, Paola Pietrandrea & Raffaele Simone (eds), 171–197. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
. 2010. Pragmatics as start point; Discourse as end point. Keynote Presentation. 9th Conference of the High Desert Linguistic Society (HDLS), University of New Mexico, Albuquerque NM.Google Scholar
. 2012a. Lexicalization and grammaticalization. In Sign Language: An International Handbook [Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Sciences (HSK) series], Markus Steinbach, Roland Pfau & Bencie Woll (eds), 816–841. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012b. From embodied perspective to grammar in American Sign Language. Keynote Presentation, Conceptual Structure, Discourse and Language (CSDL) 11. University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada, 17–20 May.Google Scholar
Janzen, Terry & Shaffer, Barbara. 2002. Gesture as the substrate in the process of ASL grammaticization. In Modality and Structure in Signed and Spoken Languages, Richard P. Meier, Kearsy Cormier & David Quinto-Pozos (eds), 199–223. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Janzen, Terry, Shaffer, Barbara & Wilcox, Sherman. 1999. Signed language pragmatics. In Handbook of Pragmatics, Installment 1999, Jef Verschueren, Jan-Ola Östman, Jan Blommaert & Chris Bulcaen (eds), 1–20. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Lakoff, Robin. 1975. Language and Women’s Place. New York NY: Harper Colophone.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 2008. Cognitive Grammar: A Basic Introduction. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leeson, Lorraine & Grehan, Carmel. 2004. To the lexicon and beyond: The effect of gender on variation in Irish Sign Language. In To the Lexicon and Beyond: Sociolinguistics in European Deaf Communities, Mieke Van Herreweghe & Myriam Vermeerbergen (eds), 39–73. Washington DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Li, Charles N. & Thompson, Sandra A. 1976. Subject and topic: A new typology of language. In Subject and Topic, Charles N. Li (ed.), 457–490. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Long, J. Schuyler. 1918. The Sign Language: A Manual of Signs. Omaha NE: Dorothy Long Thompson.Google Scholar
Mauk, Claude E. 2003. Undershoot in Two Modalities: Evidence from Fast Speech and Fast Signing. PhD dissertation University of Texas, Austin TX.Google Scholar
Mauk, Claude E. & Tyrone, Martha. 2008. Sign lowering as phonetic reduction in American Sign Language. In Proceedings of the 8th International Seminar on Speech Production, Rudolph Sock, Suzanne Fuchs & Yves Laprie (eds), 185–188. Le Chesnay, France: INRIA.Google Scholar
Padden, Carol. 1988. Interaction of Morphology and Syntax in American Sign Language. New York NY: Garland.Google Scholar
Renard, Marc & Delaporte, Yves. 2004. Aux Origines de la Langue des Signes Française: Brouland, Pélissier, Lambert, les premiers illustrateurs 1855–1865. Paris: Langue des Signes Éditions Publications.Google Scholar
Russell, Kevin, Wilkinson, Erin & Janzen, Terry. 2011. ASL sign lowering as undershoot: A corpus study. Laboratory Phonology 2(2): 403–422. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shaffer, Barbara. 2000. A Syntactic, Pragmatic analysis of the Expression of Necessity and Possibility in American Sign Language. PhD dissertation, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque NM.Google Scholar
. 2002. CAN’T: The negation of modal notions in ASL. Sign Language Studies 3(1): 34–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2004. Information ordering and speaker subjectivity: Modality in ASL. Cognitive Linguistics 15(2) 175–195. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shaffer, Barbara & Janzen, Terry. 2016. Modality and mood in American Sign Language. In The Oxford Handbook of Mood and Modality, Jan Nuyts & Johan van der Auwera (eds), 448–469. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Slobin, Dan I. 2006. Issues of linguistic typology in the study of sign language development of deaf children. In Advances in the Sign Language Development by Deaf Children, Brenda Schick, Mark Marschark & Patricia E. Spencer (eds), 20–45. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
2008. Breaking the molds: Signed languages and the nature of human languages. Sign Language Studies 8(2): 114–130. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stokoe, William C., Casterline, Dorothy C. & Croneberg, Carl G. 1965. A Dictionary of American Sign Language on Linguistic Principles. Washington DC: Gallaudet College Press.Google Scholar
Thompson, Sandra A. & Hopper, Paul J. 2001. Transitivity, clause structure, and argument structure: Evidence from conversation. In Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure [Typological Studies in Language 45], 27–60. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 1989. On the rise of epistemic meanings in English: An example of subjectification in semantic change. Language 65(1): 31–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vermeerbergen, Myriam, Leeson, Lorraine & Crasborn, Onno (eds). 2007. Simultaneity in Signed Languages: Form and Function [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 281]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilcox, Phyllis. 1998. GIVE: Acts of giving in American Sign Language. In The Linguistics of Giving [Typological Studies in Language 36], John Newmann (ed.), 175–207. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilcox, Phyllis Perrin. 2000. Metaphor in American Sign Language. Washington DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Wilcox, Sherman. 2004. Cognitive iconicity: Conceptual spaces, meaning, and gesture in signed language. Cognitive Linguistics 15(2): 119–147. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. Routes from gesture to language. In Verbal and Signed Languages: Comparing Structures, Constructs and Methodologies, Elena Pizzuto, Paola Pietrandrea & Raffaele Simone (eds), 107–131. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Wilcox, Sherman & Wilcox, Phyllis. 1995. The gestural expression of modality in ASL. In Modality in Grammar and Discourse [Typological Studies in Language 32], Joan Bybee & Suzanne Fleischman (eds), 135–162. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

Pleyer, Michael, Ryan Lepic & Stefan Hartmann
2024. Compositionality in Different Modalities: A View from Usage-Based Linguistics. International Journal of Primatology 45:3 ► pp. 670 ff. DOI logo
Hochgesang, Julie A., Ryan Lepic & Emily Shaw
2023. Chapter 11. W(h)ither the ASL corpus?. In Advances in Sign Language Corpus Linguistics [Studies in Corpus Linguistics, 108], ► pp. 287 ff. DOI logo
Makaroğlu, Bahtiyar
2023. The next station: chunking of değİl ‘not’ collocations in Turkish Sign Language. Cognitive Linguistics 34:3-4 ► pp. 371 ff. DOI logo
Hou, Lynn
2022. LOOKing for multi-word expressions in American Sign Language. Cognitive Linguistics 33:2 ► pp. 291 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.