Two agreement markers in Austrian Sign Language (ÖGS)
Julia Krebs | Research group Neurobiology of Language, Department of Linguistics, University of Salzburg | Centre for Cognitive Neuroscience (CCNS), University of Salzburg
Ronnie B. Wilbur | Linguistics Program, and Department of Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences, Purdue University
Dietmar Roehm | Research group Neurobiology of Language, Department of Linguistics, University of Salzburg | Centre for Cognitive Neuroscience (CCNS), University of Salzburg
For many of the sign languages studied to date, different types of agreement markers have been described which express agreement in transitive constructions involving non-inflecting (plain) verbs and sometimes even inflected agreement verbs. Austrian Sign Language (ÖGS) belongs to the group of sign languages employing two different agreement markers (agrm-bc/agrm-mf), which will be described in this paper. In an online questionnaire, we focused on two questions: (i) whether both forms of agreement markers are rated as equally acceptable by Deaf ÖGS-signers and hearing native signers, and (ii) whether there is a preferred syntactic position (pre- vs. postverbal) for these markers. Data analysis confirmed that both agreement markers are accepted by ÖGS-signers and that both agreement markers are slightly preferred in preverbal position. Further, possible origins of both agreement markers are discussed.
1996Non-manual realization of agreement in ASL. Boston, MA: Boston University PhD dissertation.
Bos, Heleen
1994An auxiliary verb in Sign Language of the Netherlands. In Inger Ahlgren, Brita Bergman & Mary Brennan (eds.), Perspectives on sign language structure, 37–53. Durham: ISLA.
Brentari, Diane
1989Backwards verbs in ASL: Agreement re-opened. In Lynn MacLeod (ed.), Parasession on agreement in grammatical theory (CLS 24, Vol. 2), 16–27. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
Chen Pichler, Deborah, Katharina Schalber, Julie Hochgesang, Marina Milković, Ronnie B. Wilbur, Martina Vulje & Ljubica Pribanić
2008Possession and existence in three sign languages. In Ronice M. de Quadros (ed.), Sign languages: Spinning and unraveling the past, present and future. Forty-five papers and three posters from the 9th Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research Conference, Florianopolis, Brazil, December 2006, 440–458. Petrópolis/RJ: Editora Arara Azul. [Available at: [URL]].
Costello, Brendan
2015Language and modality: Effects of the use of space in the agreement system of lengua de signos española (Spanish Sign Language). Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam PhD dissertation. Utrecht: LOT.
Fischer, Susan D.
1975Influences on word order change in American Sign Language. In Charles Li (ed.), Word order and word order change, 1–25. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Friedman, Lynn A.
1976The manifestation of subject, object, and topic in the American Sign Language. In Charles N. Li (ed.), Subject and topic, 125–148. New York: Academic Press.
Gökgöz, Kadir
2013The nature of object marking in American Sign Language. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University PhD dissertation.
Greenhouse, Samuel W. & Seymour Geisser
1959On methods in the analysis of profile data. Psychometrika 24(2). 95–112.
Hofstätter, Karin & Christian Stalzer
2011Grammatik der Österreichischen Gebärdensprache. Zusammengestellt für den ÖGSDV. Unpublished manuscript, University of Graz.
Janis, Wynne D.
1992Morphosyntax of the ASL verb phrase. Buffalo, NY: State University of New York at Buffalo PhD dissertation.
Krammer, Klaudia, Elisabeth Bergmeister, Franz Dotter, Marlene Hilzensauer, Ingeborg Okorn, Reinhold Orter & Andrea Skant
2016Kongruenzmarker in der Österreichischen Gebärdensprache (ÖGS) – Präferierte Satzposition und Distribution. Das Zeichen. Zeitschrift für Sprache und Kultur Gehörloser 30(102). 128–138.
Liddell, Scott
2003Grammar, gesture and meaning in American Sign Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lillo-Martin, Diane
1986Two kinds of null arguments in American Sign Language. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 4(4). 415–444.
Lillo-Martin, Diane & Richard P. Meier
2011On the linguistic status of ‘agreement’ in sign languages. Theoretical Linguistics 371. 95–141.
Mathur, Gaurav & Christian Rathmann
2012Verb agreement. In Roland Pfau, Markus Steinbach & Bencie Woll (eds.), Sign language. An international handbook, 136–157. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Meir, Irit
1998Thematic structure and verb agreement in Israeli Sign Language. Jerusalem: Hebrew University of Jerusalem PhD dissertation.
Meir, Irit
2002A cross-modality perspective on verb agreement. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 201. 413–450.
Murmann, Christina
2012The agreement auxiliary pam in German Sign Language – An empirical investigation. Düsseldorf: University of Düsseldorf Master’s thesis.
Neidle, Carol, Judy Kegl, Dawn MacLaughlin, Benjamin Bahan & Robert G. Lee
2000The syntax of American Sign Language: Functional categories and hierarchical structure. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Onea, Edgar
2011OnExp. Software for online questionnaires. CRC Text Structures, University of Göttingen.
Padden, Carol
1983Interaction of morphology and syntax in American Sign Language. San Diego, CA: University of California PhD dissertation [published 1988, New York: Garland Press].
Padden, Carol, Irit Meir, Mark Aronoff & Wendy Sandler
2010The grammar of space in two new sign languages. In Diane Brentari (ed.), Sign languages: A Cambridge survey, 573–595. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Pfau, Roland
2011A point well taken: On the typology and diachrony of pointing. In Donna J. Napoli & Gaurav Mathur (eds.), Deaf around the world. The impact of language, 144–163. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Pfau, Roland & Markus Steinbach
2006Modality-independent and modality-specific aspects of grammaticalization in sign languages (Linguistics in Potsdam 24). Potsdam: Universitäts-Verlag. Available at [URL].
1999Phrase structure of Brazilian Sign Language. Porto Alegre: Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul PhD dissertation.
Quadros, Ronice M. de & Josep Quer
2008Back to back(wards) and moving on: on agreement, auxiliaries and verb classes in sign languages. In Ronice M. de Quadros (ed.), Sign languages: Spinning and unraveling the past, present and future.
Forty-five papers and three posters from the9th Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research Conference
,
Florianopolis, Brazil
, December 2006, 530–551. Petrópolis/RJ: Editora Arara Azul. [Available at: [URL]].
Quer, Josep & Santiago Frigola
2006Cross-linguistic research and particular grammars: A case study on auxiliary predicates in Catalan Sign Language (LSC). Paper presented at
Workshop on Cross-linguistic Sign Language Research
, Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen, Netherlands, January 2006.
Quer, Josep
2011When agreeing to disagree is not enough: Further arguments for the linguistic status of sign language agreement. Theoretical Linguistics 37(3/4). 189–196.
Rathmann, Christian & Mathur Gaurav
2002Is verb agreement the same cross-modally? In Richard P. Meier, Kearsy Cormier & David Quinto-Pozos (eds.), Modality and structure in signed and spoken languages, 370–404. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rathmann, Christian
2003The optionality of agreement phrase: Evidence from German Sign Language (DGS). Texas Linguistics Forum 531. 181–192.
Sandler, Wendy & Diane Lillo-Martin
2006Sign language and linguistic universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sapountzaki, Galini
2012Agreement auxiliaries. In Roland Pfau, Markus Steinbach & Bencie Woll (eds.), Sign language. An international handbook, 204–227. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Senghas, Ann & Marie Coppola
2001Children creating language: How Nicaraguan Sign Language acquired a spatial grammar. Psychological Science 12(4). 323–328.
Senghas, Ann & Marie Coppola
2011Getting to the point: How a simple gesture became a linguistic element in Nicaraguan signing. In Donna J. Napoli & Gaurav Mathur (eds.), Deaf around the world: The impact of language, 127–143. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Skant, Andrea, Franz Dotter, Elisabeth Bergmeister, Marlene Hilzensauer, Manuela Hobel, Klaudia Krammer, Ingeborg Okorn, Christian Orasche, Reinhold Orter & Natalie Unterberger
2002Grammatik der Österreichischen Gebärdensprache, Vol. 41. Klagenfurt: Veröffentlichungen des Forschungszentrums für Gebärdensprache und Hörgeschädigtenkommunikation.
Smith, Wayne H.
1990Evidence for auxiliaries in Taiwan Sign Language. In Susan Fischer & Patricia Siple (eds.), Theoretical issues in sign language research, Vol. 1: Linguistics, 211–228. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Steinbach, Markus & Roland Pfau
2007Grammaticalization of auxiliaries in sign languages. In Pamela Perniss, Roland Pfau & Markus Steinbach (eds.), Visible variation: Comparative studies on sign language structure, 303–339. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Steinbach, Markus
2011What do agreement auxiliaries reveal about the grammar of sign language agreement?Theoretical Linguistics 37(3/4). 209–221.
Thompson, Robin, Karen Emmorey & Robert Kluender
2006The relationship between eye gaze and verb agreement in American Sign Language: an eye-tracking study. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 24(2). 571–604.
Vos, Connie de
2012Sign-spatiality in Kata Kolok: How a village sign language of Bali inscribes its signing space. Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics PhD dissertation.
2002Phrase structure in ASL and ÖGS. In Rolf Schulmeister & Heimo Reinitzer (eds.), Progress in sign language research. In honor of Siegmund Prillwitz, 235–247. Hamburg: Signum.
Wilbur, Ronnie B.
2005Evidence from American Sign Language and Austrian Sign Language (ÖGS) for asymmetries in Universal Grammar. In Anna Maria Di Sciullo & Rodolfo Delmonte (eds.), Universal Grammar and external systems, 191–210. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
2017. Author’s preface. Sign Language & Linguistics 20:2 ► pp. 221 ff.
Bross, Fabian
2020. Object marking in German Sign Language (<i>Deutsche Gebärdensprache</i>): Differential object marking and object shift in the visual modality. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 5:1
Börstell, Carl
2019. Differential object marking in sign languages. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 4:1
2021. Acceptability Judgments in Sign Linguistics. In The Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Syntax, ► pp. 561 ff.
Krebs, Julia, Evie Malaia, Ronnie B. Wilbur & Dietmar Roehm
2020. Interaction between topic marking and subject preference strategy in sign language processing. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 35:4 ► pp. 466 ff.
Krebs, Julia, Ronnie B. Wilbur, Phillip M. Alday & Dietmar Roehm
2019. The Impact of Transitional Movements and Non-Manual Markings on the Disambiguation of Locally Ambiguous Argument Structures in Austrian Sign Language (ÖGS). Language and Speech 62:4 ► pp. 652 ff.
Krebs, Julia, Ronnie B. Wilbur & Dietmar Roehm
2020. Distributional properties of an agreement marker in Austrian Sign Language (ÖGS). Linguistics 58:4 ► pp. 1151 ff.
Pfau, Roland, Martin Salzmann & Markus Steinbach
2018. The syntax of sign language agreement: Common ingredients, but unusual recipe. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 3:1
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 14 april 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.