Cover not available
Article published In:
Thematic issue: Historical Linguistics of Sign Languages
[Diachronica 41:2] 2024
► pp. 203–250

An approach to path movement in the diachronic study of sign languages

Biomechanics and nonarbitrariness

ORCID logo | Swarthmore College
ORCID logo | University of Toronto
Sign languages seem not to be amenable to traditional historical reconstruction via the comparative method, making it difficult to replicate the successes achieved in the diachronic study of spoken languages. We propose to alleviate this difficulty with an alternative approach that draws upon nonarbitrariness and biomechanics, especially the drive for reducing articulatory effort. We offer a demonstration of this approach, which can add confirmation to known relationships between sign languages and new evidence in support of suspected relationships, helping to fill in a methodological gap in the diachronic study of sign languages.
Keywords: sign languages, historical change, articulatory effort, nonarbitrariness
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Issues that complicate the historical study of sign languages
    • 2.1Transmission of language
    • 2.2Extent of borrowing
    • 2.3Rate of change
    • 2.4Nonarbitrariness
    • 2.5Availability of data
    • 2.6Dearth of regular phonological change
  • 3.Movement in sign languages
    • 3.1Movement
    • 3.2Motivated possible historical changes to the movement parameter
    • 3.3Utility
  • 4.Examples of this dual approach to analyzing the movement parameter
    • 4.1Data set
    • 4.2Nonarbitrariness
    • 4.3Biomechanics
      • 4.3.1Iteration loss
      • 4.3.2Weak drop
      • 4.3.3Weak Freeze
      • 4.3.4Joint freeze
      • 4.3.5Joint Graft (as part of distalization)
      • 4.3.6Torque reduction
      • 4.3.7Lowering
      • 4.3.8Location Undershoot
      • 4.3.9Midsagittal symmetry
  • 5.Discussion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 11 June 2024
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.23033.nap
References (264)
References
Abner, Natasha, Carlo Geraci, Shi Yu, Jessica Lettieri, Justine Mertz & Anah Salgat. 2020. Getting the upper hand on sign language families: Historical analysis and annotation methods. FEAST 31. 17–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Adam, Meike, Wiebke Iversen, Erin Wilkinson & Jill P. Morford. 2007. Meaning on the one and on the other hand: Iconicity in native vs. foreign signed languages. In Elżbieta Tabakowska, Christina Ljungberg & Olga Fischer (eds.), Insistent images, 211–227. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Adam, Robert. 2012. Language contact and borrowing. In Roland Pfau, Markus Steinbach & Bencie Woll (eds.), Sign language: An international handbook, 841–861. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. Standardization of sign languages. Sign Language Studies 15(4). 432–445. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ajello, Roberto, Laura Mazzoni & Florida Nicolai. 1997. Gesti linguistici: La labializzazione in LIS [Linguistic gestures: Labialization in LIS]. Quaderni della Sezione di Glottologia e Linguistica – Dipartimento di Studu Medivali e Moderni – Università degli Studi «G. D’Annunzio» di Chieti 91. 5–45.Google Scholar
Anderson, Lloyd & David Peterson. 1980. A comparison of some American, British, Australian and Swedish signs: Evidence on historical changes in signs and some family relationships of sign languages. In Brita Bergman & Inger Ahlgren (eds.), Papers from the First International Symposium on Sign Language Research, Stockholm, Sweden, June 10–16, 1979. Leksand, Sweden: Swedish National Association of the Deaf.Google Scholar
Bailey, Guy, Tom Wikle, Jan Tillery & Lori Sand. 1991. The apparent time construct. Language Variation and Change 3(3). 241–264. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bank, Richard, Onno Crasborn & Roeland van Hout. 2015. Alignment of two languages: The spreading of mouthings in Sign Language of the Netherlands. International Journal of Bilingualism 19(1). 40–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Battison, Robbin. 1974. Phonological deletion in American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies 5(1). 1–9. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berthier, Ferdinand. 1852. L’Abbé de l’Épée: Sa vie, son apostolat, ses travaux, sa lutte et ses succès. Paris: Michel Lévy Frères.Google Scholar
Blanchet, Alexandre. 1850. La surdi-mutité: Traité philosophique et médical suivi d’un petit dictionnaire usuel de mimique et de dactylologie à l’usage des médecins et des gens du monde. Paris: Labé.Google Scholar
Blything, Liam, Robert Davies & Kate Cain. 2015. Young children’s comprehension of temporal relations in complex sentences: The influence of memory on performance. Child Development 86(6). 1922–1934. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Börstell, Carl, Onno Crasborn & Lori Whynot. 2020. Measuring lexical similarity across sign languages in Global Signbank. In Proceedings of the LREC2020 9th Workshop on the Representation and Processing of Sign Languages: Sign Language Resources in the Service of the Language Community, Technological Challenges and Application Perspectives, 21–26.Google Scholar
Börstell, Carl, Ryan Lepic & Gal Belsitzman. 2016. Articulatory plurality is a property of lexical plurals in sign language. Lingvisticæ Investigationes 39(2). 391–407. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Braithwaite, Ben. 2020. Ideologies of linguistic research on small sign languages in the global South: A Caribbean perspective. Language & Communication 741. 182–194. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brennan, Mary. 2005. Conjoining word and image in British Sign Language (BSL): An exploration of metaphorical signs in BSL. Sign Language Studies 5(3). 360–382. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brentari, Diane. 1998. A prosodic model of sign language phonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 2011. Handshape in sign language phonology. In Martin van Oostendorp, Colin Ewen, Elizabeth Hume & Keren Rice (eds.), The Blackwell companion to phonology, 195–222. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2019. Sign language phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brentari, Diane & Laurinda Crossley. 2002. Prosody on the hands and face: Evidence from American Sign Language. Sign Language and Linguistics 51. 105–130. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brentari, Diane & Howard Poizner. 1994. A phonological analysis of a deaf Parkinsonian signer. Language and Cognitive Processes 9(1). 69–99. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bromham, Lindell, Russell Dinnage, Hedvig Skirgård, Andrew Ritchie, Marcel Cardillo, Felicity Meakins, Simon Greenhill & Xia Hua. 2022. Global predictors of language endangerment and the future of linguistic diversity. Nature Ecology & Evolution 6(2). 163–173. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, James. 1856. A vocabulary of mute signs. Baton Rouge, LA: Morning Comet Office.Google Scholar
Burns, Sarah. 1998. Irish Sign Language: Ireland’s second minority language. In Ceil Lucas (ed.), Pinky extension and eye gaze: Language use in deaf communities, 233–273. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Cagle, Keith. 2010. Exploring the ancestral roots of American Sign Language: Lexical borrowing from Cistercian Sign Language and French Sign Language. Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico dissertation.
Calderón Verde, Alicia, Donny Wilson Limonta, Gilmas Cervantes Soliño, Ariel Hernández Hernández & Elena Benedicto. 2018. Path and (a)telicity in space: Motion predicates in LSCu, Sign Language of Cuba. FEAST 21. 1–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Campello, Ana Regina e Souza. 2011. A constituição histórica da Língua de Sinais Brasileira: Século XVIII a XXI [The historical constitution of Brazilian Sign Language: 18th to 21st Century]. Revista Mundo & Letras 21. 8–25.Google Scholar
Campos de Abreu, Antonio. 1994. The deaf social life in Brazil. In Carol Erting, Robert Johnson, Dorothy Smith & Bruce Snider (eds.), The deaf way: Perspectives from the International Conference on Deaf Culture, 114–116. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Cantin, Yann & Florence Encrevé. 2022. Perspectives: On the historicalness of sign languages. Frontiers in Communication 71. 801862. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carling, Gerd & Niklas Johansson. 2014. Motivated language change: Processes involved in the growth and conventionalization of onomatopoeia and sound symbolism. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 46(2). 199–217. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Caselli, Naomi & Jennie Pyers. 2017. The road to language learning is not entirely iconic: Iconicity, neighborhood density, and frequency facilitate acquisition of sign language. Psychological Science 28(7). 979–987. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2020. Degree and not type of iconicity affects sign language vocabulary acquisition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 46(1). 127–139. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Caselli, Naomi, Corrine Occhino, Bruno Artacho, Andreas Savakis & Matthew Dye. 2022. Perceptual optimization of language: Evidence from American Sign Language. Cognition 2241. 105040. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, Eve. 1971. On the acquisition of the meaning of before and after . Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 10(3). 266–275. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Corazza, Serena. 1994. The history of sign language in Italian education of the deaf. In Carol Erting, Robert Johnson, Dorothy Smith & Bruce Snider (eds.), The deaf way: Perspectives from the International Conference on Deaf Culture, 186–193. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Corina, David & Ursula Hildebrandt. 2002. Psycholinguistic investigations of phonological structure in ASL. In Richard Meier, Kearsy Cormier & David Quinto-Pozos (eds.), Modality and structure in signed and spoken language, 88–111. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Corina, David & Heather Knapp. 2006. Lexical retrieval in American Sign Language production. In Louis Goldstein, Douglas Whalen & Catherine Best (eds.), Laboratory phonology 81, 213–240. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Corina, David & Wendy Sandler. 1993. On the nature of phonological structure in sign language. Phonology 10(2). 165–207. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crasborn, Onno. 2011. The other hand in sign language phonology. In Marc van Oostendorp, Colin J. Ewen, Elizabeth Hume & Keren Rice (eds.), The Blackwell companion to phonology, 1–18. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crasborn, Onno & Els van der Kooij. 2003. Base joint configuration in Sign Language of the Netherlands: Phonetic variation and phonological specification. In Jeroen van de Weijer, Vincent van Heuven & Harry van der Hulst (eds.), The phonological spectrum. Volume I: Segmental structure (Amsterdam Studies in the Theory and History of Linguistic Science 233), 257–287. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crasborn, Onno, Inge Zwitserlood, Els van der Kooij & Richard Bank (eds.). 2020. Global Signbank, version 4. Radboud University, Nijmegen. [URL]
Crowley, Terry. 1987. An introduction to historical linguistics. Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea: University of Papua New Guinea Press & Suva, Fiji: Institute of Pacific Studies, University of the South Pacific.Google Scholar
Currie, Thomas, Simon Greenhill & Ruth Mace. 2010. Is horizontal transmission really a problem for phylogenetic comparative methods? A simulation study using continuous cultural traits. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 3651. 3903–3912. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cuxac, Cristian & Marie-Anne Sallandre. 2007. Iconicity and arbitrariness in French Sign Language: Highly iconic structures, degenerated iconicity and diagrammatic iconicity. In Elena Pizzuto, Paola Pietrandrea & Raffaele Simone (eds.), Verbal and signed languages: Comparing structure, constructs and methodologies, 13–33. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Ćwiek, Aleksandra, Susanne Fuchs, Christoph Draxler, Eva Liina Asu, Dan Dediu, Katri Hiovain, Shigeto Kawahara, inter alia & Bodo Winter 2022. The bouba/kiki effect is robust across cultures and writing systems. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 377(1841). 20200390. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dautriche, Isabelle, Kyle Mahowald, Edward Gibson, Anne Christophe & Steven Piantadosi. 2017. Words cluster phonetically beyond phonotactic regularities. Cognition 1631. 128–145. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de l’Épée, Charles-Michel. 1784. La véritable manière d’instruire les sourds et muets, confirmée par une longue expérience. Paris: Nyon l’aîné.Google Scholar
Degérando, Baron Joseph-Marie. 1827. De l’éducation des sourds-muets de naissance. Paris: Méquignon.Google Scholar
DeGraff, Michel. 2005. Linguists’ most dangerous myth: The fallacy of Creole exceptionalism. Language in Society 34(4). 533–591. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Delaporte, Yves. 2007. Dictionnaire étymologique et historique de la langue des signes française: Origine et évolution de 1200 signes. Paris: Editions du Fox.Google Scholar
Dennis, Dannah. 2005. A history of the education of the deaf in India and Nepal. Baltimore, MD: University of Baltimore dissertation.
Deo, Ashwini. 2015. Diachronic semantics. Annual Review of Linguistics 1(1). 179–197. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Desai, Pranshankar Lallubhai. 1930. The deaf and dumb in India and abroad. American Annals of the Deaf 75(2). 137–145.Google Scholar
Dingemanse, Mark, Damián Blasi, Gary Lupyan, Morten Christiansen & Padraic Monaghan. 2015. Arbitrariness, iconicity, and systematicity in language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 19(10) 603–615. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dingemanse, Mark, Marcus Perlman & Pamela Perniss. 2020. Construal of iconicity: Experimental approaches to form–meaning resemblances in language. Language and Cognition 12(1). 1–14. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dye, Matthew & Shui-I Shih. 2006. Phonological priming in British Sign Language. In Louis Goldstein, Douglas Whalen & Catherine Best (eds.), Laboratory phonology 8, 241–263. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Edwards, Viv & Paddy Ladd. 1983. The linguistic status of British Sign Language. In Mark Sebba & Loreto Todd (eds.), Urban pidgins and creoles: Papers from the York Creole Conference, 24–27. Heslington, UK: Department of Language, University of York.Google Scholar
Eichmann, Hanna. 2009. Planning sign languages: Promoting hearing hegemony? Conceptualizing sign language standardization. Current Issues in Language Planning 10(3). 293–307. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fenlon, Jordan, Kearsy Cormier & Adam Schembri. 2015. Building BSL SignBank: The lemma dilemma revisited. International Journal of Lexicography 28(2). 169–206. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fenlon, Jordan & Erin Wilkinson. 2015. Sign languages in the world. In Adam Schembri & Ceil Lucas (eds.), Sociolinguistics and deaf communities, 5–28. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fenlon, Jordan, Adam Schembri, Ramas Rentelis & Kearsy Cormier. 2013. Variation in handshape and orientation in British Sign Language: The case of the ‘1’ hand configuration. Language & Communication 33(1): 69–91. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ferrand, Jean. 1896. Dictionnaire des sourds-muets. Manuscript, ca. 1785, ed. J. A. A. Rattel, Collection ancienne et moderne d’otologie, 7. Paris: Laval.Google Scholar
Ferrara, Casey & Donna Jo Napoli. 2019. Manual movement in sign languages: One hand versus two in communicating shapes. Cognitive Science 43(9). e12741. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ferrara, Lindsey & Rolf Piene Halvorsen. 2017. Depicting and describing meanings with iconic signs in Norwegian Sign Language. Gesture 16(3). 371–395. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ferrara, Lindsey & Gabrielle Hodge. 2018. Language as description, indication, and depiction. Frontiers in Psychology 91. 716. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fischer, Susan D. 1996. By the numbers: Language-internal evidence for creolization. In William H. Edmondson & Ronnie B. Wilbur (eds.), International review of sign linguistics, 1–22. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Fitch, Allison, Sudha Arunachalam & Amy M. Lieberman. 2021. Mapping word to world in ASL: Evidence from a human simulation paradigm. Cognitive Science 45(12). e13061. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Frishberg, Nancy. 1975. Arbitrariness and iconicity: Historical change in American Sign Language. Language 51(3). 696–719. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gama, Flausino José da. 1875. Iconografia dos signaes dos surdos-mudos [Iconography of deaf-mute signs]. Rio de Janeiro: Tipografia Universal de E. & H. Laemmert.Google Scholar
Geraci, Carlo, Katia Battaglia, Anna Cardinaletti, Carlo Cecchetto, Caterina Donati, Serena Giudice & Emiliano Mereghetti. 2011. The LIS corpus project: A discussion of sociolinguistic variation in the lexicon. Sign Language Studies 171. 528–574. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Geraci, Carlo, Roland Pfau, Pietro Braione, Carlo Cecchetto & Josep Quer. 2019. Hidden languages in a digital world: The case of sign language archives. Journal of the Italian Association of Speech Sciences 61. 31–47.Google Scholar
Gibson, Edward, Richard Futrell, Steven Piantadosi, Isabelle Dautriche, Kyle Mahowald, Leon Bergen & Roger Levy. 2019. How efficiency shapes human language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 23(5). 389–407. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giustolisi, Beatrice, Emiliano Mereghetti & Carlo Cechetto. 2017. Phonological blending or code mixing? Why mouthing is not a core component of sign language grammar. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 35(2). 347–365. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldin-Meadow, Susan. 2014. Homesign. In Patricia Brooks & Vera Kempe (eds.), Encyclopedia of language development, 267–269. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Greenhill, Simon, Thomas Currie & Russell Gray. 2009. Does horizontal transmission invalidate cultural phylogenies? Proceedings of the Royal Society B 276(1665). 2299–2306. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Groce, Nora. 1985. Everyone here spoke sign language: Hereditary deafness on Martha’s Vineyard. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Guerra Currie, Anne-Marie Palacios. 1999. A Mexican Sign Language lexicon: Internal and cross-linguistic similarities and variation. Austin, TX: University of Texas at Austin dissertation
Guerra Currie, Anne-Marie Palacios, Richard Meier & Keith Walters. 2002. A crosslinguistic examination of the lexicons of four signed languages. In Richard Meier, Kearsy Cormier & David Quinto-Pozos (eds.), Modality and structure in signed and spoken languages, 224–236. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hendriks, Bernadet & Shelley Dufoe. 2014. Non-native or native vocabulary in Mexican Sign Language. Sign Language & Linguistics 17(1). 20–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Higgins, Daniel. 1923. How to talk to the deaf. Chicago: Paluch.Google Scholar
Hock, Hans. 2003. Analogical change. In Brian Joseph & Richard Janda (eds.), The handbook of historical linguistics, 441–460. Malden, MA: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoiting, Nini & Dan Slobin. 2007. From gestures to signs in the acquisition of sign language. In Susan Duncan, Justine Cassell & Elena Levy (eds.), Gesture and the dynamic dimension of language: Essays in honor of David McNeill, 51–65. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
International Visual Theater (IVT). 1986. La langue des signes: Dictionnaire bilingue LSF/français. Vol. 11, 1990; vol. 21, 1997. Vincennes: Centre socioculturel des sourds.Google Scholar
Janzen, Terry. 2012. Lexicalization and grammaticalization. In Markus Steinbach, Roland Pfau & Bencie Woll (eds.), Handbook of sign languages, 816–840. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Janzen, Terry & Barbera Shaffer. 2002. Gesture as the substrate in the process of ASL grammaticization. In Richard Meier, David Quinto-Pozos & Kearsy Cormier (eds.), Modality and structure in signed and spoken languages, 199–223. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1909. A modern English grammar: On historical principles. Part I: Sounds and Spellings. Copenhagen: Munksgaard.Google Scholar
. 1922. Language: Its nature, development and origin. London: George Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Johanson, Lars & Martine Robbeets (eds.). 2012. Copies versus cognates in bound morphology. Leiden & Boston: Brill.Google Scholar
Johnson, Robert & Scott Liddell. 2012. Toward a phonetic representation of hand configuration: The thumb. Sign Language Studies 12(2). 316–333. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Johnston, Trevor. 1996. Function and medium in the forms of linguistic expression found in a sign language. International Review of Sign Linguistics 11. 57–94.Google Scholar
Johnston, Trevor & Adam Schembri. 1999. On defining lexeme in a signed language. Sign Language & Linguistics 2(2). 115–185. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Joseph, Brian D. and Richard D. Janda (eds.). 2003. The handbook of historical linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jullian Móntañes, Christian Giorgio. 2001. Génesis de la comunidad silente de México: La Escuela Nacional de Sordomudos (1867 a 1886) [The origin of Mexico’s mute community: National School of Deaf-Mutes (1867 to 1886)]. Mexico City: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México dissertation.
Kegl, Judy. 2008. The case of signed languages in the context of pidgin and creole studies. In Silvia Kouwenberg & John Singler (eds.), The handbook of pidgin and creole studies, 491–511. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kirby, Simon, Tom Griffiths & Kenny Smith. 2014. Iterated learning and the evolution of language. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 281. 108–114. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kitzel, Mar. 2014. Chasing ancestors: Searching for the roots of American Sign Language in the Kentish Weald, 1620–1851. Falmer, UK: University of Sussex dissertation.
Klima, Edward & Ursula Bellugi. 1979. The signs of language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar
Kooij, Els van der. 2001. Weak drop in Sign Language of the Netherlands. In Valery Dively, Melanie Metzger, Sarah Taub & Anne Marie Baer (eds.), Signed languages: Discoveries from international research, 27–42. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University PressGoogle Scholar
. 2002. Phonological categories in Sign Language of the Netherlands: Phonetic implementation and iconic motivation. Leiden: Leiden University dissertation.
Koplenig, Alexander, Sascha Wolfer & Peter Meyer. 2022. Human languages trade off complexity against efficiency. Accessed 18 April 2023: [URL]. DOI logo
Kusters, Annelies & Ceil Lucas. 2022. Emergence and evolutions: Introducing sign language sociolinguistics. Journal of Sociolinguistics 26(1). 84–98. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Labov, William. 1981. Resolving the Neogrammarian controversy. Language 57(2). 267–308. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lambert, Louis-Marie. 1865. Le langage de la physionomie et du geste mis à la portée de tous. Paris: Lecoffre.Google Scholar
Lane, Harlan. 1980. A chronology of the oppression of sign language in France and the United States. In Harlan Lane & François Grosjean (eds.), Recent perspectives on American Sign Language, 119–161. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Laveau, François. 1868. Catéchisme des sourds-muets illettrés que l’on ne peut pas instruire au moyen de l’écriture. Orléans, France: Constant.Google Scholar
Lehmann, Winfred P. 1962. Historical linguistics: An introduction. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lehrer, Adrienne. 1985. The influence of semantic fields on semantic change. In Jacek Fisiak (ed.), Historical semantics – Historical word-formation, 283–296. Berlin: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lepic, Ryan. 2016. The great ASL compound hoax. Proceedings of the High Desert Linguistics Society Conference 111. 227–250.Google Scholar
Lepic, Ryan, Carl Börstell, Gal Belsitzman & Wendy Sandler. 2016. Taking meaning in hand: Iconic motivations in two-handed signs. Sign Language & Linguistics 19(1). 37–81. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leskien, August. 1876. Die Deklination im Slavisch-Litauischen und Germanischen. Leipzig: S. Hirzel.Google Scholar
Levshina, Natalia. 2020. Efficient trade-offs as explanations in functional linguistics: Some problems and an alternative proposal. Revista da ABRALIN 19(3). 50–78. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liddell, Scott & Robert Johnson. 1986. American Sign Language compound formation processes, lexicalization, and phonological remnants. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 4(4). 445–513. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Long, Joseph Schuyler. 1910. The Sign Language: A manual of signs. Being a descriptive vocabulary of signs used by the Deaf in the United States and Canada. Washington, DC: Gibson Bros.Google Scholar
Loos, Cornelia & Donna Jo Napoli. 2021. Expanding echo: Coordinated head articulations as nonmanual enhancements in sign language phonology. Cognitive Science 5(5). e12958. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lucas, Ceil, Robert Bayley, Mary Rose & Alyssa Wulf. 2002. Location variation in American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies 2(4). 407–440. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lucas, Ceil, Robert Bayley & Clayton Valli, in collaboration with Mary Rose, Alyssa Wulf, Paul Dudis, Susan Schatz & Laura Sanheim. 2009. Sociolinguistic variation in American Sign Language. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Luick, Karl. 1896. Untersuchungen zur englischen Lautgeschichte. Strassburg: Trübner. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lupyan, Gary & Bodo Winter. 2018. Language is more abstract than you think, or, why aren’t languages more iconic?. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 373(1752). 20170137. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lupton, Linda & Joe Salmons. 1996. A re-analysis of the creole status of American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies 90(1). 80–94. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MacLaughlin, Dawn, Carol Neidle, Ben Bahan & Robert Lee. 2000. Morphological inflections and syntactic representations of person and number in ASL. Recherches Linguistiques de Vincennes 291. 73–100. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mak, Joe & Gladys Tang. 2011. Movement types, repetition, and feature organization in Hong Kong Sign Language. In Rachel Channon & Harry van der Hulst (eds.), Formational units in sign languages, 315–338. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Malaia, Evie & Ronnie Wilbur. 2012. Kinematic signatures of telic and atelic events in ASL predicates. Language and Speech 55(3). 407–421. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mandel, Mark. 1981. Phonotactics and morphophonology in American Sign Language. Berkeley, CA: University of California dissertation.
Mauk, Claude. 2003. Undershoot in two modalities: Evidence from fast speech and fast signing. Austin, TX: University of Texas at Austin dissertation.
McBurney, Susan. 2012. History of sign languages and sign language linguistics. In Roland Pfau, Markus Steinbach & Bencie Woll (eds.), Sign language: An international handbook, 909–948. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McCaskill, Carolyn, Ceil Lucas, Robert Bayley & Joseph Hill, in collaboration with Roxanne King, Pamela Baldwin & Randall Hogue. 2011. The hidden treasure of Black ASL: Its history and structure. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
McKee, David & Graeme Kennedy. 2000. Lexical comparison of signs from American, Australian, British, and New Zealand Sign Languages. In Karen Emmorey & Harlan Lane (eds.), The signs of language revisited: An anthology to honor Ursula Bellugi and Edward Klima, 43–73. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
McKee, Rachel & David McKee. 2011. Old signs, new signs, whose signs? Sociolinguistic variation in the NZSL lexicon. Sign Language Studies 11(4). 485–527. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McNeill, David. 1992. Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
(ed.). 2000. Language and gesture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mechsner, Franz, Dirk Kerzel, Günther Knoblich & Wolfgang Prinz. 2001. Perceptual basis of bimanual coordination. Nature 414(6859). 69–73. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meier, Richard, Claude Mauk, Adrianne Cheek & Christopher Moreland. 2008. The form of children’s early signs: Iconic or motoric determinants? Language Learning and Development 4(1). 63–98. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meir, Irit. 2010. Iconicity and metaphor: Constraints on metaphorical extension of iconic forms. Language 86(4). 865–896. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Michaels, John. 1923. A handbook of the sign language of the deaf. Atlanta: Home Mission Board, Southern Baptist Convention.Google Scholar
Mirus, Gene, Jami Fisher & Donna Jo Napoli. 2020. (Sub)lexical changes in iconic signs to realign with community sensibilities and experiences. Language in Society 49(2). 283–309. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mirus, Gene, Christian Rathmann & Richard Meier. 2001. Proximalization and distalization of sign movement in adult learners. In Valerie Dively, Melanie Metzger, Sarah Taub & Anne Marie Baer (eds.), Signed languages: Discoveries from international research, 103–119. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Mithun, Marianne. 1982. The synchronic and diachronic behavior of plops, squeaks, croaks, sighs, and moans. International Journal of American Linguistics 48(1). 49–58. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moita, Mara, Ema Gonçalves, Conceição Medeiros & Ana Mineiro. 2018. A phonological diachronic study on Portuguese Sign Language of the Azores. Sign Language Studies 19(1). 138–162. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moser, Margaret. 1990. The regularity hypothesis applied to ASL. In Ceil Lucas (ed.), Sign language research: Theoretical issues, 50–56. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Münte, Thomas, Kolja Schiltz & Marta Kutas. 1998. When temporal terms belie conceptual order. Nature 395(6697). 71–73. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Napoli, Donna Jo. 2017. Iconicity chains in sign languages. In Claire Bowern, Laurence Horn & Raffaella Zanuttini (eds.), On looking into words (and beyond): Structures, relations, analyses, 517–546. Berlin: Language Science Press.Google Scholar
Napoli, Donna Jo & Casey Ferrara. 2021. Correlations between handshape and movement in sign languages. Cognitive Science 45(5). 12944. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Napoli, Donna Jo & Stephanie Liapis. 2019. Effort reduction in articulation in sign languages and dance. Journal of Cultural Cognitive Science 31. 31–61. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Napoli, Donna Jo & Rachel Sutton-Spence. 2014. Order of the major constituents in sign languages: Implications for all language. Frontiers in Psychology 51. 376. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2021. Clause-initial Vs in sign languages: Scene-setters. In Vera Lee-Schoenfeld & Dennis Ott (eds.), Parameters of predicate fronting, 198–226. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Napoli, Donna Jo, Mark Mai & Nicholas Gaw. 2011. Primary movement in sign languages: A study of six languages. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Napoli, Donna Jo & Jeff Wu. 2003. Morpheme structure constraints on two-handed signs in American Sign Language: Notions of symmetry. Sign Language & Linguistics 6(2). 123–205. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Napoli, Donna Jo, Nathan Sanders & Rebecca Wright. 2014. On the linguistic effects of articulatory ease, with a focus on sign languages. Language 90(2). 424–456. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Napoli, Donna Jo, Rachel Sutton-Spence & Ronice Müller de Quadros. 2017. Influence of predicate sense on word order in sign languages: Intensional and extensional verbs. Language 93(3). 641–670. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Neidle, Carol, Judy Kegl, Dawn MacLaughlin, Ben Bahan & Robert Lee. 2000. The syntax of American Sign Language: Functional categories and hierarchical structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Nespor, Marina & Wendy Sandler. 1999. Prosody in Israeli Sign Language. Language and Speech 42(2–3). 143–176. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Noberto, Mércia Creuza Lucas de Morais, Maria do Socorro Santos Pompeu, Roselita Alves Dias Felipe, Rozana Alves dos Santos Oliveira & Geilsa Medeiros Costa. 2014. Breve histórico da educação especial no Brasil no ensino regular [A brief history of special education in Brazil in regular education]. Revista Brasileira de Educação e Saúde 4(1). 46–49.Google Scholar
Occhino, Corrine, Benjamin Anible, Erin Wilkinson & Jill Morford. 2017. Iconicity is in the eye of the beholder: How language experience affects perceived iconicity. Gesture 16(1). 100–126. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Orfanidou, Eleni, Robert Adam, James McQueen & Gary Morgan. 2009. Making sense of nonsense in British Sign Language (BSL): The contribution of different phonological parameters to sign recognition. Memory & Cognition 37(3). 302–315. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ormel, Ellen, Onno Crasborn, Gerrit Jan Kootstra & Anne de Meijer. 2017. Coarticulation of handshape in Sign Language of the Netherlands: A corpus study. Laboratory Phonology: Journal of the Association for Laboratory Phonology 8(1). 1–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ortega, Gerardo. 2017. Iconicity and sign lexical acquisition: A review. Frontiers in Psychology 81. 1280. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Osthoff, Hermann & Karl Brugman. 1878. Morphologische Untersuchungen auf dem Gebiete der indogermanischen Sprachen. Leipzig: S. Hirzel.Google Scholar
Padden, Carol. 2011. Sign language geography. In Gaurav Mathur & Donna Jo Napoli (eds.), Deaf around the world: The impact of language, 19–37. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Padden, Carol & David Perlmutter. 1987. American Sign Language and the architecture of phonological theory. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 5(3). 335–375. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Padden, Carol, Irit Meir, So-One Hwang, Ryan Lepic, Sharon Seegers & Tory Sampson. 2013. Patterned iconicity in sign language lexicons. Gesture 13(3). 287–308. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pélissier, Pierre. 1856. Iconographie des signes faisant partie de l’enseignement des sourdsmuets. Paris: Dupont.Google Scholar
Périn, Philomène, Santiago Herrera, Frédéric Isel & Caroline Bogliotti. 2023. FLexSign: A lexical database in French Sign Language (LSF). [URL]
Perniss, Pamela & Aslı Özyürek. 2008. Representations of action, motion, and location in sign space: A comparison of German (DGS) and Turkish (TİD) Sign Language narratives. In Josep Quer (ed.), Signs of the time: Selected papers from TISLR 8, 353–378. Hamburg: Seedorf Signum.Google Scholar
Perniss, Pamela, Robin Thomson & Gabriella Vigliocco. 2010. Iconicity as a general property of language: Evidence from spoken and signed languages. Frontiers in Psychology 1(227). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perniss, Pamela, Jenny Lu, Gary Morgan & Gabriella Vigliocco. 2018. Mapping language to the world: The role of iconicity in the sign language input. Developmental Science 21(2). e12551. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pfau, Roland & Markus Steinbach. 2006. Modality-independent and modality-specific aspects of grammaticalization in sign languages. In Heiner Drenhaus, Ruben van de Vijver & Ralf Vogel (eds.), Linguistics in Potsdam 24 1, 5–98. Potsdam: Universitätsverlag Potsdam.Google Scholar
Pietrandrea, Paola & Tommaso Russo. 2007. Diagrammatic and imagic hypoicons in signed and verbal languages. In Elena Pizzuto, Paola Pietrandrea & Raffaele Simone (eds.), Verbal and signed languages: Comparing structures, constructs and methodologies, 35–56. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Pinna, Paola, Laura Pagliari Rampelli, Paolo Rossini & Virginia Volterra. 1994. Written and unwritten history of a residential school for the deaf in Rome, Italy. In Carol Erting, Robert Johnson, Dorothy Smith & Bruce Snider (eds.), The Deaf way: Perspectives from the International Conference on Deaf Culture, 194–202. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Pizzuto, Elena & Virginia Volterra. 2000. Iconicity and transparency in sign language: A cross-linguistic cross-cultural view. In Karen Emmorey & Harlan Lane (eds.), Signs of language revisited: An anthology to honor Ursula Bellugi and Edward Klima, 261–286. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Pizzuto, Elena, Emanuela Cameracanna, Serena Corazza & Virginia Volterra. 1995. Terms for spatio-temporal relations in Italian Sign Language. In Raffaele Simone (ed.), Iconicity in language, 237–256. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Poizner, Howard. 1983. Perception of movement in American Sign Language: Effects of linguistic structure and linguistic experience. Perception & Psychophysics 331. 215–231. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Poizner, Howard, Diane Brentari, Martha Tyrone & Judy Kegl. 2000. The structure of language as motor behavior: Clues from signers with Parkinson’s disease. In Karen Emmorey & Harlan Lane (eds.), The signs of language revisited: An anthology to honor Ursula Bellugi and Edward Klima, 432–452. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Power, Justin. 2022. Historical linguistics of sign languages: Progress and problems. Frontiers in Psychology 131. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Power, Justin, Guido Grimm & Johann-Mattis List. 2020. Evolutionary dynamics in the dispersal of sign languages. Royal Society Open Science 7(1). 191100. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Power, Justin, David Quinto-Pozos & Danny Law. 2021. Methods and models in historical comparative research on signed languages. [URL]
Puupponen, Anna, Tommi Jantunen, Ritva Takkinen, Tuija Wainio & Outi Pippuri. 2014. Taking non-manuality into account in collecting and analyzing Finnish Sign Language video data. In Onno Crasborn, Eleni Efthimiou, Stavroula-Evita Fotinea, Thomas Hanke, Julie Hochgesang, Jette Kristoffersen, & Johanna Mesch (eds.), Beyond the manual channel: 9th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, 143–148. Paris: European Language Resources Association.Google Scholar
Pyykkönen, Pirita & Juhani Järvikivi. 2012. Children and situation models of multiple events. Developmental Psychology 48(2). 521–529. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quadros, Ronice Müller de & Ana Regina e Souza Campello. 2010. Constituição política, social e cultural da Língua Brasileira de Sinais [Political, social and cultural constitution of Brazilian Sign Language]. In Lucyenne Matos da Costa Vieira-Machado & Maura Corcini Lopes (eds.), Educação de surdos: Políticas, língua de sinais, comunidade e cultura surda, 15–47. Santa Cruz do Sul, Brazil: EDUNISC.Google Scholar
Quartararo, Anne. 2008. The poetry of a minority community: Deaf poet Pierre Pélissier and the formation of a deaf identity in the 1850s. Sign Language Studies 8(3). 241–263. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quer, Josep & Roc Boronat. 2016. D4.4 First SIGN-HUB Conference. [URL]
. 2017. D4.6 Second SIGN-HUB Conference. [URL]
Quer, Josep, Laura Mazzoni & Galini Sapountzaki. 2010. Transmission of sign languages in Mediterranean Europe. In Diane Brentari (ed.), Sign languages, 95–112. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quinto-Pozos, David. 2006. Contact between Mexican Sign Language (LSM) and American Sign Language (ASL) in two Texas border areas. Sign Language & Linguistics 7(2). 215–219. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2008. Sign language contact and interference: ASL and LSM. Language in Society 371. 161–189. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quinto-Pozos, David & Robert Adam. 2015. Sign languages in contact. In Adam Schembri & Ceil Lucas (eds.), Sociolinguistics and deaf communities, 29–60. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Radden, Günter. 2021. Iconicity. In Wen Xu & John R. Taylor (eds.), The Routledge handbook of cognitive linguistics, 268–296. New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Radutzky, Elena. 1989. La lingua dei segni italiana: Historical change in the sign language of deaf people in Italy. New York: New York University dissertation.
(ed.). 1992. Dizionario bilingue elementare della lingua italiana dei segni: Oltre 2.500 significati [Basic bilingual dictionary of Italian Sign Language: More than 2,500 signs]. Rome: Edizioni Kappa.Google Scholar
Ramsey, Claire & David Quinto-Pozos. 2010. Transmission of sign languages in Latin America. In Diane Brentari (ed.), Sign languages, 46–73. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reddy, Michael. 1979. The conduit metaphor: A case of frame conflict in our language about language. In Andrew Ortony (ed.), Metaphor and thought, 284–297. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Roccaforte, Maria. 2018. Le componenti orali della lingua dei segni italiana: Analisi linguistica, indagini sperimentali e implicazioni glottodidattiche [The oral components of Italian Sign Language: Linguistic analysis, experimental investigations and implications for language teaching]. Rome: Sapienza Università di Roma dissertation.
Rundblad, Gabriella & David B. Kronenfeld. 2000. Folk-etymology: Haphazard perversion or shrewd analogy? In Julie Coleman & Christian J. Kay (eds.), Lexicology, semantics, and lexicography, 19–34. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Russell, Kevin, Erin Wilkinson & Terry Janzen. 2011. ASL sign lowering as undershoot: A corpus study. Laboratory Phonology 2(2). 403–422. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Russo, Tommaso. 2004. Iconicity and productivity in sign language discourse: An analysis of three LIS discourse registers. Sign Language Studies 4(2). 164–197. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sanders, Nathan & Donna Jo Napoli. 2016a. A cross-linguistic preference for torso stability in the lexicon: Evidence from 24 sign languages. Sign Language & Linguistics 19(2). 197–231. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016b. Reactive effort as a factor that shapes sign language lexicons. Language 92(2). 275–297. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sandler, Wendy. 1989. Phonological representation of the sign: Linearity and nonlinearity in American Sign Language. Dordrecht: Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1993. A sonority cycle in American Sign Language. Phonology 10(2). 243–279. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1999. Cliticization and prosodic words in a sign language. In Alan Hall & Ursula Kleinhenz (eds.), Studies on the phonological word, 223–254. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2017. The challenge of sign language phonology. Annual Review of Linguistics 31. 43–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sandler, Wendy, Mark Aronoff, Irit Meir & Carol Padden. 2011. The gradual emergence of phonological form in a new language. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 29(2). 503–543. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schembri, Adam, Jordan Fenlon, Kearsy Cormier & Trevor Johnston. 2018. Sociolinguistic typology and sign languages. Frontiers in Psychology 91. 200. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schembri, Adam, Kearsy Cormier, Trevor Johnston, David McKee, Rachel McKee & Bencie Woll. 2010. Sociolinguistic variation in British, Australian and New Zealand sign languages. In Diane Brentari (ed.), Sign Languages, 476–498. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schembri, Adam, David McKee, Rachel McKee, Sara Pivac, Trevor Johnston & Della Goswell. 2009. Phonological variation and change in Australian and New Zealand Sign Languages: The location variable. Language Variation and Change 21(2). 193–231. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sehyr, Zed Sevcikova & Karen Emmorey. 2019. The perceived mapping between form and meaning in American Sign Language depends on linguistic knowledge and task: Evidence from iconicity and transparency judgments. Language and Cognition 11(2). 208–234. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shaffer, Barbara. 2002. CAN’T: The negation of modal notions in ASL. Sign Language Studies 3(1). 34–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shaw, Emily & Yves Delaporte. 2011. New perspectives on the history of American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies 11(2). 158–204. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. A historical and etymological dictionary of American Sign Language. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sicard, Roch. 1808. Théorie des signes ou introduction à l’étude des langues, où le sens des mots, au lieu d’être défini, est mis en action. 21 vols. Paris: Institution des sourds-muets.Google Scholar
Siedlecki, Theodore & John Bonvillian. 1993. Phonological deletion revisited: Errors in young children’s two-handed signs. Sign Language Studies 801. 223–242. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
SIGN-HUB. 2016–2019. SIGN-HUB: Preserving, researching and fostering the linguistic, historical and cultural heritage of European Deaf signing communities with an integral resource. [URL], accessed 20 August 2018.
Simons, Gary & Charles Fennig (eds.). 2019. Ethnologue: Languages of the world. 22nd edn. Dallas, TX: SIL International. Online. [URL], accessed 15 April 2019.
Siple, Patricia. 1978. Visual constraints for sign language communication. Sign Language Studies 191. 95–110. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Siu, Wai Yan Rebecca. 2016. Sociolinguistic variation in Hong Kong sign language. Wellington, NZ: Victoria University of Wellington dissertation.
Slonimska, Anita, Aslı Özyürek & Olga Capirci. 2020. The role of iconicity and simultaneity for efficient communication: The case of Italian Sign Language (LIS). Cognition 2001. 104246. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2021. Using depiction for efficient communication in LIS (Italian Sign Language). Language and Cognition 13(3). 367–396. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2022. Simultaneity as an emergent property of efficient communication in language: A comparison of silent gesture and sign language. Cognitive Science. 46(5). e13133. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2023. Communicative efficiency in sign languages: The role of the visual modality-specific properties. Paper presented at the 16th International Cognitive Linguistics Conference. Available at [URL]
Sofiato, Cassia Geciauskas. 2011. Do desenho à litografia: A origem da língua brasileira de sinais [From drawing to lithography: The origin of Brazilian Sign Language]. Campinas, Brazil: Universidade Estadual de Campinas dissertation.
Spreadthesign. 2006–2023. Spreadthesign. [URL]. Accessed 13 April 2023.
Stamp, Rose. 2015. Sociolinguistic variation, language change and contact in the British Sign Language (BSL) lexicon. Sign Language & Linguistics 18(1). 158–166. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stevens, Kelly. 1923. Young Hindu educator follows father’s example. The Silent Worker 35(6). 221.Google Scholar
Supalla, Ted. 2001. Making historical sign language materials accessible: A prototype database of early ASL. Sign Language & Linguistics 4(1/2). 285–297. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2004. The validity of the Gallaudet lecture films. Sign Language Studies 4(3). 261–292. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. The role of historical research in building a model of sign language typology, variation, and change. In Ritsuko Kikusawa & Lawrence A. Reid (eds.), Historical Linguistics 2011: Selected papers from the 20th International Conference on Historical Linguistics, Osaka, 25–30 July 2011 (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 326), 15–42. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Supalla, Ted & Patricia Clark. 2015. Sign language archaeology: Understanding the historical roots of American Sign Language. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Supalla, Ted, Fanny Limousin & Betsy Hicks McDonald. 2020. Historical change in American Sign Language. In Richard Janda, Brian Joseph & Barbara Vance (eds.), The handbook of historical linguistics, 423–446. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tabak, John. 2006. Significant gestures: A history of American Sign Language. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tai, James. 1985. Temporal sequence and Chinese word order. In John Haiman (ed.), Iconicity in syntax, 49–72. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taub, Sarah. 2001. Language from the body: Iconicity and metaphor in American Sign Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
The Hearing Review. 2019. RIT researchers study changes in Nicaraguan Sign Language over four decades. [URL]
Thompson, Robin, David Vinson & Gabriella Vigliocco. 2010. The link between form and meaning in British Sign Language: Effects of iconicity for phonological decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 36(4). 1017–1027.Google Scholar
Thompson, Robin, David Vinson, Bencie Woll & Gabriella Vigliocco. 2012. The road to language learning is iconic: Evidence from British Sign Language. Psychological Science 23(12). 1443–1448. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tkachman, Oksana, Gracellia Purnomo & Bryan Gick. 2018. Cyclic movement primitives underlying two-handed alternating signs in signed languages. Canadian Acoustics 46(4). 24–27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth. 2012. Pragmatics and language change. In Kasia Jaszczolt & Keith Allan (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of pragmatics, 549–566. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tyrone, Martha & Claude Mauk. 2010. Sign lowering and phonetic reduction in American Sign Language. Journal of Phonetics 38(2). 317–328. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Uyechi, Linda. 1996. The geometry of visual phonology (Dissertations in Linguistics Series). Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information.
Valentine, Gill & Tracey Skelton. 2008. Changing spaces: The role of the internet in shaping Deaf geographies. Social & Cultural Geography 9(5). 469–485. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. ‘AN UMBILICAL CORD TO THE WORLD’: The role of the Internet in D/deaf people’s information and communication practices. Information, Communication & Society 12(1). 44–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verhoef, Tessa, Simon Kirby & Bart de Boer. 2016. Iconicity and the emergence of combinatorial structure in language. Cognitive Science 40(8). 1969–1994. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vinson, David, Kearsy Cormier, Tanya Denmark, Adam Schembri & Gabriella Vigliocco. 2008. The British Sign Language (BSL) norms for age of acquisition, familiarity and iconicity. Behavior Research Methods 401. 1079–1087. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Volterra, Virginia & Elizabeth Bates. 1989. Selective impairment of Italian grammatical morphology in the congenitally deaf: A case study. Cognitive Neuropsychology 6(3). 273–308. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilbur, Ronnie. 1979. American Sign Language and sign systems. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.Google Scholar
. 2005. A reanalysis of reduplication in American Sign Language. In Bernhard Hurch (ed.), Studies on reduplication, 595–624. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2008. Complex predicates involving events, time and aspect: Is this why sign languages look so similar?. In Josep Quer (ed.), Theoretical issues in sign language research, 217–250. Seedorf: Signum.Google Scholar
. 2017. The linguistic description of American Sign Language. In Harlan Lane & François Grosjean (eds.), Recent perspectives on American Sign Language, 7–31. New York: Psychology Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilbur, Ronnie & Lesa Petersen. 1997. Backwards signing and ASL syllable structure. Language and Speech 40(1). 63–90. 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 languages. Cognitive Linguistics 15(2). 119–147. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilcox, Sherman & Corrine Occhino. 2016. Historical change in signed languages. Oxford handbooks online. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Winter, Bodo, Marcus Perlman, Lynn Perry & Gary Lupyan. 2017. Which words are most iconic? Iconicity in English sensory words. Interaction Studies 18(3). 443–464. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wittmann, Henri. 1991. Classification linguistique des langues signées non vocalement. Revue québécoise de linguistique théorique et appliquée 10(1). 215–288.Google Scholar
Woll, Bencie & Jechil Sieratzki. 1998. Echo phonology: Signs of a link between gesture and speech. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21(4). 531–532. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Woll, Bencie, Rachel Sutton-Spence & Frances Elton. 2001. Multilingualism: The global approach to sign languages. In Ceil Lucas (ed.), The sociolinguistics of sign languages, 8–32. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Woodward, James. 1978. Historical bases of American Sign Language. In Patricia Siple (ed.), Understanding language through sign language research, 333–348. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
. 1993. The relationship of sign language varieties in India, Pakistan, & Nepal. Sign Language Studies 78(1). 15–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. Some observations on research methodology in lexicostatistical studies of sign languages. In Gaurav Mathur & Donna Jo Napoli (eds.), Deaf around the world: The impact of language, 38–53. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Xavier, André & Regiane Pinheiro Agrella. 2015. Brazilian sign language (Libras). In Julie Bakken Jepsen, Goedele De Clerck, Sam Lutalo-Kiingi & William McGregor (eds.), Sign languages of the world: A comparative handbook, 129–158. Berlin: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Xavier, André & Sherman Wilcox. 2014. Necessity and possibility modals in Brazilian Sign Language (Libras). Linguistic Typology 18(3). 449–488. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yu, Shi, Carlo Geraci & Natasha Abner. 2018. Sign languages and the online world: Online dictionaries & lexicostatistics. In Nicoletta Calzolari, Khalid Choukri, Christopher Cieri, Thierry Declerck, Sara Goggi, Koiti Hasida, Hitoshi Isahara, inter alia & Takenobu Tokunaga (eds.), Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2018), 4235–4240. Miyazaki, Japan: European Language Resources Association.Google Scholar
Zeshan, Ulrike. 2003. Indo-Pakistani Sign Language grammar: A typological outline. Sign Language Studies 3(2). 157–212. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. “Making meaning”: Communication between sign language users without a shared language. Cognitive Linguistics 26(2). 211–260. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zimmer, June. 2000. Toward a description of register variation in American Sign Language. In Clayton Valli & Ceil Lucas (eds.), Linguistics of American Sign Language: An introduction, 429–442. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar