Cover not available
Article published In:
Where do nouns come from?
Edited by John B. Haviland
[Gesture 13:3] 2013
► pp. 253–286

The noun–verb distinction in two young sign languages

Many sign languages have semantically related noun-verb pairs, such as ‘hairbrush/brush-hair’, which are similar in form due to iconicity. Researchers studying this phenomenon in sign languages have found that the two are distinguished by subtle differences, for example, in type of movement. Here we investigate two young sign languages, Israeli Sign Language (ISL) and Al-Sayyid Bedouin Sign Language (ABSL), to determine whether they have developed a reliable distinction in the formation of noun-verb pairs, despite their youth, and, if so, how. These two young language communities differ from each other in terms of heterogeneity within the community, contact with other languages, and size of population. Using methodology we developed for cross-linguistic comparison, we identify reliable formational distinctions between nouns and related verbs in ISL, but not in ABSL, although early tendencies can be discerned. Our results show that a formal distinction in noun-verb pairs in sign languages is not necessarily present from the beginning, but may develop gradually instead. Taken together with comparative analyses of other linguistic phenomena, the results lend support to the hypothesis that certain social factors such as population size, domains of use, and heterogeneity/homogeneity of the community play a role in the emergence of grammar.
Keywords: Al-Sayyid Bedouin Sign Language, language emergence, Israeli Sign Language, noun-verb distinction, sign language
Published online: 21 July 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.13.3.02tka
References
Al-Fityani, Kinda & Carol Padden
(2010) Sign language geography in the Arab world. In D. Brentari (Ed.), Sign languages: A Cambridge survey (pp. 443–450). New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bender, Emily M. & Dan Flickinger
(2005) Rapid prototyping of scalable grammars: Towards modularity in extensions to a grammar-independent core. In Proceedings of IJCNLP 2005 Companion Volume1, pp. 203–208. Jeju, Korea.
Bernstein, Basil
(1971) Class, codes and control. Vol. 11. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bickford, J. Albert
(2005) The signed languages of Eastern Europe. SIL Electronic Survey Reports 2005-026: 45. [URL]Google Scholar
Boyes Braem, Penny & Rachel Sutton-Spence
(Eds.) (2001) The hands are the head of the mouth: The mouth as articulator in sign languages. Hamburg: Signum.Google Scholar
Broschart, Jürgen
(1997) Why Tongan does it differently? Linguistic Typology, 11, 123–165. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam
(1970) Remarks on nominalization. In Roderick A. Jacobs & Peter S. Rosenbaum (Eds.), Readings in English transformational grammar (pp. 184–221). Waltham, MA: Ginn.Google Scholar
(1993) A minimalist program for linguistic theory. In Kenneth Hale & Samuel Jay Keyser (Eds.), The view from building 20 (pp. 1–52). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
(1995) The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cohen, Einya, Lila Namir, & Izchak M. Schlesinger
(1977) A new dictionary of sign language: Employing the Eshkol-Wachmann movement notation system. The Hague: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Croft, William
(2000) Parts of speech as language universals and as language-particular categories. In Petra M. Vogel & Bernard Comrie (Eds.), Approaches to the typology of word classes (pp. 65–103). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Vos, Connie
(2012) Kata Kolko: An updated sociolinguistic profile. In Ulrike Zeshan & Connie de Vos (Eds.), Sign languages in village communities: Anthropological and linguistic insights (pp. 381–386). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dotter, Franz & Ingeborg Okorn
(2003) Austria’s hidden conflict: Hearing culture versus deaf culture. In Leila Frances Monaghan, Constanze Schmaling, Karen Nakamura, & Graham H. Turner (Eds.), Many ways to be deaf: International variation in deaf communities (pp. 49–66). Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Emmorey, Karen
(2002) Language, cognition, and the brain: Insights from sign language research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
(Ed.) (2003) Perspectives on classifier constructions in sign languages. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Erbaugh, Mary
(1986) Taking stock: The development of Chinese noun classifiers historically and in young children. In Colette G. Craig (Ed.), Noun classes and categorization (pp. 399–436). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Erlenkamp, Sonja
(2000) Syntaktische Kategorien und lexikalische Klassen: Typologische Aspekte der deutschen Gebärdensprache. München: LINCOM Europa.Google Scholar
Evans, Nicholas
(1995) The grammar of Kayardild. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2000) Word classes in the world’s languages. In Geert E. Booij, Christian Lehmann, & Joachim Mugdan (Eds.), Morphologie: Ein internationales Handbuch zur Flexion und Wortbildung / Morphology: International handbook on inflection and word-formation (pp. 708–732). Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Gil, David
(1991) Nouns, verbs, and quantification. EUROTYP Working Papers, Series X, No. 1.Google Scholar
Goldin-Meadow, Susan
(2003) The resilience of language: What gesture creation in deaf children can tell us about how all children learn language. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Groce, Nora E.
(1985) Everyone here spoke sign language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Harley, Heidi & Rolf Noyer
(1999) State-of-the-article: Distributed morphology. Glot International, 4 (4), 3–9.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin
(2001) Word classes and parts of speech. In Paul B. Baltes & Neil J. Smelser (Eds.), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences (Vol. 241, pp. 16538–16545). Amsterdam: Pergamon. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007) Pre-established categories don’t exist: Consequences for language description and typology. Linguistic Typology, 11 (1), 119–132. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hay, Jennifer & Laurie Bauer
(2007) Phoneme inventory size and population size. Language, 83 (2), 388–400. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Himmelmann, Nikolaus P.
(1991) The Philippine challenge to universal grammar. Köln: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft, Universität zu Köln (Arbeitspapier 15, Neue Folge).Google Scholar
Hunger, Barbara
(2006) Noun/verb pairs in Austrian sign language (ÖGS). Sign Language & Linguistics, 2 (2), 71–94. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Irvine, Judith T.
(1979) Formality and informality in communicative events. American Anthropologist, 81 (4), 773–790. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Israel, Assaf & Wendy Sandler
(2009) Phonological category resolution: A study of handshapes in younger and older sign languages. In Alexandre Castro Caldas & Ana Mineiro (Eds.), Cadernos de Saúde (Vol. 21, pp. 13–28) (Special Issue: Línguas Gestuais ). Lisbon: Universidade Católica Portuguesa (UCP).Google Scholar
Jacobsen, William H.
(1979) Noun and verb in Nootkan. In Barbara S. Efrat (Ed.), The victoria conference on Northwestern languages, Victoria, British Columbia, November 4-5, 1976 (pp. 83–155). Victoria, BC: British Columbia Provincial Museum ( Heritage Record, 4).Google Scholar
Jelinek, Eloise
(1995) Quantification in straits salish. In Emmon Bach, Eloise Jelinek, Angelika Kratzer, & Barbara H. Partee (Eds.), Quantification in natural languages (Vol. 21, pp. 487–540). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Johnson, Robert E.
(1991) Sign language, culture and community in a traditional Yucatec Maya village. Sign Language Studies, 731, 461–474. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1994) Sign language and the concept of deafness in a traditional Yucatec Mayan village. In Carol J. Erting, Robert C. Johnson, Dotpthy L. Smith, & Bruce D. Snider (Eds.), The deaf way: Perspectives from the international conference on deaf culture (pp. 103–109). Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Johnston, Trevor
(1989) Auslan: The sign language of the Australian deaf community. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Sydney.Google Scholar
(2001) Nouns and verbs in Australian sign language: An open or shut case? Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 6 (4), 235–257. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Johnston, Trevor & Adam Schembri
(2007) Australian sign language (Auslan): An introduction to sign language linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Joos, Martin
(1962) The five clocks. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Research Center in Anthropology, Folklore, and Linguistics.Google Scholar
Kakumasu, Jim
(1968) Urubú Sign Language. International Journal of American Linguistics, 341, 275–281. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1978) Urubú Sign Language. In Donna Jean Umiker-Sebeok & Thomas Albert Sebeok (Eds.), Aboriginal sign languages of the Americas and Australia (Vol. 21, pp. 247–256). New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Kimmelman, Vadim
(2009) Parts of speech in Russian sign language: The role of iconicity and economy. Sign Language & Linguistics, 12 (2), 161–186. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kisch, Shifra
(2004) Deaf discourse: Social construction of deafness in a Bedouin community in the Negev. Unpublished MA thesis, Tel-Aviv University.Google Scholar
(2012) AL-Sayyid: A sociolinguistic sketch. In Ulrike Zeshan & Connie de Vos (Eds.), Sign languages in village communities: Anthropological and linguistic insights (pp. 365–372). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Klima, Edward & Ursula Bellugi
(1979) The signs of language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Kusters, Annelies
(2012) Adamorobe: A demographic, sociolinguistic, and sociocultural profile. In Ulrike Zeshan & Connie de Vos (Eds.), Sign languages in village communities: Anthropological and linguistic insights (pp. 347–352). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W.
(1987) Nouns and verbs. Language, 631, 53–94. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Launey, Michel
(2004) The features of omnipredicativity in Classical Nahuatl. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung, 57 (1), 49–69.Google Scholar
Le Guen, Olivier
(2012) An exploration in the domain of time: From Yucatec Maya time gestures to Yucatec Maya Sign Language time signs. In Ulrike Zeshan & Connie de Vos (Eds.), Sign languages in village communities: Anthropological and linguistic insights (pp. 209–250). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MacSweeney, Mairead, Cheryl Capel, Ruth Campbell, & Bencie Woll
(2008) The signing brain: The neurobiology of sign language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12 (11), 432–440. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marsaja, I. Gede
(2008) Desa Kolok: A deaf village and its sign language in Bali, Indonesia. Nijmegen, The Netherlands: Ishara Press.Google Scholar
Meir, Irit
(2010) Iconicity and metaphor: Constraints on metaphorical use of iconic forms. Language, 86 (4), 865–896. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012) Word classes and word formation. In Roland Pfau, Markus Steinbach, & Bencie Woll (Eds.), Sign language: An international handbook (pp. 77–111). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Meir, Irit, Carol Padden, Mark Aronoff, & Wendy Sandler
(2013) Competing iconicities in the structure of languages. Cognitive Linguistics, 24 (2), 309–343. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
to appear). The influence of community on language structure: Evidence from two young sign languages. Linguistic Variation.
Meir, Irit & Wendy Sandler
(2008) A language in space: The story of Israeli sign language. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Meir, Irit, Wendy Sandler, Carol Padden, & Mark Aronoff
(2010) Emerging sign languages. In Marc Marschark & Patricia Elizabeth Spencer (Eds.), Oxford handbook of deaf studies, language, and education, (Vol. 21, pp. 267–280). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Ross E. & Michael A. Karchmer
(2004) Chasing the mythical ten percent: Parental Hearing Status of deaf and hard of hearing students in the United States. Sign Language Studies, 4 (2), 138–163. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Newport, Elissa L. & Richard P. Meier
(1985) The acquisition of American sign language. In Dan Isaac Slobin (Ed.), The cross-linguistic study of language acquisition (pp. 881–938). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Nonaka, Angela M.
(2012) Sociolinguistic sketch of Ban Khor and Ban Khor sign language. In Ulrike Zeshan & Connie de Vos (Eds.), Sign languages in village communities: Anthropological and linguistic insights (pp. 373–376). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nyst, Victoria
(2007) A descriptive analysis of Adamorobe sign language (Ghana). Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Padden, Carol, Irit Meir, Mark Aronoff, & Wendy Sandler
(2010) The grammar of space in two new sign languages. In Diane Brentari (Ed.), Sign language: A Cambridge language survey (pp. 570–590). New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Payne, Thomas E.
A sample grammatical sketch of English. [URL] (retrieved October 25, 2012).
Pettito, Laura Ann & Paula Marentette
(1991) Babbling in the manual mode: Evidence for the ontogeny of language. Science, 251 (5000), 1493–1496. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sandler, Wendy
(1993) Sign language and modularity. Lingua, 89 (4), 315–351. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sandler, Wendy & Diane Lillo-Martin
(2006) Sign language and linguistic universals. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversityPress. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sandler, Wendy, Irit Meir, Carol Padden, & Mark Aronoff
(2005) The emergence of grammar: Systematic structure in a new language. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 102 (7), 2661–2665.
Sandler, Wendy, Mark Aronoff, Irit Meir, & Carol Padden
(2011) The gradual emergence of phonological form in a new language. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 291, 503–543. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sapir, Edward
(1921) Language: An introduction to the study of speech. New York: Harcourt, Brace & Co.Google Scholar
Schein, Jerome D.
(1989) At home among strangers. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Schuit, Joke, Anne Baker, & Roland Pfau
(2011) Inuit Sign Language: A contribution to sign language typology. Linguistics in Amsterdam, 41, 1–31.Google Scholar
Schwager, Waldemar & Ulrike Zeshan
(2008) Word classes in sign languages: Criteria and classification. Studies in Language, 32 (3), 509–545. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Senghas, Ann
(2005) Language emergence: Clues from a new Bedouin sign language. Current Biology, 15 (12), 463–465. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stokoe, William
(1960) Sign language structure: An outline of the visual communication systems of the American deaf (Studies in Linguistics, Occasional Papers, 8). University of Buffalo, Dept. of Anthropology and Linguistics.Google Scholar
Stokoe, William, Dorothy Castorline, & Carl Croneberg
(1965) A dictionary of American Sign Language on linguistic principles. Washington, DC: Gallaudet College Press.Google Scholar
Supalla, Ted
(1986) The classifier system in American Sign Language. In Colette G. Craig (Ed.), Noun classes and categorization (pp. 181–214). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Supalla, Ted & Elissa Newport
(1978) How many sits in a chair? The derivation of nouns and verbs in American Sign Language. In Patricia Siple (Ed.), Understanding language through sign language research (pp. 91–132). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Taub, Sarah F.
(2000) Iconicity in American sign language: Concrete and metaphorical applications. Spatial Cognition and Computation, 21, 31–50. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tkachman, Oksana
(2012) The basic noun-verb distinction in two young sign languages. Unpublished MA thesis, University of Haifa.Google Scholar
Voghel, Amélie
(2005) Phonologically identical noun-verb pairs in Quebec sign language (LSQ): Form and context. Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics, 251, 68–75.Google Scholar
Washabaugh, William
(1979) Hearing and deaf signers on providence Island. Sign Language Studies, 241, 191–214. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1986) Five fingers for survival. Ann Arbor, MI: Karoma.Google Scholar
Washabaugh, William, James C. Woodward, & Susan DeSantis
(1978) Providence Island sign: A context-dependent language. Anthropological Linguistics, 20 (3), 95–109.Google Scholar
Wilbur, Ronnie B.
(2004) Complex predicates involving events, time and aspect: Is this why sign languages look so similar? In Josep Quer (Ed.), Signs of the time: Selected papers from TISLR 2004 (pp. 217–250). Hamburg: Signum Press.Google Scholar
Woodward, James & Angela Nonaka
(1997) Report to the Ratchasuda Foundation of findings from a pilot study of Ban Khor sign language. Research Department, Ratchasuda College, Mahidol University at Salaya, Nakhonprathom, Thailand.Google Scholar
Wray, Alison & George W. Grace
(2007) The consequences of talking to strangers: Evolutionary corollaries of socio-cultural influences on linguistic form. Lingua, 1171, 543–578. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zeshan, Ulrike
(2000) Gebärdensprachen des indischen Subkontinents. München: LINCOM Europa.Google Scholar
Zwitserlood, Inge
(2003) Classifying hand configurations in Nederlandse Gebarentaal (Sign language of the Netherlands). PhD. Thesis, Utrecht University: LOT.
(2012) Classifiers. In Roland Pfau, Markus Steinbach, & Bencie Woll (Eds.), Sign language: An international handbook (pp. 158–186). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 24 other publications

Abner, Natasha
2017. Syntactic Categorization in Sign Languages * *I am extremely indebted to all of the individuals who have shared their language and their research with me and with the scientific community. I also thank Carlo Geraci and the editors for valuable feedback and suggestions. Any remaining errors are my own.. In Handbook of Categorization in Cognitive Science, ► pp. 549 ff. DOI logo
Börstell, Carl, Thomas Hörberg & Robert Östling
2016. Distribution and duration of signs and parts of speech in Swedish Sign Language. Sign Language & Linguistics 19:2 ► pp. 143 ff. DOI logo
Ergin, Rabia
2022. Emerging Lexicon for Objects in Central Taurus Sign Language. Languages 7:2 ► pp. 118 ff. DOI logo
Gawne, Lauren, Chelsea Krajcik, Helene N. Andreassen, Andrea L. Berez-Kroeker & Barbara F. Kelly
2019. Data transparency and citation in the journal Gesture . Gesture 18:1 ► pp. 83 ff. DOI logo
Hunsicker, Dea & Susan Goldin-Meadow
2013. How handshape type can distinguish between nouns and verbs in homesign. Gesture 13:3 ► pp. 354 ff. DOI logo
Hunsicker, Dea & Susan Goldin-Meadow
2015. How handshape type can distinguish between nouns and verbs in homesign. In Where do nouns come from? [Benjamins Current Topics, 70], ► pp. 111 ff. DOI logo
HWANG, SO-ONE, NOZOMI TOMITA, HOPE MORGAN, RABIA ERGIN, DENIZ İLKBAŞARAN, SHARON SEEGERS, RYAN LEPIC & CAROL PADDEN
2017. Of the body and the hands: patterned iconicity for semantic categories. Language and Cognition 9:4 ► pp. 573 ff. DOI logo
Makaroğlu, Bahtiyar & Selçuk İşsever
2018. Agreement Verbs in Turkish Sign Language (TİD) from the Perspective of Templatic Morphology. Dilbilim Araştırmaları Dergisi 29:1 ► pp. 51 ff. DOI logo
Meir, Irit & Ariel Cohen
2018. Metaphor in Sign Languages. Frontiers in Psychology 9 DOI logo
Motamedi, Yasamin, Kathryn Montemurro, Natasha Abner, Molly Flaherty, Simon Kirby & Susan Goldin-Meadow
2022. The Seeds of the Noun–Verb Distinction in the Manual Modality: Improvisation and Interaction in the Emergence of Grammatical Categories. Languages 7:2 ► pp. 95 ff. DOI logo
Motamedi, Yasamin, Marieke Schouwstra, Kenny Smith, Jennifer Culbertson & Simon Kirby
2019. Evolving artificial sign languages in the lab: From improvised gesture to systematic sign. Cognition 192 ► pp. 103964 ff. DOI logo
Novogrodsky, Rama & Natalia Meir
2020. Age, frequency, and iconicity in early sign language acquisition: Evidence from the Israeli Sign Language MacArthur–Bates Communicative Developmental Inventory. Applied Psycholinguistics 41:4 ► pp. 817 ff. DOI logo
ORTEGA, GERARDO & ASLI ÖZYÜREK
2020. Types of iconicity and combinatorial strategies distinguish semantic categories in silent gesture across cultures. Language and Cognition 12:1 ► pp. 84 ff. DOI logo
Padden, Carol A.
2015. Methods of Research on Sign Language Grammars. In Research Methods in Sign Language Studies, ► pp. 141 ff. DOI logo
Padden, Carol A., Irit Meir, So-One Hwang, Ryan Lepic, Sharon Seegers & Tory Sampson
2013. Patterned iconicity in sign language lexicons. Gesture 13:3 ► pp. 287 ff. DOI logo
Padden, Carol A., Irit Meir, So-One Hwang, Ryan Lepic, Sharon Seegers & Tory Sampson
2015. Patterned iconicity in sign language lexicons. In Where do nouns come from? [Benjamins Current Topics, 70], ► pp. 43 ff. DOI logo
Pyers, Jennie E. & Karen Emmorey
2022. The iconic motivation for the morphophonological distinction between noun–verb pairs in American Sign Language does not reflect common human construals of objects and actions. Language and Cognition 14:4 ► pp. 622 ff. DOI logo
Sandler, Wendy, Carol Padden & Mark Aronoff
2022. Emerging Sign Languages. Languages 7:4 ► pp. 284 ff. DOI logo
Tkachman, Oksana & Carla L. Hudson Kam
2020. Measuring lexical and structural conventionalization in young sign languages. Sign Language & Linguistics 23:1-2 ► pp. 208 ff. DOI logo
Tkachman, Oksana & Irit Meir
2018. Novel compounding and the emergence of structure in two young sign languages. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 3:1 DOI logo
Tkachman, Oksana, Gracellia Purnomo & Bryan Gick
2021. Repetition Preferences in Two-Handed Balanced Signs: Vestigial Locomotor Central Pattern Generators Shape Sign Language Phonetics and Phonology. Frontiers in Communication 5 DOI logo
Tsay, Jane S.
2018. Noun-Verb Pairs in Taiwan Sign Language. In Chinese Lexical Semantics [Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 11173], ► pp. 3 ff. DOI logo
Wu, Suwei
2019. The Tool Noun and Tool Verb Alternation in Gesture. Multimodal Communication 8:2 DOI logo
Xu, Lewen, Tao Gong, Lan Shuai & Jun Feng
2022. Significantly different noun-verb distinguishing mechanisms in written Chinese and Chinese sign language: An event-related potential study of bilingual native signers. Frontiers in Neuroscience 16 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 november 2023. 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.