Cover not available
Article published In:
Sign Language & Linguistics
Vol. 20:2 (2017) ► pp.253–269
Papers from the Sign Linguistics Underground

Author’s afterword

Article outline
  • 1.Jackendoff’s framework of Conceptual Semantics: The role of Agent
  • 2.Meir’s analysis of main verb agreement in sign language
    • 2.1The distinction between spatial verbs and agreement verbs
    • 2.2Facing
    • 2.3The Lexical Conceptual Structure of directional verbs
  • 3.The analysis of main verb and auxiliary agreement in sign language by Quadros & Quer (2008)
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 26 March 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/sll.00009.bos
References (22)
References
Bos, Heleen. 1990. Person and location marking in Sign Language of the Netherlands: Some implications of a spatially expressed syntactic system. In Siegmund Prillwitz & Thomas Vollhaber (eds.), Current trends in European Sign Language research. Papers of the Third European Congress on Sign Language Research, 231–246. Hamburg: Signum Press.Google Scholar
Bos, Heleen F. 1993. Agreement and prodrop in Sign Language of the Netherlands. In Frank Drijkoningen & Kees Hengeveld (eds.), Linguistics in the Netherlands 1993, 37–48. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
1994. An auxiliary verb in Sign Language of the Netherlands. In Inger Ahlgren, Brita Bergman, & Mary Brennan (eds.), Perspectives on sign language structure. Papers from the Fifth International Symposium on Sign Language Research, Vol. I, 37–53. Durham: ISLA.Google Scholar
1996. Serial verb constructions in Sign Language of the Netherlands. Paper presented at the Fifth International Conference on Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research, Université du Québec à Montreal & McGill University, 19-22 September 1996 [Published 2016 in Sign Language & Linguistics 191. 238–251].
1998. An analysis of main verb and auxiliary agreement in SLN within the theory of Conceptual Semantics (Jackendoff 1990). Paper presented at the Sixth International Conference on Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research, Gallaudet University, Washington D.C., 12-15 November 1998 [Published 2017 in Sign Language & Linguistics, this issue]. DOI logo
Engberg-Pedersen, Elisabeth. 1986. The use of space with verbs in Danish Sign Language. In Bernard T. Tervoort (ed.), Signs of Life. Proceedings of the Second European Congress on Sign Language Research (Amsterdam July 14–18, 1985), 32–41. Amsterdam: NSDSK.Google Scholar
Fischer, Susan & Bonnie Gough. 1978. Verbs in American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies 181. 17–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Friedman, Lynn A. 1975. Space, time and person reference in American Sign Language. Language 511. 940–961. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gruber, Jeffrey. 1965[1976]. Studies in lexical relations. Cambridge, MA: MIT PhD dissertation. [Published 1976 as Lexical structures in syntax and semantics . Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company].Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray S. 1990. Semantic structures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Janis, Wynne D. 1992. Morphosyntax of the ASL verb phrase. Buffalo, NY: State University of New York at Buffalo PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
1995. A crosslinguistic perspective on ASL verb agreement. In Karen Emmorey & Judy S. Reilly (eds.), Language, gesture, and space, 195–223. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Meir, Irit. 1995. Explaining backwards verbs in ISL: Syntactic-semantic interaction. In Heleen Bos & Trude Schermer (eds.), Current trends in sign language research. Proceedings of the Fifth European Congress on Sign Language Research, 105–119. Hamburg: Signum Press.Google Scholar
. 1998a. Thematic structure and verb agreement in Israeli Sign Language. Jerusalem: Hebrew University of Jerusalem PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
. 1998b. Syntactic-semantic interaction in Israeli Sign Language verbs: The case of backwards verbs. Sign Language & Linguistics 11. 3–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2002. A cross-modality perspective on verb agreement. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 201. 413–450. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Padden, Carol A. 1981. Some arguments for syntactic patterning. Sign Language Studies 321. 239–259.Google Scholar
1983[1988]. Interaction of morphology and syntax in American Sign Language. San Diego, CA: University of California PhD dissertation. [Published 1988 in Outstanding dissertations in linguistics , New York: Garland Publishing, Inc.].Google Scholar
Quadros, Ronice M. de. 1999. Phrase structure of Brazilian Sign Language. Porto Alegre (Brazil): Pontifíca Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Quadros, Ronice M. de & Josep Quer. 2008. Back 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 the 9th Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research Conference, Florianopolis, Brazil, December 2006. Petrópolis: Editora Arara Azul. [Available at: [URL]].
Shepard-Kegl, Judy. 1985. Locative relations in American Sign Language word formation, syntax and discourse. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Smith, Wayne H. 1990. Evidence for auxiliaries in Taiwan Sign Language. In Susan D. Fischer & Patricia Siple (eds.), Theoretical issues in sign language research, Vol 1: Linguistics, 211–228. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar