Article published in:
Special Issue in Memory of Irit Meir
Edited by Diane Lillo-Martin, Wendy Sandler, Marie Coppola and Rose Stamp
[Sign Language & Linguistics 23:1/2] 2020
► pp. 142–170

From a demonstrative to a relative clause marker

Grammaticalization of pointing signs in Israeli Sign Language

| University of Haifa
Demonstratives provide an important link between gesture, discourse and grammar due to their communicative function to coordinate the interlocutor’s focus of attention. This underlies their frequent cross-linguistic development into a wide range of function words and morphemes (Diessel 1999). The present study provides evidence for a link between gesture and grammar by tracking diachronic development of a relative clause marker in Israeli Sign Language (ISL) restrictive relative clauses, which starts as a gestural locative pointing sign, and grammaticalizes into a relative pronoun connecting relative and main clauses and agreeing with referent loci, and then into an invariant relativizer. Diachronic changes are inferred from the data collected from three generations of signers. The results reveal that the behavior of demonstratives in the data varied with the signers’ ages according to four diagnostic criteria of grammaticalization (e.g., Hopper & Traugott 2003): increased systematicity, distributional and morphological changes, and phonetic reduction.
Keywords: demonstratives, pointing, grammaticalization, Israeli Sign Language, relative clauses, non-manuals
Published online: 30 October 2020
https://doi.org/10.1075/sll.00047.dac
References

References

Aarons, Debra
1996 Topics and topicalization in American sign language. Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics 30. 65–106.Google Scholar
Bahan, Benjamin, Judy Kegl, Dawn MacLaughlin & Carol Neidle
1995 Convergent evidence for the structure of determiner phrases in American Sign Language. In Leslie Gabriele, Debra Hardison & Robert Hoffmeister (Eds.), FLSM VI: Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Meeting of the Formal Linguistics Society of Mid-America: Vol. 2: Syntax II & Semantics/Pragmatics, 1–12. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Bellugi, Ursula & Edward Klima
1982 From gesture to sign: Deixis in a visuo-gestural language. In Robert Jarvella & Wolfgang Klein (Eds.), Speech, place, and action: studies in deixis and related topics, 279–313. Chichester, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
Branchini, Chiara
2007 Relatives and related constructions in LIS. Urbino: Università di Urbino PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
2014 On relativization and clefting: an analysis of Italian Sign Language. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Branchini, Chiara & Caterina Donati
2009 Italian Sign Language relatives: a contribution to the typology of relativization strategies. In Anikó Liptak (Ed.), Correlatives: theory and typology, 157–191. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Brunelli, Michele
2011 Antisymmetry and sign languages: a comparison between NGT and LIS. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Brugmann, Karl
1904 Demonstrativpronomina der Indogermanischen Sprachen. Leipzig: Teubner.Google Scholar
Bühler, Karl
1934 Sprachtheorie (Vol. 2). Jena: Fischer.Google Scholar
Butterworth, George Esmond
1998 What is special about pointing in babies? In Francesca Simion & George Esmond Butterworth (Eds.), The development of sensory, motor and cognitive capacities in early infancy. From perception to cognition, 171–190. Hove: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Cecchetto, Carlo, Carlo Geraci & Alessandro Zucchi
2006 Strategies of relativization in Italian Sign Language. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 24(4). 945–975. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cecchetto, Carlo & Caterina Donati
2016 Relativization in Italian Sign Language: the missing link of relativization. In Roland Pfau, Markus Steinbach & Annika Herrmann (Eds.), A matter of complexity: Subordination in sign languages, 182–203. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clark, Eve
1978 From gesture to word: On the natural history of deixis in language acquisition. In Jerome Bruner & Alison Garton (Eds.), Human growth and development, 85–120. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
[ p. 166 ]
Coppola, Marie
2002 The emergence of the grammatical category of Subject in home sign: Evidence from family-based gesture systems in Nicaragua. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Coppola, Marie & Ann Senghas
2010 Deixis in an emerging sign language. In Diane Brentari (Ed.), Sign languages: A Cambridge language survey, 543–569. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Coppola, Marie & Wing Chee So
2006 The seeds of spatial grammar: Spatial modulation and coreference in homesigning and hearing adults. Proceedings of the 30th Annual Boston Conference on Language Development 30, 119–130.Google Scholar
Crasborn, Onno & Han Sloetjes
2008 Enhanced ELAN functionality for sign language corpora. Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on the Representation and Processing of Sign Languages: Construction and Exploitation of Sign Language Corpora, 39–43. Paris: ELRA.Google Scholar
Dachkovsky, Svetlana
2016 The development of a RC marker from a deictic gesture in Israeli Sign Language. Talk presented at the Workshop Sign Language Agreement Revisited: New Theoretical and Experimental Perspectives, University of Konstanz, February, 24–26Google Scholar
2018 Grammaticalization of intonation in Israeli Sign Language: From information structure to relative clause relations. Haifa: University of Haifa PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Dachkovsky, Svetlana, Christina Healy & Wendy Sandler
2013 Visual intonation in two sign languages. Phonology 30(2). 211–252. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dachkovsky, Svetlana & Wendy Sandler
2009 Visual intonation in the prosody of a sign language. Language and Speech 52(2–3). 287–314. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Diessel, Holger
1999 Demonstratives: Form, function and grammaticalization. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2005 Distance contrasts in demonstratives.‏ In Martin Haspelmath, Matthew S. Dryer, David Gil & Bernard Comrie (Eds.), The world atlas of language structures, 170–173. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2006 Demonstratives, joint attention, and the emergence of grammar. Cognitive Linguistics 17(4), 463–489. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2012 Deixis and demonstratives. An international handbook of natural language meaning. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2013 Where does language come from? Some reflections on the role of deictic gesture and demonstratives in the evolution of language. Language and Cognition 5(2–3). 239–249. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Eckardt, Regine
2006 Meaning change in grammaticalization: an enquiry into semantic reanalysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Emmorey, Karen
2002 Language, cognition, and the brain: Insights from sign language research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Engberg-Pedersen, Elizabeth
1993 Space in Danish Sign Language: The semantics and morphosyntax of the use of space in a visual language. Hamburg: Signum Press.Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga, Ans van Kemenade, Willem Koopman & Wim van der Wurff
2000 The syntax of Early English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fusellier-Souza, Ivani
2006 Emergence and development of signed languages: From a semiogenetic point of view. Sign Language Studies 7(1). 30–56. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Givón, Talmy
2009 The genesis of syntactic complexity: Diachrony, ontogeny, neuro-cognition, evolution. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 167 ]
Hopper, Paul J. & Elizabeth Closs Traugott
2003 Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Iverson, Jana M. & Susan Goldin-Meadow
2005 Gesture paves the way for language development. Psychological Science 16(5). 367–371. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kendon, Adam
2004 Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kita, Sotaro
2003 Pointing. A foundational building block of human communication. In Sotaro Kita (Ed.), Pointing: Where language, culture, and cognition meeet, 1–8. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kita, Sotaro & Aslı Özyürek
2003 What does cross-linguistic variation in semantic coordination of speech and gesture reveal?: Evidence for an interface representation of spatial thinking and speaking. Journal of Memory and Language 48(1). 16–32. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kubus, Okan
2014 Relative clause constructions in Turkish Sign Language. Hamburg: University of Hamburg PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Labov, William
1963 The social motivation of a sound change. Word 19(3). 273–309. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lehmann, Christian
1985 Grammaticalization: Synchronic variation and diachronic change. Lingua e stile 20(3). 303–318.Google Scholar
2008 Information structure and grammaticalization. In Elena Seoane & María José López-Couso (Eds.), Theoretical and empirical issues in grammaticalization, 207–229. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Levinson, Stephen
2004 Deixis. In Laurence Horn & Gregory Ward (Eds.), The handbook of pragmatics, 97–121. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Liddell, Scott K.
1978 Non-manual signals and relative clauses in American Sign Language. In Patricia Siple (Ed.), Understanding language through sign language research, 59–90. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
1980 American Sign Language syntax. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
1996 Spatial representations in discourse: Comparing spoken and signed language. Lingua 98(1). 145–167. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2003 Grammar, gesture and meaning in American Sign Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lillo-Martin, Diane & Edward Klima
1990 Pointing out differences: ASL pronouns in syntactic theory. In Susan D. Fischer & Patricia Siple (Eds.), Theoretical issues in sign language research, 191–210. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Liszkowski, Ulf, Malinda Carpenter, Ann Henning, Tricia Striano & Michael Tomasello
2004 Twelve-month-olds point to share attention and interest. Developmental Science 7(3). 297–307. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
McBurney, Susan Lloyd
2002 Pronominal reference in signed and spoken language. In Richard P. Meier, Kearsy Cormier & David Quinto-Pozos (Eds.), Modality and structure in signed and spoken languages, 329–369. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
McNeill, David
1992 Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Meier, Richard P.
1990 Person deixis in American Sign Language. In Susan D. Fischer & Patricia Siple (Eds.), Theoretical issues in sign language research, 175–190. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
[ p. 168 ]
2002 The acquisition of verb agreement: pointing out arguments for the linguistic status of agreement in sign languages. In Gary Morgan & Bencie Woll (Eds.), Current developments in the study of signed language acquisition, 115–141. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Meir, Irit
1998 Syntactic-semantic interaction in Israeli Sign Language verbs: The case of backwards verbs. Sign Language & Linguistics, 1(1). 3–37. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2016 Grammaticalization is not the full story: a non-grammaticalization account of the emergence of sign language agreement morphemes. In Mediterranean Morphology Meeting 10. 112–124.Google Scholar
Meir, Irit, Carol A. Padden, Mark Aronoff & Wendy Sandler
2007 Body as subject. Journal of Linguistics 43(3). 531–563. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Meir, Irit & Wendy Sandler
2008 A language in space: The story of Israeli Sign Language. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Nespor, Marina & Wendy Sandler
1999 Prosody in Israeli Sign Language. Language and Speech 42(2–3). 143–176. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Padden, Carol
1988 Interaction of morphology and syntax in American Sign Language. New York: Garland Press.Google Scholar
Pfau, Roland & Markus Steinbach
2005 Relative clauses in German Sign Language: Extraposition and reconstruction. In Leah Bateman & Cherlon Ussery (Eds.), Proceedings of the North East Linguistic Society (NELS 35), Vol. 2, 507–521. Amherst, MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
2006 Modality-independent and modality-specific aspects of grammaticalization in sign languages (Linguistics in Potsdam 24). Potsdam: Universitäts-Verlag. Available at http://​opus​.kobv​.de​/ubp​/volltexte​/2006​/1088/
Sandler, Wendy
1999 Cliticization and prosodic words in a sign language. In Traci Hall & Ursula Kleinhenz (Eds.), Studies on the phonological word, 223–255. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sandler, Wendy & Diane Lillo-Martin
2006 Sign language and linguistic universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sankoff, Gillian & Penelope Brown
1976 The origins of syntax in discourse: A case study of Tok Pisin relatives. Language 52(3). 631–666. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sheldon, Amy
1974 The role of parallel function in the acquisition of relative clauses in English. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior 13(3). 272–281. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Shepard-Kegl, Judy
1985 Locative relations in ASL word formation, syntax, and discourse. Cambridge, MA: MIT PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Supalla, Ted
1982 Structure and acquisition of verbs of motion and location in American Sign Language. San Diego, CA: University of California PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Tang, Gladys, Prudence Lau & Jafi Lee
2010 Strategies for relativization in HKSL. Paper presented at Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research (TISLR 10), Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
Tomasello, Michael
1999 The cultural origins of human cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth C.
1992 Syntax. In Richard Hogg (Ed.), The Cambridge history of the English language, vol I, 168–229. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wilbur, Ronnie
2017 Internally-headed relative clauses in sign languages. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 2(1): 25. 1–34. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 169 ]
Zimmer, June & Cynthia G. Patschke
1990 A class of determiners in ASL. In Ceil Lucas (Ed.), Sign language research: Theoretical issues, 201–210. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Zukowski, Andrea
2009 Elicited production of relative clauses in children with Williams syndrome. Language and Cognitive Processes 24(1). 1–43. CrossrefGoogle Scholar