Cover not available
Article published In:
Sign Language & Linguistics
Vol. 18:2 (2015) ► pp.167–204

Rethinking constructed action

| aDeafness, Cognition and Language Research Centre, University College London
| bLaboratory for Language and Cognitive Neuroscience, San Diego State University
| bLaboratory for Language and Cognitive Neuroscience, San Diego State University
We aim to demonstrate the importance of defining linguistic phenomena by using constructed action or CA (i.e. a stretch of discourse that represents one role or combination of roles depicting actions, utterances, thought, attitudes and/or feelings of one or more referents) as an example. The problem is that different assumptions about CA have led to some apparent contradictions about the nature and characteristics of this phenomenon. Based on observations and analyses of British Sign Language narrative data, we outline criteria and recommendations for defining and annotating CA. We show that, in carefully defining the phenomenon in question and providing criteria for its identification, applying these criteria to usage data leads to emergence of particular types of CA. We also show how identifying these types can help resolve some of the apparent contradictions in the literature.
Keywords: role, constructed action, quotation, referential shift, role shift, nonmanual signals, eyegaze
Published online: 4 February 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/sll.18.2.01cor
References (73)
Bahan, Ben. 1996. Non-manual realization of agreement in American Sign Language. Boston, MA: Boston University dissertation.Google Scholar
Bahan, Ben & Samuel Supalla. 1995. Line segmentation and narrative structure: A study of eyegaze behavior in American Sign Language. In Karen Emmorey & Judy Reilly (eds.), Language, gesture, and space, 171–191. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Bavin, Edith L. 2009. Widening the field: The process of language acquisition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32(25). 449–450. DOI logo
Casey, Shannon. 2003. “Agreement” in gestures and signed languages: The use of directionality to indicate referents involved in actions. San Diego, CA: University of California at San Diego dissertation.Google Scholar
Coates, Jennifer & Rachel Sutton-Spence. 2001. Turn taking patterns in Deaf conversation. Journal of Sociolinguistics 2(1). 3–34.Google Scholar
Cormier, Kearsy, Robert Adam, Katherine Rowley, Bencie Woll & Joanna Atkinson. 2012a. The British Sign Language Sentence Reproduction Test: Exploring age-of-acquisition effects in British deaf adults. Paper presented at the workshop “Experimental studies in sign language research” at the Annual Meeting of the German Linguistics Society (DGfS), Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Cormier, Kearsy, Jordan Fenlon & Adam Schembri. 2015. Indicating verbs in British Sign Language favour motivated use of space. Open Linguistics 1(1). DOI logo.
Cormier, Kearsy, David Quinto-Pozos, Zdenka Sevcikova & Adam Schembri. 2012. Lexicalisation and de-lexicalisation processes in sign languages: Comparing depicting constructions and viewpoint gestures. Language and Communication 32(4). 329–348. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cormier, Kearsy, Sandra Smith & Zed Sevcikova. 2013. Predicate structures, gesture and simultaneity in the representation of action in British Sign Language: Evidence from deaf children and adults. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 18(3). 370–390. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cormier, Kearsy, Sandra Smith & Martine Zwets. 2013. Framing constructed action in British Sign Language narratives. Journal of Pragmatics 551. 119–139. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Beuzeville, Louise, Trevor Johnston & Adam Schembri. 2009. The use of space with indicating verbs in Australian Sign Language: A corpus-based investigation. Sign Language & Linguistics 12(1). 52–83. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dudis, Paul G. 2004. Body partitioning and real-space blends. Cognitive Linguistics 15(2). 223–238. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Earis, Helen. 2008. Point of view in narrative discourse: A comparison of British Sign Language and spoken English. London: University College London dissertation.Google Scholar
Earis, Helen & Kearsy Cormier. 2013. Point of view in British Sign Language and spoken English narrative discourse: the example of ‘The Tortoise and the Hare’. Language and Cognition 5(4). 313–343. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Emmorey, Karen & Judy Reilly. 1998. The development of quotation and reported action: Conveying perspective in ASL. In Eve Clark (ed.), Proceedings of the twenty-ninth Annual Child Language Research Forum, 81–90. Stanford, CA: CSLI Press.Google Scholar
Engberg-Pedersen, Elisabeth. 1993. Space in Danish Sign Language. Hamburg: Signum Press.Google Scholar
. 1995. Point of view expressed through shifters. In Karen Emmorey & Judy Reilly (eds.), Language, gesture, and space, 133–154. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Goswell, Della. 2011. Being there: Role shift in English to Auslan interpreting. In Lorraine Leeson, Myriam Vermeerbergen & Svenja Wurm (eds.), Signed language interpreting: Preparation, practice and performance, 61–86. St. Jerome.Google Scholar
Hansen, Martje & Jens Heßmann. 2007. Matching propositional content and formal markers: Sentence boundaries in a DGS text. Sign Language & Linguistics 10(2). 145–175. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Herrmann, Annika & Markus Steinbach. 2007. When ‘I’ is not I – Quotation in sign languages. Linguistische Berichte 151. 153–179.Google Scholar
. 2012. Quotation in sign languages. A visible context shift. In Ingrid van Alphen & Isabelle Buchstaller (eds.), Quotatives: Cross-linguistic and cross-disciplinary perspectives, 203–230. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hosemann, Jana. 2011. Eye gaze and verb agreement in German Sign Language: A first glance. Sign Language & Linguistics 141. 76–93. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Janzen, Terry. 2004. Space rotation, perspective shift, and verb morphology in ASL. Cognitive Linguistics 15(2). 149–174. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Johnston, Trevor, Jane van Roekel & Adam Schembri. 2015. On the conventionalization of mouth actions in Australian Sign Language. Language and Speech. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Johnston, Trevor, Myriam Vermeerbergen, Adam Schembri & Lorraine Leeson. 2007. ‘Real data are messy’: Considering cross-linguistic analysis of constituent ordering in Auslan, VGT, and ISL. In Pamela M. Perniss, Roland Pfau & Markus Steinbach (eds.), Visible variation: Comparative studies on sign language structure, 163–206. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kegl, Judy. 1995. The manifestation and grammatical analysis of clitics in American Sign Language. Chicago Linguistic Society 31(2). 140–167.Google Scholar
Kooij, Els van der, Wim Emmerik & Onno Crasborn. 2004. Prosodic features of focus in NGT. Paper presented at Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research 8, Barcelona, Spain.
Lee, Robert G., Carol Neidle, Dawn MacLaughlin, Ben Bahan & Judy Kegl. 1997. Role shift in ASL: A syntactic look at direct speech. In Carol Neidle, Dawn MacLaughlin & Robert G. Lee (eds.), Syntactic structure and discourse function: An examination of two constructions in American Sign Language, 24–45. Boston, MA: American Sign Language Linguistic Research Project, Boston University.Google Scholar
Lentz, Ella Mae. 1986. Teaching role shifting. In Carol A. Padden (ed.), Proceedings of the fourth national symposium on sign language research and teaching, 58–69. Silver Spring, MD: NAD.Google Scholar
Liddell, Scott K. 2003. Grammar, gesture and meaning in American Sign Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liddell, Scott K. & Melanie Metzger. 1998. Gesture in sign language discourse. Journal of Pragmatics 301. 657–697. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lillo-Martin, Diane. 1995. The point of view predicate in American Sign Language. In Karen Emmorey & Judy Reilly (eds.), Language, gesture, and space, 155–170. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
. 2012. Utterance reports and constructed action. In Roland Pfau, Markus Steinbach & Bencie Woll (eds.), Sign language – An international handbook (Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Science), 365–387. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Loew, Ruth C. 1984. Roles and reference in American Sign Language: A developmental perspective. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota dissertation.Google Scholar
McKee, Rachel & David McKee. 1992. What’s so hard about learning ASL? Sign Language Studies 21(75). 129–158. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McKee, Rachel, Adam Schembri, David McKee & Trevor Johnston. 2011. Variable ‘subject’ presence in Australian Sign Language and New Zealand Sign Language. Language Variation and Change 23(3). 375–398. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McNeill, David. 1992. Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Metzger, Melanie. 1995. Constructed dialogue and constructed action in American Sign Language. In Ceil Lucas (ed.), Sociolinguistics in Deaf communities, 255–271. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Morgan, Gary. 2002. Children’s encoding of simultaneity in British Sign Language narratives. Sign Language & Linguistics 5(2). 131–165. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Morgan, Gary & Bencie Woll. 2003. The development of reference switching encoded through body classifiers in British Sign Language. In Karen Emmorey (ed.), Perspectives on classifier constructions in sign languages, 297–310. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google 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
Padden, Carol A. 1986. Verbs and role shifting in American Sign Language. In Carol Padden (ed.), Proceedings of the fourth national symposium on sign language research and teaching, 44–57. Silver Spring, MD: NAD.Google Scholar
. 1990. The relation between space and grammar in ASL verb morphology. In Ceil Lucas (ed.), Sign language research: Theoretical issues, 118–132. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Pfau, Roland & Josep Quer. 2010. Nonmanuals: Their grammatical and prosodic roles. In Diane Brentari (ed.), Sign languages, 381–402. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pfau, Roland & Markus Steinbach. 2006. Modality-independent and modality-specific aspects of grammaticalization in sign languages (Linguistics in Potsdam 24). Potsdam: Universitäts-Verlag (available at [URL]).Google Scholar
Poulin, Christine. 1994. Null arguments and referential shift in American Sign Language. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 231. 267–281.Google Scholar
Poulin, Christine & Christopher Miller. 1995. On narrative discourse and point of view in Quebec Sign Language. In Karen Emmorey & Judy Reilly (eds.), Language, gesture, and space, 117–131. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Pyers, Jennie E. & Ann Senghas. 2007. Reported action in Nicaraguan and American Sign Languages: Emerging versus established systems. In Pamela M. Perniss, Roland Pfau & Markus Steinbach (eds.), Visible variation: Comparative studies on sign language structure, 279–302. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Quer, Josep. 2005. Context shift and indexical variables in sign languages. In Efthymia Georgala & Jonathan Howell (eds.), Proceedings from Semantics and Linguistic Theory 151, 152–168. Ithaca, NY: CLC.Google Scholar
. 2011. Reporting and quoting in signed discourse. In Elke Brendel, Jörg Meibauer & Markus Steinbach (eds.), Understanding quotation, 277–302. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quinto-Pozos, David. 2005. Factors that influence the acquisition of ASL for interpreting students. In Marc Marschark, Rico Peterson & Elizabeth Winston (eds.), Sign language interpreting and interpreter education: Directions for research and practice, 159–187. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. Can constructed action be considered obligatory? Lingua 1171. 1285–1314. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quinto-Pozos, David, Kearsy Cormier & Claire Ramsey. 2009. Constructed action of highly animate referents: Evidence from American, British and Mexican Sign Languages. Paper presented at 35th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (Special Session on Non-Speech Modalities), Berkeley, CA.
Quinto-Pozos, David & Sarika Mehta. 2010. Register variation in mimetic gestural complements to signed language. Journal of Pragmatics 421. 557–584. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quinto-Pozos, David, Jenny Singleton, Peter Hauser, Susan Levine, Carrie Garberoglio & Lynn Y-S. Hou. 2013. Atypical signed language development: A case study of challenges with visual-spatial processing. Cognitive Neuropsychology 301. 332–359. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reilly, Judy. 2000. Bringing affective expression into the service of language: Acquiring perspective marking in narratives. In Karen Emmorey & Harlan Lane (eds.), The signs of language revisited: An anthology to honor Ursula Bellugi and Edward Klima, 415–433. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Sandler, Wendy & Diane Lillo-Martin. 2006. Sign language and linguistic universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schembri, Adam. 2003. Rethinking “classifiers” in signed languages. In Karen Emmorey (ed.), Perspectives on classifier constructions in sign languages, 3–34. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Schick, Brenda S. 1987. The acquisition of classifier predicates in American Sign Language. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University dissertation.Google Scholar
Schlenker, Phillipe. In press. Super monsters 1: Attitude and action role shift in sign language. [URL]. Semantics and Pragmatics.
Slobin, Dan, Nini Hoiting, Marlon Kuntze, Reyna Lindert, Amy Weinberg, Jennie Pyers, Michelle Anthony, Yael Biederman & Helen Thurmann. 2003. A cognitive/functional perspective on the acquisition of “classifiers”. In Karen Emmorey (ed.), Perspectives on classifier constructions in sign languages, 271–296. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Supalla, Ted. 1982. Structure and acquisition of verbs of motion and location in American Sign Language. San Diego, CA: University of California at San Diego dissertation.Google Scholar
. 2003. Revisiting visual analogy in ASL classifier predicates. In Karen Emmorey (ed.), Perspectives on classifier constructions in sign languages, 249–257. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Tannen, Deborah. 1986. That’s not what I meant!: How conversational style makes or breaks your relations with others. New York: William Morrow.Google Scholar
. 1989a. Interpreting interruption in conversation. In Bradley Music, Randolph Graczyk & Caroline Wiltshire (eds.), CLS 25: Papers from the 25th Annual Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society; Part Two: Parasession on language in context , 266–287. Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistic Society.
. 1989b. Talking voices: Repetition, dialogue, and imagery in conversational discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Thompson, Robin. 2006. Eye gaze in American Sign Language: Linguistic functions for verbs and pronouns. San Diego, CA: University of California at San Diego dissertation.Google Scholar
Thompson, Robin, Karen Emmorey & Robert Kluender. 2006. The relationship between eye gaze and verb agreement in American Sign Language: An eye-tracking study. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 24(2). 571–604. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. Learning to look: The acquisition of eye gaze agreement during the production of ASL verbs. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 12(4). 393–409. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilcox, Sherman. 2009. Symbol and symptom: Routes from gesture to signed language. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics 71. 89–110. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Winston, Elisabeth. 1992. Space and involvement in an American Sign Language lecture. In J. Plant-Moeller (ed.), Expanding horizons: Proceedings of the twelfth national convention of the registry of interpreters for the deaf , 93–105. Silver Spring, MD: RID Publications.
Zimmer, June. 1989. Toward a description of register variation in American Sign Language. In Ceil Lucas (ed.), The sociolinguistics of the deaf community, 429–442. San Diego: Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zwitserlood, Inge. 2003. Classifying hand configurations in Nederlandse Gebarentaal (Sign Language of the Netherlands). Utrecht: University of Utrecht dissertation.Google Scholar
Cited by (78)

Cited by 78 other publications

Devika, Methil & Babitha Justin
2024.  The Crossover: Integrating Indian Sign Language with the Mudras in an Indian Classical Dance Performance Creation . Visual Anthropology 37:2 ► pp. 146 ff. DOI logo
Gür, Cansu
2024. Investigating the effects of late sign language acquisition on referent introduction: a follow-up study. Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 60:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Hernández, Doris, Anna Puupponen, Jarkko Keränen, Gerardo Ortega & Tommi Jantunen
2024. Between bodily action and conventionalized structure: The neural mechanisms of constructed action in sign language comprehension. Brain and Language 252 ► pp. 105413 ff. DOI logo
Horton, Laura & James Waller
2024. The Pragmatics of Gaze Patterns in a Local Family Sign Language from Guatemala. Languages 9:6 ► pp. 223 ff. DOI logo
Kendon, Adam
2024. Contributions to the Study of Visible Action as Utterance: A Fifty-Year Retrospective. In The Cambridge Handbook of Gesture Studies, ► pp. 133 ff. DOI logo
Puupponen, Anna, Gabrielle Hodge, Benjamin Anible, Juhana Salonen, Tuija Wainio, Jarkko Keränen, Doris Hernández & Tommi Jantunen
2024. Opening up Corpus FinSL: enriching corpus analysis with linguistic ethnography in a study of constructed action. Linguistics 0:0 DOI logo
Stamp, Rose, David Cohn, Hagit Hel-Or & Wendy Sandler
2024. Kinect-ing the Dots: Using Motion-Capture Technology to Distinguish Sign Language Linguistic From Gestural Expressions. Language and Speech 67:1 ► pp. 255 ff. DOI logo
Stamp, Rose, Svetlana Dachkovsky, Hagit Hel-Or, David Cohn & Wendy Sandler
2024. A kinematic study of phonetic reduction in a young sign language. Journal of Phonetics 104 ► pp. 101311 ff. DOI logo
Aristodemo, Valentina, Beatrice Giustolisi, Giorgia Zorzi, Doriane Gras, Charlotte Hauser, Rita Sala, Jordina Sánchez Amat, Caterina Donati & Carlo Cecchetto
2023. On the nature of role shift. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 41:2 ► pp. 459 ff. DOI logo
Ferrara, Lindsay, Benjamin Anible, Gabrielle Hodge, Tommi Jantunen, Lorraine Leeson, Johanna Mesch & Anna-Lena Nilsson
2023. A cross-linguistic comparison of reference across five signed languages. Linguistic Typology 27:3 ► pp. 591 ff. DOI logo
German, Austin
2023. Abrupt grammatical reorganization of an emergent sign language. Diachronica DOI logo
German, Austin
2024. Metalinguistic Discourse in an Emerging Sign Language. Languages 9:7 ► pp. 240 ff. DOI logo
Keleş, Onur, Furkan Atmaca & Kadir Gökgöz
2023. Reference tracking strategies of deaf adult signers in Turkish Sign Language. Journal of Pragmatics 213 ► pp. 12 ff. DOI logo
Keränen, Jarkko
2023. Cross-modal iconicity and indexicality in the production of lexical sensory and emotional signs in Finnish Sign Language. Cognitive Linguistics 34:3-4 ► pp. 333 ff. DOI logo
Napoli, Donna Jo & Rachel Sutton-Spence
2023. The nature of torso articulation in human expression: signing and dancing. Journal of Cultural Cognitive Science 7:3 ► pp. 269 ff. DOI logo
Napoli, Donna Jo & Rachel Sutton-Spence
2024. Torso articulation in sign languages. Sign Language & Linguistics 27:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Proctor, Heidi & Kearsy Cormier
2023. Sociolinguistic Variation in Mouthings in British Sign Language: A Corpus-Based Study. Language and Speech 66:2 ► pp. 412 ff. DOI logo
Sevgi, Hande & Kadir Gökgöz
2023. Classifiers, argument expression, and age of acquisition effects in Turkish Sign Language (TİD). Sign Language & Linguistics 26:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Steinbach, Markus
2023. Angry lions and scared neighbors: Complex demonstrations in sign language role shift at the sign-gesture interface. Linguistics 61:2 ► pp. 391 ff. DOI logo
Andries, Fien, Geert Brône & Myriam Vermeerbergen
2022. Stance in Flemish Sign Language. Belgian Journal of Linguistics 36 ► pp. 16 ff. DOI logo
Beukeleers, Inez & Myriam Vermeerbergen
2022. Show Me What You’ve B/Seen: A Brief History of Depiction. Frontiers in Psychology 13 DOI logo
Gür, Cansu & Beyza Sümer
2022. Learning to introduce referents in narration is resilient to the effects of late sign language exposure. Sign Language & Linguistics 25:2 ► pp. 205 ff. DOI logo
Hodge, Gabrielle & Lindsay Ferrara
2022. Iconicity as Multimodal, Polysemiotic, and Plurifunctional. Frontiers in Psychology 13 DOI logo
Hou, Lynn
2022. LOOKing for multi-word expressions in American Sign Language. Cognitive Linguistics 33:2 ► pp. 291 ff. DOI logo
Hou, Lynn
2022. A Usage-Based Proposal for Argument Structure of Directional Verbs in American Sign Language. Frontiers in Psychology 13 DOI logo
Konrad, Reiner, Gabriele Langer, Anke Müller & Sabrina Wähl
2022. Where frozen signs reclaim iconic ground. In Iconicity in Cognition and across Semiotic Systems [Iconicity in Language and Literature, 18], ► pp. 265 ff. DOI logo
Martinod, Emmanuella
2022. Role-taking in two micro-community sign languages: Phylogenetic insights. Frontiers in Communication 7 DOI logo
Parisot, Anne-Marie & Darren Saunders
2022. Character perspective shift sequences and embodiment markers in signed and spoken discourse. Languages in Contrast 22:2 ► pp. 259 ff. DOI logo
Puupponen, Anna, Laura Kanto, Tuija Wainio & Tommi Jantunen
2022. Variation in the use of constructed action according to discourse type and age in Finnish Sign Language. Language & Communication 83 ► pp. 16 ff. DOI logo
Quinto-Pozos, David, Fey Parrill & Caitie Coons
2022. The interface between grammar and bodily enactment in ASL and English. Languages in Contrast 22:2 ► pp. 195 ff. DOI logo
Sandler, Wendy
2022. Redefining Multimodality. Frontiers in Communication 6 DOI logo
Sivunen, Nina & Elina Tapio
2022. “Do you understand (me)?” negotiating mutual understanding by using gaze and environmentally coupled gestures between two deaf signing participants. Applied Linguistics Review 13:6 ► pp. 983 ff. DOI logo
Vandenitte, Sébastien
2022. Showing where you stand. Belgian Journal of Linguistics 36 ► pp. 46 ff. DOI logo
Vandenitte, Sébastien
2022. Making Referents Seen and Heard Across Signed and Spoken Languages: Documenting and Interpreting Cross-Modal Differences in the Use of Enactment. Frontiers in Psychology 13 DOI logo
Vandenitte, Sébastien
2023. When referents are seen and heard. In Reference [Studies in Language Companion Series, 228], ► pp. 127 ff. DOI logo
Abrusán, Márta
2021. The spectrum of perspective shift: protagonist projection versus free indirect discourse. Linguistics and Philosophy 44:4 ► pp. 839 ff. DOI logo
Beal, Jennifer S, Jessica A Scott & Kelly Spell
2021. Goodnight Gorilla: Deaf Student American Sign Language Narrative Renditions After Viewing a Model. The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 26:1 ► pp. 85 ff. DOI logo
Hsu, Hui-Chieh, Geert Brône & Kurt Feyaerts
2021. When Gesture “Takes Over”: Speech-Embedded Nonverbal Depictions in Multimodal Interaction. Frontiers in Psychology 11 DOI logo
Hsu, Hui-Chieh, Geert Brône & Kurt Feyaerts
2021.  In other gestures: Multimodal iteration in cello master classes. Linguistics Vanguard 7:s4 DOI logo
Luna, Stéphanie, Sven Joubert, Marion Blondel, Carlo Cecchetto & Jean-Pierre Gagné
2021. The Impact of Aging on Spatial Abilities in Deaf Users of a Sign Language. The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 26:2 ► pp. 230 ff. DOI logo
Morales-López, Esperanza
2021. Form-function dialectics in the analysis of irony in political discourse. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada/Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics 34:2 ► pp. 527 ff. DOI logo
Omardeen, Rehana, Kate Mesh & Markus Steinbach
2021. Initial person reference in Providence Island Sign Language. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 6:1 DOI logo
Raičević Bajić, Dragana, Myriam Vermeerbergen, Adam Schembri & Mieke Van Herreweghe
2021. Constituent order in Serbian Sign Language declarative clauses. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 6:1 DOI logo
Schönström, Krister
2021. Sign languages and second language acquisition research: An introduction. Journal of the European Second Language Association 5:1 ► pp. 30 ff. DOI logo
Stamp, Rose & Wendy Sandler
2021. The emergence of referential shift devices in three young sign languages. Lingua 257 ► pp. 103070 ff. DOI logo
Zuckerman, Charles H. P.
2021. Figure Composition. Signs and Society 9:3 ► pp. 263 ff. DOI logo
Jantunen, Tommi, Danny De Weerdt, Birgitta Burger & Anna Puupponen
2020. The more you move, the more action you construct. Gesture 19:1 ► pp. 72 ff. DOI logo
Kimmelman, Vadim, Alfarabi Imashev, Medet Mukushev, Anara Sandygulova & Matthew L. Hall
2020. Eyebrow position in grammatical and emotional expressions in Kazakh-Russian Sign Language: A quantitative study. PLOS ONE 15:6 ► pp. e0233731 ff. DOI logo
Napoli, Donna Jo & Lorraine Leeson
2020. Visuo-spatial construals that aid in understanding activity in visual-centred narrative. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 35:4 ► pp. 440 ff. DOI logo
Slonimska, Anita, Asli Özyürek & Olga Capirci
2020. The role of iconicity and simultaneity for efficient communication: The case of Italian Sign Language (LIS). Cognition 200 ► pp. 104246 ff. DOI logo
SLONIMSKA, ANITA, ASLI ÖZYÜREK & OLGA CAPIRCI
2021. Using depiction for efficient communication in LIS (Italian Sign Language). Language and Cognition 13:3 ► pp. 367 ff. DOI logo
Slonimska, Anita, Asli Özyürek & Olga Capirci
2022. Simultaneity as an Emergent Property of Efficient Communication in Language: A Comparison of Silent Gesture and Sign Language. Cognitive Science 46:5 DOI logo
Tomasuolo, Elena, Chiara Bonsignori, Pasquale Rinaldi & Virginia Volterra
2020. The representation of action in Italian Sign Language (LIS). Cognitive Linguistics 31:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Ferrara, Lindsay
2019. Coordinating signs and eye gaze in the depiction of directions and spatial scenes by fluent and L2 signers of Norwegian Sign Language. Spatial Cognition & Computation 19:3 ► pp. 220 ff. DOI logo
Hodge, Gabrielle & Kearsy Cormier
2019. Reported speech as enactment. Linguistic Typology 23:1 ► pp. 185 ff. DOI logo
Hodge, Gabrielle, Lindsay N. Ferrara & Benjamin D. Anible
2019. The semiotic diversity of doing reference in a deaf signed language. Journal of Pragmatics 143 ► pp. 33 ff. DOI logo
Hübl, Annika, Emar Maier & Markus Steinbach
2019. To shift or not to shift. Sign Language & Linguistics 22:2 ► pp. 171 ff. DOI logo
Johnston, Trevor Alexander
2019. Clause constituents, arguments and the question of grammatical relations in Auslan (Australian Sign Language). Studies in Language 43:4 ► pp. 941 ff. DOI logo
Nordlund, Sanna
2019. Agent defocusing in two-participant clauses in Finnish Sign Language. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 4:1 DOI logo
Puupponen, Anna
2019. Towards understanding nonmanuality: A semiotic treatment of signers’ head movements. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 4:1 DOI logo
Quer, Josep & Markus Steinbach
2019. Handling Sign Language Data: The Impact of Modality. Frontiers in Psychology 10 DOI logo
Ferrara, Lindsay & Gabrielle Hodge
2018. Language as Description, Indication, and Depiction. Frontiers in Psychology 9 DOI logo
Garcia, Brigitte, Marie-Anne Sallandre & Marie-Thérèse L’Huillier
2018. Impersonal human reference in French Sign Language (LSF). Sign Language & Linguistics 21:2 ► pp. 307 ff. DOI logo
Garcia, Brigitte, Marie-Anne Sallandre, Marie-Thérèse L’Huillier & Hatice Aksen
2018. La référence impersonnelle humaine en langue des signes française. TIPA. Travaux interdisciplinaires sur la parole et le langage :34 DOI logo
Herrmann, Annika & Nina-Kristin Pendzich
2018. Between narrator and protagonist in fables of German Sign Language. In Linguistic Foundations of Narration in Spoken and Sign Languages [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 247], ► pp. 275 ff. DOI logo
Lu, Jenny C. & Susan Goldin-Meadow
2018. Creating Images With the Stroke of a Hand: Depiction of Size and Shape in Sign Language. Frontiers in Psychology 9 DOI logo
Rinaldi, Pasquale, Maria Cristina Caselli, Tommaso Lucioli, Luca Lamano & Virginia Volterra
2018. Sign Language Skills Assessed Through a Sentence Reproduction Task. The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 23:4 ► pp. 408 ff. DOI logo
Sallandre, Marie-Anne, Camille Schoder & Maya Hickmann
2018. Chapter 17. Motion expression in children’s acquisition of French Sign Language. In Sources of Variation in First Language Acquisition [Trends in Language Acquisition Research, 22], ► pp. 365 ff. DOI logo
Schembri, Adam, Kearsy Cormier & Jordan Fenlon
2018. Indicating verbs as typologically unique constructions: Reconsidering verb ‘agreement’ in sign languages. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 3:1 DOI logo
Ferrara, Lindsay & Rolf Piene Halvorsen
2017. Depicting and describing meanings with iconic signs in Norwegian Sign Language. Gesture 16:3 ► pp. 371 ff. DOI logo
Green, E. Mara
2017. Performing gesture. Gesture 16:2 ► pp. 329 ff. DOI logo
Frederiksen, Anne Therese & Rachel I. Mayberry
2016. Who's on First? Investigating the referential hierarchy in simple native ASL narratives. Lingua 180 ► pp. 49 ff. DOI logo
Frederiksen, Anne Therese & Rachel I. Mayberry
2019. Reference tracking in early stages of different modality L2 acquisition: Limited over-explicitness in novice ASL signers’ referring expressions. Second Language Research 35:2 ► pp. 253 ff. DOI logo
Stec, Kashmiri, Mike Huiskes & Gisela Redeker
2016. Multimodal quotation: Role shift practices in spoken narratives. Journal of Pragmatics 104 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Sümer, Beyza
2016. Scene-setting and referent introduction in sign and spoken languages. In The Acquisition of Turkish in Childhood [Trends in Language Acquisition Research, 20], ► pp. 193 ff. DOI logo
Davidson, Kathryn
2015. Quotation, demonstration, and iconicity. Linguistics and Philosophy 38:6 ► pp. 477 ff. DOI logo
Davidson, Kathryn
2018. What belongs in the “logical core” of a language?. Theoretical Linguistics 44:3-4 ► pp. 227 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2022. Italian Sign Language from a Cognitive and Socio-semiotic Perspective [Gesture Studies, 9], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.