Cover not available
Article published In:
Sign Language & Linguistics
Vol. 22:1 (2019) ► pp.44–82

General use coordination in Japanese and Japanese Sign Language

| Showa Women’s University
Davidson (2013) shows that in American Sign Language (ASL), conjunction and disjunction can be expressed by the same general use coordinator (cf. mary drink tea coord coffee ‘Mary drank tea and coffee; Mary drank tea or coffee.’). To derive these two meanings, she proposes an alternative semantic analysis whereby the two interpretations arise through universal or existential quantification over a set of alternatives licensed by (non-)linguistic cues, such as contexts and prosodic or lexical material. This paper provides supportive evidence for Davidson’s analysis from two other languages, Japanese and Japanese Sign Language. These languages are shown to employ general use coordination similar to that in ASL, but the general use coordinators in the three languages differ in one important respect: the locality of lexical elements that induce a disjunctive meaning. It is suggested that this cross-linguistic variation can be attributed to language-specific properties that concern the Q-particle discussed in Uegaki (2014, 2018).
Keywords: coordination, conjunction, disjunction, Q-particle, American Sign Language, Japanese, Japanese Sign Language
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2. Davidson (2013)
  • 3.General use coordination in Japanese
  • 4.General use coordination in Japanese Sign Language
  • 5.Cross-linguistic differences in general use coordination
  • 6.How to accommodate the cross-linguistic variation
    • 6.1Disjunction in Japanese
    • 6.2Disjunction in JSL
  • 7.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
Published online: 9 October 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/sll.18003.asa
References (41)
References
Asada, Yuko. 2014. On the nature of the repetitive coordinator -to in Japanese. Gengo Kenkyu 1451. 97–109.Google Scholar
Alonso-Ovalle, Luis. 2006. Disjunction in alternative semantics. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Beck, Sigrid & Shin-Sook Kim. 2006. Intervention effects in alternative questions. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 91. 165–208. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bowler, Margit. 2014. Conjunction and disjunction in a language without ‘and’. In Todd Snider, Sarah D’Antonio & Mia Weigand (eds.), Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) 24, 137–155. Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications.Google Scholar
Cable, Seth. 2010. The grammar of Q: Q-particles, wh-movement, and pied-piping. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crain, Stephen. 2008. The interpretation of disjunction in Universal Grammar. Language and Speech 51(1–2). 151–169. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davidson, Kate. 2013. ‘And’ or ‘or’: General use coordination in ASL. Semantics & Pragmatics 6(4). 1–44.Google Scholar
den Dikken, Marcel. 2006. Either-float and the syntax of co-or-dination. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 241. 689–749. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fischer, Susan & Qunhu Gong. 2011. Variation in East Asian sign language structures. In Diane Brentari (ed.), Sign languages, 499–518. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fukui, Naoki. 1986. A theory of category projection and its applications. Cambridge, MA: MIT PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Goro, Takuya & Sachie Akiba. 2004. The acquisition of disjunction and positive polarity in Japanese. In Gina Garding & Mimu Tsujimura (eds.), Proceedings of the 23rd West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL), 251–264. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Hagstrom, Paul. 1998. Decomposing questions. Cambridge, MA: MIT PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Hamblin, C. L. 1973. Questions in Montague English. Foundations of Language 10(1). 41–53.Google Scholar
Han, Chung-Hye & Maribel Romero. 2004. The syntax of whether/Q… or questions: Ellipsis combined with movement. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 221. 527–564. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hiraiwa, Ken & Shinichiro Ishihara. 2012. Syntactic metamorphosis: Clefts, sluicing, and in-situ focus in Japanese. Syntax 15(2). 142–180. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoji, Hajime. 1990. Theories of anaphora and aspects of Japanese syntax. Unpublished manuscript, University of Southern California.Google Scholar
Ichida, Yasuhiro. 1998. Nihon shuwa no bunpoo [The grammar of Japanese Sign Language]. Gekkan Gengo 27(4). 44–51. Tokyo: Taishukan Shoten.Google Scholar
Kimura, Harumi. 2007. Nihon shuwa to roo bunka: Roosha wa stranger [Japanese Sign Language and Deaf culture: Deaf is a stranger]. Tokyo: Seikatsushoin.Google Scholar
Kishimoto, Hideki. 1992. LF pied piping: Evidence from Sinhala. Gengo Kenkyu 1021. 46–87.Google Scholar
Kotani, Katsunori. 2009. Nihon shuwa-ni okeru tooi-koozoo [Coordinate structures in Japanese Sign Language]. Paper presented at the 35th Annual Meeting of Japanese Association for Sign Language Studies. 33–36. The University of Tokyo, Tokyo.
Kuroda, Sige-Yuki. 1965. Generative grammatical studies in the Japanese language. Cambridge, MA: MIT PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
. 1988. Whether we agree or not: A comparative syntax of English and Japanese. Lingvisticae Investigationes 121. 1–47. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liddell, Scott. 2003. Grammar, gesture, and meaning in American Sign Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mitrovič, Moreno & Uli Sauerland. 2014. Decomposing coordination. In Jyoti Iyer & Leland Kusmer (eds.), Proceedings of the 44th North East Linguistic Society (NELS), 39–52. Amherst, MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
Morgan, Michael W. 2006. Interrogatives and negatives in Japanese Sign Language. In Ulrike Zeshan (ed.), Interrogative and negative constructions in sign languages, 91–127. Nijmegen: Ishara Press.Google Scholar
Nicolae, Andreea Cristina. 2013. Any questions?: Polarity as a window into the structure of questions. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Ohori, Toshio. 2004. Coordination in mentalese. In Martin Haspelmath (ed.), Coordinating constructions, 41–66. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oka, Norie & Hitomi Akahori (eds.). 2011. Bunpoo ga kisokara wakaru nihon shuwa no sikumi [The structure of Japanese Sign Language: Understanding the grammar from the basics]. Tokyo: Taishukan Shoten.Google Scholar
Petronio, Karen & Diane Lillo-Martin. 1997. Wh-movement and the position of Spec CP: Evidence from American Sign Language. Language 731. 18–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Podlesny, Olivia. 2015. Investigating disjunction in American Sign Language: The importance of nonmanual signals and the influence of English. Carleton, Canada: Carleton University MA thesis.Google Scholar
Roelofsen, Floris & Sam van Gool. 2010. Disjunctive questions, intonation, and highlighting. In Maria Aloni, Harald Bastiaanse, Tikitu de Jager & Katrin Schulz (eds.), Selected Papers from the 17th Amsterdam Colloquium, 365–374. ILLC/Department of Philosophy, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Singh, Raj, Ken Wexler, Andrea Astle, Deepthi Kamawar & Danny Fox. 2013. Children interpret disjunction as conjunction: Consequences for the theory of scalar implicature. Unpublished manuscript, Carleton University.Google Scholar
. 2016. Children interpret disjunction as conjunction: Consequences for theories of implicature and child development. Natural Language Semantics 24(4). 305–352. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Slade, Benjamin. 2011. Formal and philological inquiries into the nature of interrogatives, indefinites, disjunction, and focus in Sinhala and other languages. Urbana-Champaign, IL: University of Illinois PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Smith, Ryan Walter & Ryoichiroo Kobayashi. 2017. Focusing on coordination: The case of Japanese -toka and -tari . In Michael Yoshitaka Erlewine (ed.), Proceedings of GLOW in Asia XI–Volume II (MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 85), 205–215. Cambridge, MA: MITWPL.Google Scholar
Szabolcsi, Anna. 2002. Hungarian disjunctions and positive polarity. In Istvan Kenesei & Peter Siptar (eds.), Approaches to Hungarian 81, 217–241. The University of Szeged.Google Scholar
. 2004. Positive polarity – negative polarity. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 221. 409–452. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Uchibori, Asako & Kazumi Matsuoka. 2013. Some observations on wh-clauses in Japanese Sign Language. Journal of Japanese Linguistics 291. 17–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. Split movement of wh-elements in Japanese Sign Language: A preliminary study. Lingua 1831. 107–125. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Uegaki, Wataru. 2014. Cross-linguistic variation in the derivation of alternative questions: Japanese and beyond. In Luka Crnič & Uli Sauerland (eds.), The art and craft of semantics: A festschrift for Irene Heim, 251–274. Cambridge, MA: MIT Working Papers in Linguistics.Google Scholar
. 2018. A unified semantics for the Japanese Q-particle “ka” in indefinites, questions and disjunctions. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 3(1). 1–45. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Rodrigues, Angélica & Roland Pfau
2023. Language Prejudice and Language Structure: On Missing and Emerging Conjunctions in Libras and Other Sign Languages. In Understanding Linguistic Prejudice, ► pp. 157 ff. DOI logo
Hartmann, Katharina, Roland Pfau & Iris Legeland
2021. Asymmetry and Contrast: Coordination in Sign Language of the Netherlands. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 35:1 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.