Cover not available
Article published In:
Sign Language & Linguistics
Vol. 22:2 (2019) ► pp.171–209

To shift or not to shift

Indexical attraction in role shift in German Sign Language

| University of Göttingen
| University of Groningen
| University of Göttingen

There are two main competing views about the nature of sign language role shift within formal semantics today: Quer (2005) and Schlenker (2017a,b), following now standard analyses of indexical shift in spoken languages, analyze it as a so-called ‘monstrous operator’, while Davidson (2015) and Maier (2017), following more traditional and cognitive approaches, analyze it as a form of quotation. Examples of role shift in which some indexicals are shifted and some unshifted pose a prima facie problem for both approaches. In this paper, we propose a pragmatic principle of attraction to regulate the apparent unshifting/unquoting of indexicals in quotational role shift. The analysis is embedded in a systematic empirical investigation of the predictions of the attraction hypothesis for German Sign Language (DGS). Results for the first and second person pronouns (ix 1 and ix 2) support the attraction hypothesis, while results for here are inconclusive.

Keywords: role shift, quotation, indexicals, attraction, demonstration, shift together
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Role shift
    • 2.1Role shift as a visible monster
    • 2.2Role shift as quotation/demonstration
  • 3.Shifted and unshifted indexicals
    • 3.1 shift-together, mixed indexicality, and monsters
    • 3.2Iconic indexicals and unquotation
  • 4.The pragmatics of attraction
  • 5.Evidence for attraction
    • 5.1Empirical study
      • 5.1.1Participants
      • 5.1.2Procedure
      • 5.1.3 ix 1 items
      • 5.1.4 ix 2 items
      • 5.1.5 here items
      • 5.1.6Fillers and controls
      • 5.1.7Summary
    • 5.2Results and discussion
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 10 February 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/sll.18004.hub
References
Anand, Pranav
2006 De de se. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation. [URL]
Anand, Pranav & Andrew Nevins
2004 Shifty operators in changing contexts. Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) 141. 20–37. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brendel, Elke, Jörg Meibauer & Markus Steinbach
2011 Exploring the meaning of quotation. In Elke Brendel, Jörg Meibauer & Markus Steinbach (eds.), Quotation and meaning, 1–33. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Cappelen, Herman & Ernest Lepore
1997 Varieties of quotation. Mind 1061. 429–450. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012 Quotation. In Edward N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. [URL]
Clark, Herbert & Richard Gerrig
1990 Quotations as demonstrations. Language 66(4). 764–805. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cormier, Kearsy, Sandra Smith & Martine Zwets
2013 Framing constructed action in British Sign Language narratives. Journal of Pragmatics 551. 119–39. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cormier, Kearsy, Sandra Smith & Zed Sevcikova-Sehyr
2015 Rethinking constructed action. Sign Language & Linguistics 18(2). 167–204. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davidson, Donald
1979 Quotation. Theory and Decision 11(1). 27–40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davidson, Kathryn
2015 Quotation, demonstration, and iconicity. Linguistics and Philosophy 38(6). 477–520. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deal, Amy Rose
2017 Shifty asymmetries: Universals and variation in shifty indexicality. Unpublished manuscript, UC Berkeley.Google Scholar
Eckardt, Regine
2014 The semantics of free indirect discourse. How texts allow us to mindread and eavesdrop. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Engberg-Pedersen, Elisabeth
1995 Point of view expressed through shifters. In Karen Emmorey & Judy S. Reilly (eds.), Language, gesture, and space, 133–154. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Evans, Nicholas
2012 Some problems in the typology of quotation: A canonical approach. In Dunstan Brown, Marina Chumakina & Greville G. Corbett (eds.), Canonical morphology and syntax, 66–98. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Herrmann, Annika & Nina-Kristin Pendzich
2018 Between narrator and protagonist in fables of German Sign Language. In Annika Hübl & Markus Steinbach (eds.), Linguistic foundations of narration in spoken and sign languages, 275–308. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Herrmann, Annika & Markus Steinbach
2012 Quotation in sign languages: A visible context shift. In Ingrid van Alphen & Isabelle Buchstaller (eds.), Quotatives: Cross-linguistic and cross disciplinary perspectives, 203–228. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hübl, Annika
2014 Context shift (im)possible: Indexicals in German Sign Language. Conference of the Student Organization of Linguistics of Europe (ConSOLE) 211. 171–183.Google Scholar
Kaplan, David
1989 Demonstratives. In Joseph Almog, John Perry & Howard Wettstein (eds.), Themes from Kaplan, 481–614. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Liddell, Scott & Melanie Metzger
1998 Gesture in sign language discourse. Journal of Pragmatics 30(6). 657–697. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lillo-Martin, Diane
1995 The point of view predicate in American Sign Language. In Karen Emmorey & Judy S. Reilly (eds.), Language, gesture, and space, 155–170. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
2012 Utterance reports and constructed action. In Roland Pfau, Markus Steinbach & Bencie Woll (eds.), Sign language. An international handbook, 365–387. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maier, Emar
2014 Mixed quotation: The grammar of apparently transparent opacity. Semantics & Pragmatics. 7(7). 1–67. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016 A plea against monsters. Grazer Philosophische Studien 931. 363–95. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2017 The pragmatics of attraction: Explaining unquotation in direct and free indirect discourse. In Paul Saka & Michael Johnson (eds.), The semantics and pragmatics of quotation, 259–280. Berlin: Springer. [URL]. DOI logo
2018 Quotation, demonstration, and attraction in sign language role shift. Theoretical Linguistics 441. 165–176. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meir, Irit, Carol A. Padden, Mark Aronoff & Wendy Sandler
2007 Body as subject. Journal of Linguistics 431. 531–563. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Metzger, Melanie
1995 Constructed dialogue and constructed action in ASL. In Ceil Lucas (ed.), Sociolinguistics in deaf communities, 255–271. 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
Potts, Christopher
2007 The dimensions of quotation. In Chris Barker & Pauline Jacobson (eds.), Direct compositionality, 405–431. Oxford: Oxford University Press.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. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Onea, Edgar & Alexander Syring
2012 OnExp. Courant Research Center ‘Text Structures’ (University of Göttingen). [URL]
Quer, Josep
2005 Context shift and indexical variables in sign languages. Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) 151. 152–168. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011 Reporting and quoting in signed discourse. In Elke Brendel, Jörg Meibauer & Markus Steinbach (eds.), Quotation and meaning, 277–302. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2012 Attitude ascriptions in sign languages and role shift. Proceedings of the Texas Linguistic Society (TLS) 131. 12–28. [URL]
Quer, Josep, Carlo Cecchetto, Caterina Donati, Carlo Geraci, Meltem Kelepir, Roland Pfau & Markus Steinbach
2017 The SignGram blueprint. A guide to sign language grammar writing. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schlenker, Philippe
1999 Propositional attitudes and indexicality: A cross-categorial approach. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation. [URL]
2003 A plea for monsters. Linguistics and Philosophy 26(1). 29–120. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011 Indexicality and de se reports. In Klaus von Heusinger, Claudia Maienborn & Paul Portner (eds.), Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning, 1561–1604. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.Google Scholar
2017a Super monsters I: Attitude and action role shift in sign language. Semantics and Pragmatics 10(9). 1–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2017b Super monsters II: Role shift, iconicity and quotation in sign language. Semantics and Pragmatics 10(12). 1–67. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schlenker, Philippe, Jonathan Lamberton & Mirko Santoro
2013 Iconic variables. Linguistics & Philosophy 36(2). 91–149. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stec, Kashmiri, Mike Huiskes & Gisela Redeker
2016 Multimodal quotation: Role shift practices in spoken narratives. Journal of Pragmatics 1041. 1–17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Steinbach, Markus & Edgar Onea
2016 A DRT analysis of discourse referents and anaphora resolution in sign language. Journal of Semantics 331. 409–448. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Streeck, Jürgen
2002 Grammars, words, and embodied meanings. On the uses and evolution of so and like . The Journal of Communication 521. 581–596. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tannen, Deborah
1989 Talking voices: Repetition, dialogue, and imagery in conversational discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Zucchi, Sandro
2004 Monsters in the visual mode? Unpublished manuscript, University of Milan. [URL]
Cited by

Cited by 3 other publications

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
Maier, Emar & Markus Steinbach
2022. Perspective Shift Across Modalities. Annual Review of Linguistics 8:1 ► pp. 59 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

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 14 april 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.