Article published In:
Sign Language & Linguistics: Online-First ArticlesThe interaction of syntax, non-manuals, and prosodic cues as potential topic markers in Austrian Sign Language
Topic is often marked only by prosody across languages. In sign languages, prosody is expressed by features
similar to those in speech: i.e., sign duration, velocity and amplitude of movement (cf. slope and range of pitch). Topicalized
signs usually occur sentence-initially, are followed by a pause, and may show longer duration than nontopics. We used pausing and
duration characteristics to resolve a puzzle concerning the status of OSV sentences in Austrian Sign Language (ÖGS): are they a
nonmanually unmarked variant of non-manually marked topic sentences (O,SV), or are they a within-clause variant of the basic SOV
order serving an as-yet-unknown discourse function? We investigated the temporal parameters of prosodic cues of 160 sentences
produced by a fluent ÖGS signer: 40 in each of four conditions — SOV, OSV, S,OV, and O,SV. Overt topic marking effects on signing
dynamics consisted of (1) lengthening of the sentence-initial topic phrases, causing a delay of the onset of the argument
following the topic-marked item, and (2) a shortened duration of the noun phrase following the topic-marked item. Critically, the
initial argument of OSV sentences did not show these prosodic cues, indicating that the initial argument O is not treated as being
the same kind of topic as in the non-manually marked O,SV sentences. In accordance with the previous literature on pausing and
lack thereof, we suggest that OSV might be akin to spoken German scrambling (within-clause movement), although the function
performed remains to be investigated. The findings characterize parameters of temporal structure in the physical markers of topic
in ÖGS and point to cross-linguistic variability in prosodic marking for topicalized structures.
Keywords: sign language, Austrian Sign Language, prosody, topic marking, language modality, layering
Article outline
- 1.Introduction: The relationship between prosody and information structure
- 1.1What is meant by ‘word order’ of a language?
- 1.1.1Issues in interpreting word order sequences
- 1.1.2Measurable differences in sign language production related to word order
- 1.1.3Non-manual markings and their role in word order
- 1.1.4Word order and ÖGS
- 1.2Structuring information: The changing concept of ‘topic’
- 1.2.1How are these features marked?
- 1.2.2Büring’s notion of S(entence)-topic
- 1.2.3Topic function and ÖGS
- 1.3Word order and topic marking in sign languages
- 1.3.1Prosody in sign languages
- 1.3.2Topic marking in sign languages
- 1.3.3Goals of the present study
- 1.1What is meant by ‘word order’ of a language?
- 2.Part 1 — Rating study: Perception of sentences with and without overt topic marking
- 2.1Part 1 — Method
- 2.1.1Materials
- 2.1.2Participants
- 2.1.3Procedure
- 2.1.4Analysis
- 2.2Part 1 — Results
- 2.1Part 1 — Method
- 3.Part 2 — Linguistic analysis: production of sentences with and without overt marking
- 3.1Part 2 — Method
- 3.1.1Materials
- 3.1.2Analysis
- 3.2Part 2 — Results
- 3.2.1Unmarked SOV and OSV
- 3.2.2Marked S,OV and O,SV
- 3.2.3Further exploration for dynamic (timing) differences: comparison of unmarked and marked stimuli
- 3.1Part 2 — Method
- 4.Discussion
- 4.1What is marked in ÖGS?
- 4.2Differences in overt topic marking across sign languages
- 4.3Holds indicating intonational breaks in signing vs. speaking
- 4.4Timing of prosodic cues
- 4.4.1Lengthening and shortening observed in overtly marked topic orders
- 4.4.2Complex timing of prosodic cues during prosodic break in signing
- 5.Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
-
References
Published online: 18 November 2024
https://doi.org/10.1075/sll.23003.kre
https://doi.org/10.1075/sll.23003.kre
References (150)
Aarons, Debra. 1994. Aspects
of syntax of American Sign Language. Boston: Boston University PhD dissertation.
. 1996. Topics
and topicalization in American Sign Language. Stellenbosch Papers in
Linguistics 30(1). 65–106.
Aboh, Enoch O. 2007a. Focused versus non-focused
wh-phrases. In Katharina Hartmann & Malte Zimmermann (eds.), Focus
strategies in African languages: The interaction of focus and grammar in Niger-Congo and
Afro-Asiatic, 287–314. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
2007b. Leftward focus versus rightward
focus: The Kwa-Bantu conspiracy. SOAS Working Papers in
Linguistics 151. 81–104.
2010. Information structure begins
with the numeration. Iberia: An International Journal of Theoretical
Linguistics 21. 12–42.
2016. Information structure: A
cartographic perspective. In Caroline Féry & Shinichiro Ishihara (eds.), The
Oxford handbook of information
structure, 147–164. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Aldridge, Edith. 2018. C-T
inheritance and the left periphery in Old Japanese. Glossa: a Journal of General
Linguistics 3(1). 26.
Baayen, R. Harald, Douglas J. Davidson & Douglas M. Bates. 2008. Mixed-effects
modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and
Language 59(4). 390–412.
Bade, Nadine & Konstantin Sachs. 2019. EXH
passes on alternatives: A comment on Fox and Spector (2018). Natural Language
Semantics 271. 19–45.
Baker-Shenk, Charlotte L. 1983. A microanalysis of the nonmanual
components of questions in American Sign
Language. Berkeley: University of California PhD dissertation.
Baker, Charlotte & Dennis Cokely. 1980. American
Sign Language: a teacher’s resource text on grammar and culture. Silver Spring, MD: TJ Publishers.
Bates, Douglas, Martin Mächler, Benjamin M. Bolker & Steven C. Walker. 2015. Fitting
linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical
Software 671. 1–48.
Beckman, Mary E. & Janet B. Pierrehumbert. 1986. Intonational
structure in Japanese and English. Phonology
Yearbook 31. 255–309.
Bianchi, Valentina, Giuliano Bocci & Silvio Cruschina. 2016. Focus
fronting, unexpectedness, and evaluative implicatures. Semantics &
Pragmatics 9(3). 1–54.
Bogliotti, Caroline & Frederic Isel. 2021. Manual
and spoken cues in French Sign Language’s lexical access: Evidence from mouthing in a sign-picture priming
paradigm. Frontiers in Psychology 121.
Bolinger, Dwight. 1985. Intonation
and its parts: melody in spoken English. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Boyes Braem, Penny. 1999. Rhythmic
temporal patterns in the signing of deaf early and later learners of Swiss German Sign
Language. Language &
Speech 42(2–3). 177–208.
Braun, Bettina. 2006. Phonetics
and phonology of thematic contrast in German. Language and
Speech 49(4). 451–493.
Brentari, Diane & Laurinda Crossley. 2002. Prosody
on the hands and face: Evidence from American Sign Language. Sign Language &
Linguistics 5(2). 105–130.
Brentari, Diane, Carolina González, Amanda Seidl & Ronnie B. Wilbur. 2011. Sensitivity
to visual prosodic cues in signers and nonsigners. Language &
Speech 54(1). 49–72.
Brozdowski, Chris & Emmorey, Karen. 2023. Using
transitional information in sign and gesture perception. Acta
Psychologica 2361. 103923.
Büring, Daniel. 1997. The
meaning of topic and focus: The 59th street bridge
accent. London: Routledge.
. 2016a. (Contrastive)
Topic. In Caroline Féry & Shinichiro Ishihara (eds.), The
Oxford handbook of information
structure, 64–85. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Calderone, Chiara. 2020. Can
you retrieve it? Pragmatic, morpho-syntactic and prosodic features in sentence topic types in Italian Sign Language
(LIS). Venice: Università Ca’Foscari PhD dissertation.
Capek, Cheryl M., Dafydd Waters, Bencie Woll, Mairéad MacSweeney, Michael J. Brammer, Philip K. McGuire, Anthony S. David & Ruth Campbell. 2008. Hand
and mouth: Cortical correlates of lexical processing in British Sign Language and speechreading
English. Journal of Cognitive
Neuroscience 20(7). 1220–1234.
Churng, Sarah. 2011. Syntax
and prosodic consequences in ASL: Evidence from multiple WH-questions. Sign Language &
Linguistics 14(1). 9–48.
Coerts, Jane. 1992. Nonmanual
grammatical markers: An analysis of interrogatives, negations and topicalizations in Sign Language of the
Netherlands. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam PhD dissertation.
Constant, Noah. 2012. Topic
abstraction as the source for nested alternatives. A conservative semantics for contrastive
topic. In Nathan Arnett & Ryan Bennett (eds.), West
Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics
(WCCFL)
30
1, 120–130. Somerville: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
. 2014. Contrastive
topic: Meanings and realizations. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts PhD dissertation.
Coulter, Geoffrey R. 1993. Phrase-level prosody in ASL:
Final lengthening and phrasal contours. In Geoffrey R. Coulter (ed.), Phonetics
and phonology: Current issues in ASL
phonology, 263–272. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Crasborn, Onno, Els van der Kooij, Johan Ros & Helen de Hoop. 2009. Topic
agreement in NGT (Sign Language of the Netherlands). The Linguistic
Review 26(2–3). 355–370.
Dachkovsky, Svetlana & Wendy Sandler. 2009. Visual
intonation in the prosody of a sign language. Language &
Speech 52(2–3). 287–314.
Dachkovsky, Svetlana, Christina Healy & Wendy Sandler. 2013. Visual
intonation in two sign
languages. Phonology 30(2). 211–252.
Ebbinghaus, Horst & Jens Heβmann. 2001. Sign
language as multidimensional communication: Why manual signs, mouthings, and mouth gestures are three different
things. In Penny Boyes Braem & Rachel Sutton-Spence (eds.), The
hands are the head of the mouth. The mouth as articulator in sign
languages, 133–151. Hamburg: Signum Press.
Esposito, Anna & Maria Marinaro. 2007. What
pauses can tell us about speech and gesture partnership. In Anna Esposito, Maja Bratanić, Eric Keller & Maria Marinaro (eds.), Fundamentals
of verbal and nonverbal communication and the biometric issue, NATO Publishing Series, Sub-Series E: Human and Societal
Dynamics — Vol. 18., 45–57. The Netherlands: IOS Press.
Fenlon, Jordan, Tanya Denmark, Ruth Campbell & Bencie Woll. 2007. Seeing
sentence boundaries. Sign Language &
Linguistics 10(2). 177–200.
Fenlon, Jordan & Diane Brentari. 2021. Prosody:
Theoretical and experimental perspectives. In Josep Quer, Roland Pfau & Annika Herrmann (eds.), Routledge
handbook of theoretical and experimental sign language
research, 70–94. Oxfordshire, UK: Routledge.
Féry, Caroline. 2006. The
prosody of topicalization. On information structure, meaning and form: Generalizations across
languages. In Kerstin Schwabe & Susanne Winkler (eds.), On
information structure, meaning and
form, 69–86. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Féry, Caroline & Vieri Samek-Lodovici. 2006. Focus
projection and prosodic prominence in nested
foci. Language 821. 131–150.
Fischer, Susan A. 1975. Influences on word-order change
in American Sign Language. In Charles Li (ed.), Word
order and word order change, 1–25. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
Fox, Danny & Benjamin Spector. 2018. Economy
and embedded exhaustification. Natural Language
Semantics 261. 1–50.
Friedman, Lynn. 1976a. Phonology
of a soundless language: Phonological structure of American Sign Language. Berkeley, CA: University of California PhD dissertation.
. 1976b. The
manifestation of subject, object, and topic in American Sign
Language. In Charles Li (ed.), Subject
and topic, 127–148. New York: Academic Press.
Fry, Dennis B. 1955. Duration and intensity as
physical correlates of linguistic stress. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of
America 27(4). 765–768.
Grosjean, François. 1979. A
study of timing in a manual and a spoken language: American Sign Language and English. Journal
of Psycholinguistic
Research 8(4). 379–405.
Grosjean, François & Harlan Lane. 1977. Pauses
and syntax in American Sign
Language. Cognition 5(2). 101–117.
Grosjean, François & Maryann Collins. 1979. Breathing,
pausing and
reading. Phonetica 36(2). 98–114.
Gussenhoven, Carlos. 2004. “The
phonology of tone and intonation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hausch, Christian. 2008. Topickonstruktionen und Satzstrukturen in der ÖGS [Topic
constructions and sentence structures in ÖGS]. In Gebärdensprachlinguistik und Gebärdensprachkommunikation. Referate der VERBAL-Sektion “Gebärdensprachlinguistik und
-kommunikation” innerhalb der 34. Österreichischen Linguistiktagung an der Universität
Klagenfurt [Sign language linguistics and sign language
communication], 85–94. Klagenfurt: Veröffentlichungen des Zentrums für Gebärdensprache und Hörbehindertenkommunikation der Universität Klagenfurt.
Heim, Johannes. 2019. Commitment
and engagement: The role of intonation in deriving speech acts. Vancouver, Canada: University of British Columbia PhD dissertation.
Heim, Johannes & Martina Wiltschko. 2020. Interaction
at the prosody–syntax interface. In Gerrit Kentner & Joost Kremers (eds.), Prosody
in syntactic
coding, 189–218. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Ichida, Yasuhiro. 2010. Introduction
to Japanese Sign Language: iconicity in language. Studies in Language
Sciences 91. 3–32.
Hunger, Barbara, Katharina Schalber & Ronnie B. Wilbur. 2000. Bub
wollen lernen, wollen? Further investigations into the modals in the Styrian dialect of Austrian Sign Language with a
particular focus on repetition and pauses. Poster presented at
the Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research 7
conference, Amsterdam.
Hunger, Barbara & Katharina Schalber. 2001.
bub
fussballspielen kÖnnen — Untersuchungen zur Stellung der Modalverben in der steirischen Variante der österreichischen
Gebärdensprache. Grazer Linguistische
Studien 561. 37–45.
Janzen, Terry. 1995. Differentiating
topic from subjects in ASL. In Marie Christine Aubin (ed.), Perspectives d’avenir en traduction [Future prospects in
translation], 57–74. Winnipeg: Presses Universitaires de Saint-Boniface.
. 1997. Pragmatic
and syntactic features of topics in American Sign Language. Meta. Numéro special:
L’interprétation en langues des signes [Special issue: Interpretation in sign
languages] 42(3). 502–514.
. 1999. The
grammaticization of topics in American Sign Language. Studies in
Language 23(2). 271–306.
Johnston, Trevor & Adam Schembri. 2007. Australian
Sign Language: an introduction to sign language linguistics. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Johnston, Trevor, Jane Van Roekel & Adam Schembri. 2016. On
the conventionalization of mouth actions in Australian Sign Language. Language and
Speech 59(1). 3–42.
Katz, Jonah & Elisabeth Selkirk. 2011. Contrastive
focus vs. discourse-new: Evidence from phonetic prominence in
English. Language 87(4). 771–816.
Kegl, Judy. 1976. Relational
grammar and American Sign Language. Unpublished manuscript. Cambridge, MA: MIT [Published 2004
in Sign Language &
Linguistics 7(2). 131–170].
. 1977. ASL
syntax: Research in progress and proposed research. Unpublished
manuscript. Cambridge, MA: MIT [Published 2004
in Sign Language &
Linguistics 7(2). 173–206].
Keleş, Onur & Kadir Gökgöz. 2022. Expression
of aboutness subject topic Constructions in Turkish Sign Language (TİD) narratives. Hrvatska revija za rehabilitacijska istraživanja [The Croatian
Review of Rehabilitation Research], special issue: Sign Language, Deaf Culture, and Bilingual
Education, Vol 58. 194–205.
Kimmelman, Vadim. 2015. Topics
and topic prominence in two sign languages. Journal of
Pragmatics 871. 156–170.
Kimmelman, Vadim & Roland Pfau. 2016. Information
structure in sign languages. In Caroline Féry & Shinichiro Ishihara (eds.), The
Oxford handbook of information
structure, 814–833. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kishimoto, Hideki. 2018. Sinhala
focus concord constructions from a discourse-syntactic perspective. Glossa: a Journal of
General
Linguistics 3(1). 9.
Kratzer, Angelika & Elisabeth Selkirk. 2020. Deconstructing
information structure. Glossa: a Journal of General
Linguistics 5(1). 113.
Krebs, Julia. 2017. The
syntax and the processing of argument relations in Austrian Sign Language
(ÖGS). Salzburg: University of Salzburg PhD dissertation.
Krebs, Julia & Lydia Fenkart. 2024. Einführung in die Grammatik der Österreichischen Gebärdensprache. Das Handbuch [Introduction to the grammar of Austrian Sign Language. The
handbook]. Guntramsdorf: Verlag Fenkart.
Krebs, Julia, Evie Malaia, Ronnie B. Wilbur & Dietmar Roehm. 2018. Subject
preference emerges as cross-modal strategy for linguistic processing. Brain
Research 16911. 105–117.
. 2020. Interaction
between topic marking and subject preference strategy in sign language processing. Language,
Cognition and
Neuroscience 351. 466–484.
Krebs, Julia & Ronnie B. Wilbur. in prep.
a. Word order in Austrian Sign Language (ÖGS).
. in prep.
b. Word order in the context of extensional and intensional events in Austrian Sign Language
(ÖGS).
Krebs, Julia, Ronnie B. Wilbur, Phillip M. Alday & Dietmar Roehm. 2019. The
impact of transitional movements and non-manual markings on the disambiguation of locally ambiguous argument structures in
Austrian Sign Language (ÖGS). Language and
Speech 62(4). 652–680.
Krebs, Julia, Ronnie B. Wilbur & Dietmar Roehm. 2017. Two
agreement markers in Austrian Sign Language (ÖGS). Sign Language &
Linguistics 20(1). 27–54.
. 2020. Distributional
properties of an agreement marker in Austrian Sign Language
(ÖGS). Linguistics 58(4). 1151–1194.
Lackner, Andrea. 2013. Linguistic
functions of head and body movements in Austrian Sign Language (ÖGS). A corpus-based
analysis. Graz: University of Graz PhD dissertation.
Ladd, Robert D. 1988. Declination ‘Reset’ and the
hierarchical organization of utterances. Journal of the Acoustic Society of
America 84(2). 530–544.
Ladefoged, Peter. 1982. Syllables
and suprasegmental features. In A course in
phonetics, 243–257. Oxford: Oxford Univesity Press.
Lambrecht, Knud. 1994. Information
structure and sentence form: topic, focus, and the mental representations of discourse
referents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Liddell, Scott K. 1977. An investigation into the syntax of
American Sign Language. San Diego, CA: University of California PhD dissertation.
1978. Nonmanual signals and relative
clauses in American Sign Language. In Patricia Siple (ed.), Understanding
language through sign language research, 59–90. New York: Academic Press.
Liddell, Scott K. & Robert E. Johnson. 1989. American
Sign Language: The phonological base. Sign Language
Studies 64(1).195–277.
Lillo-Martin, Diane & Richard P. Meier. 2011. On
the linguistic status of ‘agreement’ in sign languages. Theoretical
linguistics 37(3–4). 95–141.
Malaia, Evie. 2014. It
still isn’t over: Event boundaries in language and perception. Language and Linguistics
Compass 8(3). 89–98.
. 2017. Current
and future methodologies for quantitative analysis of information transfer in sign language and gesture
data. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 401.
Malaia, Evie & Ronnie B. Wilbur. 2012. Kinematic
signatures of telic and atelic events in ASL predicates. Language and
Speech 55(3). 407–421.
Malaia, Evie, Ronnie B. Wilbur & Marina Milković. 2013. Kinematic
parameters of signed verbs. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing
Research 56(5). 1677–1688.
Malaia, Evie, Ronnie B. Wilbur & Christine Weber-Fox. 2013. Event
end-point primes the undergoer argument: Neurobiological bases of event structure
processing. In Boban Arsenijević, Berit Gehrke & Rafael Marín (eds.), Studies
in the composition and decomposition of event
predicates, 231–248. New York: Springer.
Malaia, Evie, Joshua D. Borneman & Ronnie B. Wilbur. 2016. Assessment
of information content in visual signal: Analysis of optical flow fractal complexity. Visual
Cognition 24(3). 246–251.
McDonald, John, Rosalee Wolfe, Ronnie B. Wilbur, Robyn Moncrief, Evie Malaia, Sayuri Fujimoto, Souad Baowidan & Jessika Stec. 2016. A
new tool to facilitate prosodic analysis of motion capture data and a data-driven technique for the improvement of avatar
motion. Proceedings of Language Resources and Evaluation Conference
(LREC). 153–59.
McIntire, Marina LaRay. 1980. Locatives in American Sign
Language. Los Angeles: University of California PhD dissertation.
Mohr, Susanne. 2012. The
visual-gestural modality and beyond: Mouthings as a language contact phenomenon in Irish Sign
Language. Sign Language &
Linguistics 15(2). 185–211.
Molnár, Valéria & Susanne Winkler. 2010. Edges
and gaps: Contrast at the
interfaces. Lingua 1201. 1329–1415.
Nespor, Marina & Wendy Sandler. 1999. Prosody
in Israeli Sign Language. Language and
Speech 42(2–3). 143–176.
Ni, Dawei. 2014. Topikkonstruktionen in der Österreichischen Gebärdensprache [Topic
constructions in Austrian Sign
Language]. Hamburg: University of Hamburg Master’s thesis.
Nicodemus, Brenda. 2010. Prosodic
markers and utterance boundaries in American Sign Language interpretation. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
Padden, Carol. 1983. Interaction
of morphology and syntax in American Sign Language. San Diego: University of California PhD dissertation.
Perlmutter, David M. 1993. Sonority and syllable structure
in American Sign Language. In Geoffrey R. Coulter (ed.), Current
issues in ASL
phonology, 227–261. London: Academic Press.
Perniss, Pamela, David Vinson & Gabriella Vigliocco. 2020. Making
sense of the hands and mouth: The role of “secondary” cues to meaning in British Sign Language and
English. Cognitive
Science 44(7). e12868.
Pfau, Roland & Josep Quer. 2010. Nonmanuals:
their grammatical and prosodic roles. In Diane Brentari (ed.), Sign
languages (Cambridge language
surveys), 381–402. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Quinto-Pozos, David & Robert Adam. 2015. Sign
languages in contact. In Adam Schembri & Ceil Lucas (eds.), Sociolinguistics
and deaf
communities, 29–60. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
R Core Team. 2018. R: A language and
environment for statistical computing. [Computer software]. Retrieved
from [URL]
Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The
fine structure of the left periphery. In Liliane Haegeman (ed.), Elements
of
grammar, 281–337. Dordrecht: Springer.
Rosenstein, Ofra. 2001. Israeli
Sign Language — a topic prominent
language. Haifa: University of Haifa Master’s thesis.
Sandler, Wendy. 1999. Prosody
in two natural language modalities. Language and
Speech 42(2–3). 127–142.
. 2012. Visual
prosody. In Roland Pfau, Markus Steinbach & Bencie Woll (eds.), Sign
language. An international handbook (HSK — Handbooks of linguistics and communication
science), 55–76. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Sandler, Wendy & Diane Lillo-Martin. 2006. Sign
language and linguistic universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schalber, Katharina. 2006a. What
is the chin doing? An analysis of interrogatives in Austrian Sign Language. Sign Language &
Linguistics 9(1/2). 133–150.
. 2006b. The
phonological visibility of event structure in Austrian Sign Language. Sign Language &
Linguistics 91. 207–231.
. 2015. Austrian
Sign Language. In Julie Bakken Jepsen, Goedele De Clerck, Sam Lutalo-Kiingi & William B. McGregor (eds.), Sign
languages of the world: A comparative
handbook, 105–128. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Schalber, Katharina & Barbara Hunger. 2001.
bub fussballspielen kÖnnen — Untersuchungen zur Stellung von Modalverben in der Steirischen Variante
der Österreichischen Gebärdensprache [
boy soccer play can — Studies
on the sentence position of modal verbs in the Styrian variant of Austrian Sign Language]. Grazer
Linguistische
Studien 561. 37–46.
. 2008. Possession
in Austrian Sign Language (ÖGS) — with existentials on the
side. In Pamela Perniss & Ulrike Zeshan (eds.), Possessive
and existential constructions in sign
languages, 151–180. Nijmegen: Ishara Press.
Skant, Andrea, Franz Dotter, Elisabeth Bergmeister, Marlene Hilzensauer, Manuela Hobel, Klaudia Krammer, Ingeborg Okorn, Christian Orasche, Reinhold Orter & Natalie Unterberger. 2002. Grammatik der Österreichischen Gebärdensprache [Grammar of
Austrian Sign
Language], Vol. 41. Klagenfurt: Veröffentlichungen des Forschungszentrums für Gebärdensprache und Hörgeschädigtenkommunikation.
Slade, Benjamin. 2018. History
of focus-concord constructions and focus-associated particles in Sinhala, with comparison to Dravidian and
Japanese. Glossa: a Journal of General
Linguistics 3(1). 2.
Sutton-Spence, Rachel & Bencie Woll. 1999. The
linguistics of British Sign
Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sze, Felix. 2011. Nonmanual
markings for topic constructions in Hong Kong Sign Language. Sign Language &
Linguistics 14(1). 115–147.
Tang, Gladys, Diane Brentari, Carolina González & Felix Sze. 2010. Cross-linguistic
variation in prosodic cues. In Diane Brentari (ed.), Sign
languages (Cambridge language
surveys), 519–542. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tyrone, Martha E., Hosung Nam, Elliot Saltzman, Gaurav Mathur & Louis Goldstein. 2010. Prosody
and movement in American Sign Language: A task-dynamics approach. Speech Prosody 2010
Conference Proceedings.
Valli, Clayton & Ceil Lucas. 2000. Linguistics
of American Sign Language. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
Van der Kooij, Els, Onno Crasborn & Wim Emmerik. 2006. Explaining
prosodic body leans in Sign Language of the Netherlands: pragmatics required. Journal of
Pragmatics 38(10). 1598–1614.
Vinson, David P., Robin L. Thompson, Robert Skinner, Neil Fox & Gabriella Vigliocco. 2010. The
hands and mouth do not always slip together in British Sign Language: Dissociating articulatory channels in the
lexicon. Psychological
Science 21(8). 1158–1167.
Weast, Traci. 2008. Questions
in American Sign Language: A quantitative analysis of raised and lowered eyebrows. Arlington, TX: University of Texas PhD dissertation.
Whitman, John. 1997. Kakarimusubi
from a comparative perspective. Japanese/Korean Linguistics
6. Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information.
Wilbur, Ronnie B. 1987. American Sign Language: linguistic and
applied dimensions. Boston: Little, Brown and Co.
2000. Phonological and prosodic
layering of non-manuals in American Sign Language. In Harlan Lane & Karen Emmorey (eds.), The
signs of language revisited: Festschrift for Ursula Bellugi and Edward
Klima, 213–241. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
2002. Phrase structure in ASL and
ÖGS. In Rolf Schulmeister & Heimo Reinitzer (eds.), Progress
in sign language research. In honor of Siegmund
Prillwitz, 235–247. Hamburg: Signum.
2005. Evidence from ASL and ÖGS for
asymmetries in UG. In Anna Maria DiScuillo (ed.), UG
and external systems: Language, brain and
computation, 193–210 Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
2009. Effects of varying rate of
signing on ASL manual signs and non-manual markers. Language &
Speech 52(2–3). 245–285.
2012. Information
structure. In Roland Pfau, Markus Steinbach & Bencie Woll (eds.), Sign
language. An international handbook (HSK — Handbooks of linguistics and communication
science), 462–489. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
2021. Non-manual markers — theoretical
and experimental perspectives. In Josep Quer, Roland Pfau & Annika Herrmann (eds.), Routledge
handbook of theoretical and experimental sign language
research, 530–565. London: Routledge
Wilbur, Ronnie B. & Evie Malaia. 2008. Contributions
of sign language research to gesture understanding: What can multimodal computational systems learn from sign language
research. International Journal of Semantic
Computing 2(1). 5–19.
. 2018. A
new technique for analyzing narrative prosodic effects in sign languages using motion capture
technology. In Annika Hübl & Markus Steinbach (eds.), Linguistic
foundations of narration in spoken and sign
languages, 15–40. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Wilbur, Ronnie B. & Aleix M. Martínez. 2002. Physical
correlates of prosodic structure in American Sign Language. Chicago Linguistics Society
(CLS) 381. 693–704.
Wilbur, Ronnie B. & Susan B. Nolen. 1986. The
duration of syllables in ASL. Language &
Speech 29(3). 263–280.
Wilbur, Ronnie B. & Cynthia G. Patschke. 1998. Body
leans and the marking of contrast in ASL. Journal of
Pragmatics 30(3). 275–303.
Wilbur, Ronnie B. & Brenda S. Schick. 1987. The
effects of linguistic stress on ASL signs. Language &
Speech 30(4). 301–323.
Wilbur, Ronnie B. & Howard N. Zelaznik. 1997. Kinematic
correlates of stress and position in ASL. Paper presented at The
Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, Chicago,
IL.