Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T16:26:33.090Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Establishing a sonority hierarchy in American Sign Language: the use of simultaneous structure in phonology*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 October 2008

Diane Brentari
Diane Brentari
Affiliation:
University of California, Davis
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The purpose of this paper is to help define and limit the role that temporal ordering plays in morphophonemic representation, syllable structure and phrases in American Sign Language (ASL). First, I will list the ways in which temporal ordering plays a role in morphophonemic structures. Second, I will show that temporal ordering plays a limited role in ASL phrases. Third, I will argue that neither temporal ordering nor segmentation plays a role in syllables, and the bulk of this paper will be devoted to motivating this syllable template. Stokoe (1960) and Stokoe et al. (1965) proposed that ASL is organised according to simultaneous phonemes, but since Liddell (1984) the importance of temporally ordered structure in sign structure has been emphasised by many researchers (Liddell & Johnson 1989; Sandler 1986, 1989; Perlmutter 1990, 1992; Corina 1990a, b; to name a few).

Type
Articles
Information
Phonology , Volume 10 , Issue 2 , August 1993 , pp. 281 - 306
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Archangeli, Diana & Pulleyblank, Douglas (in press). Grounded phonology. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Blevins, Juliette (1993). The nature of constraints on the non-dominant hand in ASL. In Coulter (1993). 43–62.Google Scholar
Bosch, Anna (1991). Phonotactics at the level of the phonological word. PhD dissertation, University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Brentari, Diane (1988). Backwards verbs in ASL: agreement re-opened. CLS 24:2. 16–27.Google Scholar
Brentari, Diane (1990a). Theoretical foundations of American Sign Language phonology. PhD dissertation, University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Brentari, Diane (1990b). Licensing in ASL handshape change. In Lucas (1990). 57–68.Google Scholar
Brentari, Diane (1990c). Underspecification in American Sign Language phonology. BLS 16. 46–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brentari, Diane (1992). Phonological representation in American Sign Language. Lg 68. 359–374.Google Scholar
Brentari, Diane & Goldsmith, John (1993). Secondary licensing and the non-dominant hand in ASL phonology. In Coulter (1993). 19–41.Google Scholar
Brentari, Diane, Poizner, Howard & Kegl, Judy (1993). Aphasic and Parkinsonian signers: differences in phonological disruption. Ms, University of California, Davis & Rutgers University.Google Scholar
Chinchor, N. (1978). The syllable in ASL. Paper presented at the MIT Sign Language Symposium, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Clements, G. N. (1985). The geometry of phonological features. Phonology Yearbook 2. 225–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clements, G. N. (1990). The role of sonority cycle in core syllabification. In Kingston, J. & Beckman, M. (eds.) Papers in laboratory phonology I: between the grammar and physics of speech. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 282–333.Google Scholar
Clements, G. N. & Goldsmith, J. (1984). Autosegmental studies in Bantu tone: introduction. In Clements, G. N. & Goldsmith, J. (eds.) Autosegmental studies in Bantu tone. Dordrecht: Foris. 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corina, David (1990a). Reassessing the role of sonority in syllable structure: evidence from a visual-gestural language. CLS 26:2. 33–44.Google Scholar
Corina, David (1990b). Handshape assimilations in hierarchical phonological representations. In Lucas (1990). 27–49.Google Scholar
Corina, David (1993). To branch or not to branch: underspecification in ASL handshape contours. In Coulter (1993). 63–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coulter, Geoffrey (1982). On the nature of ASL as a monosyllabic language. Paper presented at the 57th Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America,San Diego.Google Scholar
Coulter, Geoffrey (ed.) (1993). Current issues in ASL phonology. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Edmondson, William (1990). Segments in signed languages: do they exist and does it matter? In William, Edmondson & Karlson, F. (eds.) SLR '87: Papers from the 4th International Symposium on Sign Language Research. Hamburg: Signum. 66–74.Google Scholar
Fischer, Susan & Patricia, Siple (eds.) (1990). Theoretical issues on sign language research. Vol. 1. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Frishberg, Nancy (1975). Arbitrariness and iconicity: historical change in American Sign Language. Lg 51. 696–719.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, John (1989). Licensing, inalterability and harmonic phonology. CLS 25:1. 145–156.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, John (1990). Autosegmental and metrical phonology. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, John (1993). Harmonic phonology. In Goldsmith, J. (ed.) The last phonological rule. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 21–60.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, John & Larson, Gary (1990). Local modeling and syllabification. CLS 26:2. 129–141.Google Scholar
Hayes, Bruce (1993). Against movement. In Coulter (1993). 213–226.Google Scholar
Hubel, David & Wiesel, Thorston (1962). Receptive fields, binocular interaction and functional architecture in the cat's visual cortex. Journal of Physiology (London) 160. 106–154.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hubel, David & Wiesel, Thorston (1965). Receptive fields and functional architecture in two nonstriate visual areas (18 and 19) of the cat. Journal of Neurophysiology 28. 229–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klima, Edward & Bellugi, Ursula (1979). The signs of language. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Liddell, Scott (1984). THINK and BELIEVE: sequentiality in American Sign Language. Lg 60. 372–399.Google Scholar
Liddell, Scott (1990). Structures for representing handshape and local movement at the phonemic level. In Fischer & Siple (1990). 37–65.Google Scholar
Liddell, Scott & Johnson, Robert (1986). American Sign Language - compound formation processes, lexicalization, and phonological remnants. NLLT 4. 445–513.Google Scholar
Liddell, Scott & Johnson, Robert (1989). American Sign Language: the phonological base. Sign Language Studies 64. 197–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Livingstone, Margaret & Hubel, David (1987a). Connections between layer 4b of area 17 and thick cytochrome oxidase stripes of area 18 in the squirrel monkey. Journal of Neuroscience 7. 3371–3377.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Livingstone, Margaret & Hubel, David (1987b). Segregation of form, color, and stereopsis in primate area 18. Journal of Neuroscience 7. 3378–3415.Google Scholar
Livingstone, Margaret & Hubel, David (1987c). Psychophysical evidence for separate channels for the perception of form, color movement and depth. Journal of Neuroscience 7. 3416–3468.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Livingstone, Margaret & Hubel, David (1990). Segregation of form, color, movement, and depth: anatomy, physiology and perception. Science 240. 740–749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, J. Schuyler (1918). The sign language. Washington, D.C.: Gallaudet College.Google Scholar
Lucas, Ceil (ed.) (1990). Sign language research: theoretical issues. Washington, D.C.: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Meier, Richard (1993). A psycholinguistic perspective on phonological segmentation in sign and speech. In Coulter (1993). 169–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ohala, John (1990). Alternatives to the sonority hierarchy for explaining the shape of the syllable. CLS 26:2. 319–338.Google Scholar
Ohala, John (1992). The segment: primitive or derived? In Docherty, G. J. & Ladd, D. R. (eds.) Papers in laboratory phonology II: gesture, segment, prosody. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 166–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ohala, John & Kawasaki, Haruko (1984). Prosodic phonology and phonetics. Phonology Yearbook 1. 113–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Padden, Carol & Perlmutter, David (1987). American Sign Language and the architecture of phonological theory. NLLT 5. 335–375.Google Scholar
Perlmutter, David (1990). On the segmental representation of transitional and bidirectional movements in ASL phonology. In Fischer & Siple (1990). 67–80.Google Scholar
Perlmutter, David (1991). Prosodic vs segmental structure: a moraic theory of American Sign Language syllable structure. Ms, University of California, San Diego.Google Scholar
Perlmutter, David (1992). Sonority and syllable structure in American Sign Language. LI 23. 407–442.Google Scholar
Prince, Alan & Smolensky, P. (1993). Optimality theory. Ms, Rutgers University & University of Colorado, Boulder.Google Scholar
Sandler, Wendy (1986). The spreading hand autosegment of American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies 50. 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sandler, Wendy (1987). Sequentiality and simultaneity in American Sign Language phonology. PhD dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
Sandler, Wendy (1989). Phonological representation of the sign: linearity and non-linearity in American Sign Language. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaw, Patricia (1992). Nuclear vs. non-nuclear syllable templates. Ms, University of British Columbia.Google Scholar
Stack, Kelly (1988). Tiers and syllable structure in American Sign Language: evidence from phonotactics. MA thesis, UCLA.Google Scholar
Stokoe, William (1960). Sign language structure: an outline of the visual communication systems of the American deaf. Studies in Linguistics Occasional Papers 8. (2nd edn, 1978. Silver Spring, MD: Linstok Press.)Google Scholar
Stokoe, William, Casterline, D. & Croneberg, C. (1965). A dictionary of American Sign Language on linguistic principles. Washington, D.C.: Gallaudet College Press. (2nd edn, 1976. Silver Spring, MD: Linstok Press.)Google Scholar
Supalla, Ted & Newport, Elissa (1978). How many seats in a chair? The derivation of nouns and verbs in American Sign Language. In Siple, P. (ed.) Understanding language through sign language research. New York: Academic Press. 91–132.Google Scholar
Svaib, Trisha (1992). Compound nouns in American Sign Language: which way are they headed? Paper presented at the 4th International Conference on Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research,San Diego.Google Scholar
Uyechi, Linda (1993). Against wiggling and circling as movement in American Sign Language. Paper presented at the 67th Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America,Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Wilbur, Ronnie B. (1987). American Sign Language: linguistic and applied dimensions. 2nd edn.Boston: Little/Brown.Google Scholar
Wilbur, Ronnie B. (1990). Why syllables? What the notion means for ASL research. In Fischer & Siple (1990). 81–108.Google Scholar
Wilbur, Ronnie B. (1993). Syllables and segments: hold the movement and move the holds! In Coulter (1993). 135–168.Google Scholar
Wilbur, Ronnie B. & Nolen, S. (1986). The duration of syllables in American Sign Language. Language and Speech 29. 263–280.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wiltshire, Caroline (1992). Syllabification and rule application in harmonic phonology. PhD dissertation, University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Zec, Draga (1988). Sonority constraints on prosodic structure. PhD dissertation, Stanford University.Google Scholar