Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T16:04:52.509Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A sonority cycle in American Sign Language*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 October 2008

Wendy Sandler
Wendy Sandler
Affiliation:
University of Haifa
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It is generally accepted that there are three major categories of phonological elements in the signs of sign language: (i) the shape of the hand, (ii) the location of the hand on or near the body and (iii) the movement of the hand – either (a) movement of the fingers or palm at a single location or (b) movement of the whole hand along a path from one location to another. It has further been argued that each of these categories consists of hierarchically organised classes of features (Sandler 1987b, 1989a).

Type
Articles
Information
Phonology , Volume 10 , Issue 2 , August 1993 , pp. 243 - 279
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

Blevins, J. (1993). The nature of constraints on the non-dominant hand in ASL. In Coulter (1993). 43–62.Google Scholar
Brentari, D. (1990). Theoretical foundations of American Sign Language phonology. PhD dissertation, University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Brentari, D. & Goldsmith, J. (1993). Secondary licensing and the non-dominant hand in ASL phonology. In Coulter (1993). 19–41.Google Scholar
Brentari, D., Poizner, H. & Kegl, J. (1993). Aphasic and Parkinsonian signers: differences in phonological disruption. Ms, University of California, Davis.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 the sonority cycle in core syllabification. In Kingston, J. & Beckman, M. (eds.) Papers in laboratory phonology I: between the grammar and the physics of speech. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 282–333.Google Scholar
Corina, D. P. (1990). Reassessing the role of sonority in syllable structure: evidence from a visual-gestural language. CLS 26:2. 33–44.Google Scholar
Corina, D. P. & Sagey, E. (1989). Predictability in ASL handshape sequences, with implications for features and feature geometry. Ms, University of California, San Diego.Google Scholar
Coulter, G. (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, G. (ed.) (1993). Current issues in ASL phonology. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Edmondson, W. H. (1985). Autosegmental phonology: the syllable and the sign. In Tervoort, B. (ed.) Signs of life. Amsterdam: Institute of General Linguistics, University of Amsterdam. 79–94.Google Scholar
Edmondson, W. H. (1990). Segments in signed languages: do they exist and does it matter? In Edmondson, W. & Karlsson, F. (eds.) SLR '87: Papers from the 4th International Symposium on Sign Language Research. Hamburg: Signum. 66–74.Google Scholar
Fischer, S. & Siple, P. (eds.) (1990). Theoretical issues in sign language research. Vol. 1. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, J. (1976). Autosegmental phonology. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Hayes, B. (1993). Against movement. In Coulter (1993). 213–226.Google Scholar
Hulst, H. G. Van Der (1992). Units in the analysis of signs. Paper presented at the Workshop on Sign Language Phonology, 7th International Phonology Meeting, Krems.Google Scholar
Hulst, H. G. van der (1993). Radical CV phonology. Ms, University of Leiden.Google Scholar
Johnson, R. (1986). Metathesis in American Sign Language. Paper presented at the Conference on Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research, Rochester, NY.Google Scholar
Kaisse, E. (1992). Can [consonantal] spread? Lg 68. 313–332.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, P. (1982). Lexical morphology and phonology. In Yang, I.-S. (ed.) Linguistics in the morning calm. Seoul: Hanshin. 3–91.Google Scholar
Klima, E. & Bellugi, U. (1979). The signs of language. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Ladefoged, P. (1982). A course in phonetics. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
Liddell, S. K. (1984a). THINK and BELIEVE: sequentiality in American Sign Language. Lg 60. 372–399.Google Scholar
Liddell, S. K. (1984b). Unrealized-inceptive aspect in American Sign Language: feature insertion in syllabic frames. CLS 20. 257–270.Google Scholar
Liddell, S. K. (1990). Structures for representing handshape and local movement at the phonemic level. In Fischer & Siple (1990). 37–65.Google Scholar
Liddell, S. K. & Johnson, R. (1985). American Sign Language: the phonological base. Ms, Gallaudet University.Google Scholar
Liddell, S. K. & Johnson, R. (1986). ASL compound formation processes, lexicalization and phonological remnants. NLLT 4. 445–513.Google Scholar
Liddell, S. K. & Johnson, R. (1989). American Sign Language: the phonological base. Sign Language Studies 64. 197–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, J. (1979). Formal problems in Semitic phonology and morphology. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. (1981). A prosodic theory of nonconcatenative morphology. LI 12. 373–418.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. (1986). OCP effects: gemination and antigemination. LI 17. 207–263.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. (1988). Feature geometry and dependency: a review. Phonetica 43. 84–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, J. (1989). Linear order in phonological representation. LI 20. 71–99.Google Scholar
Meier, R. (1982). Icons, analogues, and morphemes: the acquisition of verb agreement in American Sign Language. PhD dissertation, University of California, San Diego.Google Scholar
Padden, C. (1981). Some arguments for syntactic patterning in American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies 32. 239–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Padden, C. (1988). Interaction of morphology and syntax in American Sign Language. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Perlmutter, D. (1989). A moraic theory of American Sign Language syllable structure. Ms, University of California, San Diego.Google Scholar
Perlmutter, D. (1992). Sonority and syllable structure in American Sign Language. LI 23. 407–442.Google Scholar
Perlmutter, D. (1993). Sonority and syllable structure in American Sign Language. In Coulter (1993). 227–261.Google Scholar
Sagey, E. (1986). The representation of features and relations in non-linear phonology. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Sandler, W. (1986). The spreading hand autosegment of American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies SO. 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sandler, W. (1987a). Assimilation and feature hierarchy in American Sign Language. CLS 23:2. 266–278.Google Scholar
Sandler, W. (1987b). Sequentiality and simultaneity in American Sign Language phonology. PhD dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
Sandler, W. (1989a). Phonological representation of the sign: linearity and nonlinearity in American Sign Language phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sandler, W. (1989b). Linearization of phonological tiers in ASL. Paper presented at Workshop on ASL phonology, LSA Summer Institute, Tucson.Google Scholar
Sandler, W. (1990). Temporal aspects and American Sign Language phonology. In Fischer & Siple (1990). 7–35.Google Scholar
Sandler, W. (1993a). Linearization of phonological tiers in ASL. In Coulter (1993). 103–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sandler, W. (1993b). Sign language and modularity. Lingua 89. 315–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sandler, W. (1993c). Four arguments for movement. Ms, University of Haifa.Google Scholar
Sandler, W. (to appear a). Markedness in ASL handshapes: a componential analysis. In van der Hulst, H. G. & van de Weijer, J. (eds.) Proceedings of the HIL Phonology Conference. Leiden: Leiden University Press.Google Scholar
Sandler, W. (to appear b). Hand in hand: the role of the nondominant hand in ASL. The Linguistic Review 9.Google Scholar
Saussure, F. de (1916). Cours de linguistique générate. Lausanne & Paris: Payot.Google Scholar
Sekuler, R. & Blake, R. (1985). Perception. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Sievers, E. (1881). Grundzüge der Phonetik. Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel.Google Scholar
Stack, K. (1988). Tiers and syllable structure in American Sign Language: evidence from phonotactics. MA thesis, UCLA.Google Scholar
Stokoe, W. C. (1960). Sign language structure. Republished 1978. Silver Spring, MD: Linstok Press.Google Scholar
Supalla, T. (1982). Structure and acquisition of verbs of motion and location in American Sign Language. PhD dissertation, University of California, San Diego.Google Scholar
Supalla, T. & Newport, E. (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. 91–133.Google Scholar
Uyechi, L. (1992). Visual phonology: an M-less model for straight and arced movement. Ms, Stanford University.Google Scholar
Wilbur, R. (1987). American Sign Language: linguistic and applied dimensions. 2nd edn. Boston: College Hill Press.Google Scholar
Wilbur, R. (1993). Syllables and segments: hold the movement and move the holds! In Coulter (1993). 135–168.Google Scholar
Woodward, J. (1974). Implicational variation in ASL: negative incorporation. Sign Language Studies 5. 20–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar