Journal articles on the topic 'Nonmanual markers'
To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Nonmanual markers.
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 18 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Nonmanual markers.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Kuhn, Ninoslava Šarac, and Ronnie B. Wilbur. "Interrogative structures in Croatian Sign Language: Polar and content questions." Sign Language and Linguistics 9, no. 1-2 (2006): 151–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/sll.9.1-2.09kuh.
Full textAbstract:
In this study, we investigate the interrogative structures in Croatian Sign Language (HZJ) with respect to the word order, manual question words, and nonmanual markers and their scope. Both polar and content questions mainly use specific nonmanual markers to indicate interrogative function. Polar questions use chin down and content questions use chin up as their prominent nonmanual markers. In addition to these markers, brows up occurs in both constructions leading to the suggestion that brows up may be a general question marker in HZJ. Brows down can also occur, particularly in content questions. Other nonmanual markers that appear in polar questions are head forward, and eyes wide open and those in content questions are head forward, headshake, shoulders up, and eyes closed.Both interrogative constructions use manual question words. Polar questions can use an optional manual sign je-li that was probably introduced to HZJ through Signed Croatian. je-li is not connected to the peak intensity of the nonmanual markers and we consider it to be an adjunct to the question structure. Content words are used in most HZJ content interrogatives. Question words can be represented by specific signs or can be formed by the content sign ‘5’ (i.e. handshape 5 or b-th moving side-to-side). This ‘5’ sign is further specified by mouthing the particular question word from spoken Croatian. Content words can appear in sentence initial, sentence final or both positions. In content questions, question words bear the highest peak of nonmanual intensity, thus we consider them to be operating as operators.Recent research shows that HZJ shares some features with Austrian Sign Language (ÖGS) because in the 19th century, Croatian deaf students attended Vienna’s Institute for the Deaf (Schalber this volume; Šarac 2003; Šarac et al in press). Upon finishing their education, they would return back to Croatia. Similarities between HZJ and ÖGS are found in their interrogative nonmanual markings but not in their syntactic structures. This can be seen by the fact that these two sign languages do not have the same canonical word order.
2
Kuhn, Ninoslava Šarac, and Ronnie B. Wilbur. "Interrogative structures in Croatian Sign Language." Investigating Understudied Sign Languages - Croatian SL and Austrian SL, with comparison to American SL 9, no. 1-2 (December 31, 2006): 151–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/sll.9.1.09kuh.
Full textAbstract:
In this study, we investigate the interrogative structures in Croatian Sign Language (HZJ) with respect to the word order, manual question words, and nonmanual markers and their scope. Both polar and content questions mainly use specific nonmanual markers to indicate interrogative function. Polar questions use chin down and content questions use chin up as their prominent nonmanual markers. In addition to these markers, brows up occurs in both constructions leading to the suggestion that brows up may be a general question marker in HZJ. Brows down can also occur, particularly in content questions. Other nonmanual markers that appear in polar questions are head forward, and eyes wide open and those in content questions are head forward, headshake, shoulders up, and eyes closed. Both interrogative constructions use manual question words. Polar questions can use an optional manual sign je-li that was probably introduced to HZJ through Signed Croatian. je-li is not connected to the peak intensity of the nonmanual markers and we consider it to be an adjunct to the question structure. Content words are used in most HZJ content interrogatives. Question words can be represented by specific signs or can be formed by the content sign ‘5’ (i.e. handshape 5 or b-th moving side-to-side). This ‘5’ sign is further specified by mouthing the particular question word from spoken Croatian. Content words can appear in sentence initial, sentence final or both positions. In content questions, question words bear the highest peak of nonmanual intensity, thus we consider them to be operating as operators. Recent research shows that HZJ shares some features with Austrian Sign Language (ÖGS) because in the 19th century, Croatian deaf students attended Vienna’s Institute for the Deaf (Schalber this volume; Šarac 2003; Šarac et al in press). Upon finishing their education, they would return back to Croatia. Similarities between HZJ and ÖGS are found in their interrogative nonmanual markings but not in their syntactic structures. This can be seen by the fact that these two sign languages do not have the same canonical word order.
3
Schalber, Katharina. "What is the chin doing?: An analysis of interrogatives in Austrian sign language." Sign Language and Linguistics 9, no. 1-2 (2006): 133–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/sll.9.1-2.08sch.
Full textAbstract:
The aim of this paper is to investigate the structure of polar (yes/no questions) and content questions (wh-questions) in Austrian Sign Language (ÖGS), analyzing the different nonmanual signals, the occurrence of question signs and their syntactic position. As I will show, the marking strategies used in ÖGS are no exception to the crosslinguistic observations that interrogative constructions in sign languages employ a variety of nonmanual signals and manual signs (Zeshan 2004). In ÖGS polar questions are marked with ‘chin down’, whereas content questions are indicated with ‘chin up’ or ‘head forward’ and content question signs. These same nonmanual markers are reported for Croatian sign language, indicating common foundation due to historical relations and intense language contact.
4
Schalber, Katharina. "What is the chin doing?" Investigating Understudied Sign Languages - Croatian SL and Austrian SL, with comparison to American SL 9, no. 1-2 (December 31, 2006): 133–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/sll.9.1.08sch.
Full textAbstract:
The aim of this paper is to investigate the structure of polar (yes/no questions) and content questions (wh-questions) in Austrian Sign Language (ÖGS), analyzing the different nonmanual signals, the occurrence of question signs and their syntactic position. As I will show, the marking strategies used in ÖGS are no exception to the crosslinguistic observations that interrogative constructions in sign languages employ a variety of nonmanual signals and manual signs (Zeshan 2004). In ÖGS polar questions are marked with ‘chin down’, whereas content questions are indicated with ‘chin up’ or ‘head forward’ and content question signs. These same nonmanual markers are reported for Croatian sign language, indicating common foundation due to historical relations and intense language contact.
5
Anderson, Diane E., and Judy S. Reilly. "The puzzle of negation: How children move from communicative to grammatical negation in ASL." Applied Psycholinguistics 18, no. 4 (October 1997): 411–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0142716400010912.
Full textAbstract:
ABSTRACTIn American Sign Language (ASL), in addition to manual signs, specific nonmanual behaviors play a crucial role in the grammar of the language. For example, conditionals and relative clauses are signaled by obligatory nonmanual markers. This study focuses on the acquisition of negation in ASL, which is signaled by manual signs as well as an obligatory headshake. In particular, we address the developmental relationship between the communicative and grammatical (or linguistic) headshakes for negation. Study 1 includes naturalistic data from a cross-sectional sample of 51 deaf children, ranging in age from 1: 0 to 4: 11, who are acquiring ASL as their primary language. Study 2 includes longitudinal data from 16 of these children.
6
Wilbur, Ronnie B. "Effects of Varying Rate of Signing on ASL Manual Signs and Nonmanual Markers." Language and Speech 52, no. 2-3 (June 2009): 245–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0023830909103174.
Full text
7
Pendzich, Nina-Kristi, Jens-Michael Cramer, Thomas Finkbeiner, Annika Herrmann, and Markus Steinbach. "How do signers mark conditionals in German Sign Language? Insights from a Sentence Reproduction Task on the use of nonmanual and manual markers." Hrvatska revija za rehabilitacijska istraživanja 58, Special Issue (October 12, 2022): 206–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.31299/hrri.58.si.11.
Full textAbstract:
This paper presents the results of a Sentence Reproduction Task (SRT) investigating conditional sentences in German Sign Language (DGS). We found that participants mark conditional sentences in DGS by systematically using different non-manual markers on the antecedent and the consequent. In addition, these non-manual markers were frequently used in combination with one or two manual signs. However, the manual markers were omitted in the test sentences, i.e., the input stimuli the participants were asked to reproduce. The results of our experimental study are, on the one hand, consistent with descriptions of manual and non-manual strategies used to mark conditional sentences in different unrelated sign languages. On the other hand, our findings provide new insights on the multi-layered marking of conditional sentences in DGS.
8
Gökgöz, Kadir. "Negation in Turkish Sign Language." Nonmanuals in Sign Language 14, no. 1 (August 11, 2011): 49–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/sll.14.1.04gok.
Full textAbstract:
This paper presents a detailed description of manual and nonmanual markers (NMMs) in negative sentences in Turkish Sign Language (TİD). It has been argued that TİD has a manual dominant pattern for negation with a backward head tilt being the major NMM in negative sentences. By contrast, in this paper I argue that, when it comes to negation, TİD is not a strictly manual dominant language. I will consider spreading of NMMs such as headshake, brow-lowering, and brow-raising and argue that these spreading NMMs play a syntactic role in TİD negative sentences. They mark the syntactic domain of negation, either through c-command, a spec-head-relation or both. In addition, I offer a generative analysis of the syntax of negation in TİD based on the syntactic background provided for TİD and the distributional patterns of NMMs.
9
Hunger, Barbara. "Noun/Verb Pairs in Austrian Sign Language (ÖGS)." Investigating Understudied Sign Languages - Croatian SL and Austrian SL, with comparison to American SL 9, no. 1-2 (December 31, 2006): 71–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/sll.9.1.06hun.
Full textAbstract:
The present work provides the evidence for a measurable distinction between members of formationally related Noun/Verb Pairs in ÖGS. Like similar investigations in other sign languages, such as American (ASL), Australian (Auslan) and British (BSL), this empirical study investigates nouns and verbs of related pairs in ÖGS from several perspectives. The primary investigation focuses on the movement component of signs, which is identified as the major differentiating factor between related nouns and verbs. The study also briefly examines nonmanual markers and the adjacent lexical categories of nouns and verbs in context. The findings are compared with the distinctions reported for other sign languages and show that ÖGS also follows the distinction model that other sign languages use for distinguishing between related nouns and verbs, in particular, distinctions in the movement components of signs. The formational difference between related ÖGS nouns and verbs is systematically shown in their duration, with verbs substantially longer in duration than their comparable nouns. It is not known whether this observed difference will generalize to the wider comparison of ÖGS unrelated verbs and nouns.
10
Krause, Jean C., and Andrew K. Hague. "Signing Exact English Transliteration: Effects of Accuracy and Lag Time on Message Intelligibility." Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 25, no. 2 (December 8, 2019): 199–211. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enz042.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract This paper, the fourth in a series concerned with the level of access afforded to students who use educational interpreters, focuses on the intelligibility of interpreters who use Signing Exact English (SEE). Eight expert receivers of SEE were employed to evaluate the intelligibility of transliterated messages that varied in accuracy and lag time. Results of intelligibility tests showed that, similar to Cued Speech transliterators, (a) accuracy had a large positive effect on transliterator intelligibility, (b) overall intelligibility (69%) was higher than average accuracy (58%), and (c) the likelihood that an utterance reached 70% intelligibility was somewhat sigmoidal in shape, with the likelihood of reaching 70% intelligibility dropping off fastest for accuracy values <65%. Accuracy alone accounted for 53% of the variance in transliterator intelligibility; mouthing was identified as a secondary factor that explained an additional 11%. Although lag time accounted for just .4% of the remaining variance, utterances produced with lag times between .6 and 1.2 s were most likely to exceed 70% intelligibility. With 36% of the variance still unexplained, other sources of transliterator variability (for example, facial expression, nonmanual markers, and mouth/sign synchronization) may also play a role in intelligibility and should be explored in future research.
11
Karabüklü, Serpil, and Ronnie B. Wilbur. "Marking various aspects in Turkish Sign Language." Sign Language and Linguistics 24, no. 2 (July 16, 2021): 182–225. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/sll.20006.kar.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Sign languages have been reported to have manual signs that function as perfective morphemes (Fischer & Gough 1999; Meir 1999; Rathmann 2005; Duffy 2007; Zucchi et al. 2010). Turkish Sign Language (TİD) has also been claimed to have such morphemes (Zeshan 2003; Kubuş & Rathmann 2009; Dikyuva 2011; Gökgöz 2011; Karabüklü 2016) as well as a nonmanual completive marker (‘bn’) (Dikyuva 2011). This study shows that the nonmanual ‘bn’ is in fact a perfective morpheme. We examine its compatibility with different event types and furthermore show that TİD has a manual sign bı̇t (‘finish’) that is indeed the completive marker but with possibly unusual restrictions on its use. Based on their distribution, the current study distinguishes bı̇t and ‘bn’ as different morphemes even though they can co-occur. TİD is argued to be typologically different from other sign languages since it has both a nonmanual marker (‘bn’) for a perfective morpheme and a manual sign (bı̇t) with different selectional properties than the manual signs reported for other sign languages.
12
Meir, Irit. "Question and Negation in Israeli Sign Language." Sign Language and Linguistics 7, no. 2 (March 30, 2006): 97–124. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/sll.7.2.03mei.
Full textAbstract:
The paper presents the interrogative and negative constructions in Israeli Sign Language (ISL). Both manual and nonmanual components of these constructions are described, revealing a complex and rich system. In addition to the basic lexical terms, ISL uses various morphological devices to expand its basic question and negation vocabulary, such as compounding and suffixation. The nonmanual component consists of specific facial expressions, head and body posture, and mouthing. The use of mouthing is especially interesting, as ISL seems to use it extensively, both as a word formation device and as a grammatical marker for negation. Interrogative and negative constructions interact in with other grammatical categories in the language; i.e., the distribution of various negation words is determined by the lexical category of the negated word. Thus, the distribution of negation words provides evidence for the existence of Nouns, Verbs and Adjectives as formal categories in the language. Finally, a diachronic comparison between present day ISL and earlier stages of the language reveals interesting traits in the development of these systems.
13
Vyas, Lina. "“New normal” at work in a post-COVID world: work–life balance and labor markets." Policy and Society 41, no. 1 (January 1, 2022): 155–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/polsoc/puab011.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract The coronavirus pandemic has interrupted labor markets, triggering massive and instant series of experimentations with flexible work arrangements, and new relationships to centralized working environments. These approaches have laid the basis for the “new normal,” likely extending into the organization of work in the post-pandemic era. These new arrangements, especially flexible work arrangements, have challenged traditional relationships with employees and employers, work time and working hours, the work–life balance (WLB), and the relationship of individuals to work. This paper investigates how labor markets have been interrupted due to the pandemic, focusing especially on manual (blue-collar) and nonmanual (white-collar) work and the future of the WLB, along with exploring the projected deviations that are driving a foreseeable future policy revolution in work and employment. This paper argues that although hybrid and remote working would be more popular in the post-pandemic for nonmanual work, it will not be “one size fits all” solution. Traditional work practices will remain, and offices will not completely disappear. Manual labor will continue current work practices with increased demands. Employers’ attention to employees’ WLB in the new normal will target employees’ motivation and achieving better WLB. These trends for the labor market and WLB are classified into three categories—those that are predicated on changes that were already underway but were accelerated with arrival of the pandemic (“acceleration”); those that represent normalization of what were once considered avant-garde ways of work (“normalization”); and those that represent modification or alteration of pre-pandemic set-up (“remodelling”).
14
Hosemann, Jana. "Eye gaze and verb agreement in German Sign Language." Nonmanuals in Sign Language 14, no. 1 (August 11, 2011): 76–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/sll.14.1.05hos.
Full textAbstract:
Eye gaze as a nonmanual component of sign languages has not yet been investigated in much detail. The idea that eye gaze may function as an agreement marker was brought forward by Bahan (1996) and Neidle et al. (2000), who argued that eye gaze is an independent agreement marker occurring with all three verb types (plain verbs, spatial verbs, and agreeing verbs) in American Sign Language (ASL). Thompson et al. (2006) conducted an eye-tracking experiment to investigate the interdependency between eye gaze and ASL verb agreement in depth. Their results indicate that eye gaze in ASL functions as an agreement marker only when accompanying manual agreement, marking the object in agreeing verbs and the locative argument in spatial verbs. They conclude that eye gaze is part of an agreement circumfix. Subsequently, I conducted an eye-tracking experiment to investigate the correlation of eye gaze and manual agreement for verbs in German Sign Language (DGS). The results differ from Thompson et al.’s, since eye gaze with agreeing verbs in the DGS data did not occur as systematically as in ASL. Nevertheless, an analysis of verb duration and the spreading of a correlating eye gaze suggests that there is a dependency relation between eye gaze and manual agreement.
15
Herrmann, Annika. "The interaction of eye blinks and other prosodic cues in German Sign Language." Sign Language and Linguistics 13, no. 1 (August 20, 2010): 3–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/sll.13.1.02her.
Full textAbstract:
As an interface phenomenon, prosody interacts with all components of grammar, even though it is often subsumed under the broad area of phonology. In sign languages, an equivalent system of prosody reveals interesting results with regard to modality-independent notions of language structure. This paper presents data from a study on German Sign Language (Deutsche Gebärdensprache, DGS) and investigates prosodic cues on the basis of annotated video data. The focus of the study was on eye blinks and their use in prosodic structuring of signed utterances. Systematic methodology, annotation, and statistical evidence provided the basis for a thorough analysis of blinking behavior in DGS. The results suggest a consistent use of certain eye blinks as markers to indicate prosodic phrase boundaries. A constant 70%/30% ratio of prosodic and non-prosodic blinks further indicates the efficient use of this device. Even though some aspects of blinking are subject to inter-signer variation, the prosodic use of blinks is intriguingly similar across signers. However, blinks are not obligatory boundary markers in DGS. I propose an analysis that takes into account various factors such as syntactic constituency, prosodic structuring, and particularly the interplay of various nonmanuals such as eye gaze, head nods, and facial expressions. The fine-grained distinction of blinks resulting from a modified categorization for eye blinks and additional statistical computations give insight into how visual languages realize phrase boundaries and prosodic marking and to what extent they use the system consistently.
16
Schoonjans, Steven. "Nonmanual downtoning in German co-speech gesture and in German Sign Language." Yearbook of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association 5, no. 1 (December 20, 2017). http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/gcla-2017-0006.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractDowntoning meanings in German are not only expressed by means of verbal elements such as modal particles, but also at the gestural level. This paper presents the results of a first study showing that these downtoning gestures in German show interesting correspondences with the downtoning patterns in German Sign Language, both from a formal perspective (which forms are used with which functions) and at the topological level (at which point in the sentence the markers are realized and which words/signs they accompany).
17
Cervetto, Sabrina, Mariano Díaz-Rivera, Agustín Petroni, Agustina Birba, Miguel Martorell Caro, Lucas Sedeño, Agustín Ibáñez, and Adolfo M. García. "The Neural Blending of Words and Movement: Event-Related Potential Signatures of Semantic and Action Processes during Motor–Language Coupling." Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, June 18, 2021, 1–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_01732.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Behavioral embodied research shows that words evoking limb-specific meanings can affect responses performed with the corresponding body part. However, no study has explored this phenomenon's neural dynamics under implicit processing conditions, let alone by disentangling its conceptual and motoric stages. Here, we examined whether the blending of hand actions and manual action verbs, relative to nonmanual action verbs and nonaction verbs, modulates electrophysiological markers of semantic integration (N400) and motor-related cortical potentials during a lexical decision task. Relative to both other categories, manual action verbs involved reduced posterior N400 amplitude and greater modulations of frontal motor-related cortical potentials. Such effects overlapped in a window of ∼380–440 msec after word presentation and ∼180 msec before response execution, revealing the possible time span in which both semantic and action-related stages reach maximal convergence. These results allow refining current models of motor–language coupling while affording new insights on embodied dynamics at large.
18
Engberg-Pedersen, Elisabeth. "Markers of epistemic modality and their origins." Studies in Language, September 7, 2020, 1–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/sl.19065.eng.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Native deaf signers express epistemic modality by different means: mental-state words, clause-internal particles, signs indicating hypothesis, and nonmanually. The data for this study come from two unrelated sign languages, Danish Sign Language and Japanese Sign Language. In dialogues the signers use both calques of majority-language words and signs that appear to have emerged in the sign languages only. Based on the multifunctionality of some word forms, the origin of the epistemic modal particles may be traced back to tags, interjections, and lexical signs, a route motivated by interaction and also found in unrelated spoken languages. Furthermore, in both sign languages, the first-person pronoun can be used, without a verb, as an epistemic “anchor” of a proposition, a construction that seems specific to languages in the gestural-visual modality. Another modality-specific feature is the possibility of transferring the expression of a marker of epistemic uncertainty from one articulator to another.