Quantification in American Sign Language

Abner, Natasha; Wilbur, Ronnie Β.

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-44330-0_2

Cited by 88 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Antzakas (2006), for instance, points out that no equivalent of English any has been documented in Greek Sign Language. A similar situation is found for American Sign Language (Abner & Wilbur 2017, but see Schlenker 2018 for some potential cases of ANY as an NPI). Concerning the three languages under investigation in this study, recently published grammars do not discuss any clear case of NPIs either (see Millet (2019) for LSF, Klomp (2021) for NGT and Branchini & Mantovan (2020) for LIS).…”

Section: Human Language and Polarity Sensitivitysupporting

confidence: 68%

As strong as an NPI in LSF, NGT and LIS

Geraci¹,

Oomen²,

Santoro³

2022

SALT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Negative polarity items emerge from the interaction between some propertiesof the semantic module of human language and its lexicon. This leads tothe expectation that they should be equally common in spoken and sign language,contrary to what has been documented. We describe the sign UNTIL in French SignLanguage, Italian Sign Language and Sign Language of the Netherlands. We showthat under its punctual reading, UNTIL behaves as a strong negative polarity item,just like English until. We also discuss why more prototypical cases of polarityitems like any or ever are much harder to find in sign language

show abstract

Section: Human Language and Polarity Sensitivitysupporting

confidence: 68%

As strong as an NPI in LSF, NGT and LIS

Geraci¹,

Oomen²,

Santoro³

2022

SALT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As for previous analysis, Abner & Wilbur (2017) claim that three universal quantifiers of ASL are valued for the feature [distributivity]. They claim that #ALL (+/-distributive) and EACH (+/-distributive) are compatible with distributive interpretations, but ALL (-distributive) (which they gloss as ALL-CIRCLE) can only be used with a collective reading.…”

mentioning

confidence: 87%

“…ALL #DOGS SLEEP t b. DOG IX[pl] ALL SLEEP After finding this exception to the model provided by Abner & Wilbur (2017), Liskova (2017) goes into great detail about the numerous phonetic variations of #ALL that she observes, but eventually she does conclude that #ALL and ALL are semantically synonymous.…”

mentioning

confidence: 93%

#ALL versus ALL in American Sign Language (ASL)

Crabtree

Wilbur

2020

Proc Ling Soc Amer

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper extends a visible pattern (‘iconicity’) that has been observed in sign language verbs and adjectives to quantification in American Sign Language (ASL). The Event Visibility Hypothesis (EVH) states that boundedness is morphophonologically encoded in articulation of a rapid deceleration of movement at the end of a sign (aka end-marking). Here the EVH is applied to the two ASL quantifiers glossed #ALL and ALL. Doing so accounts for the semantic distinction between them: ALL is definite (bounded), whereas #ALL is underspecified for definiteness (unbounded).

show abstract

The universal quantifier ‘all’ in Turkish Sign Language

Saral

Kelepir

2020

Studies in Language Companion Series

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quantification in American Sign Language

Cited by 88 publications

References 21 publications

As strong as an NPI in LSF, NGT and LIS

As strong as an NPI in LSF, NGT and LIS

#ALL versus ALL in American Sign Language (ASL)

The universal quantifier ‘all’ in Turkish Sign Language

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About