Nominal-internal word order in Hong Kong Sign Language and Cantonese: A Comparative Study

Jieqiong Li, G. Tang
{"title":"Nominal-internal word order in Hong Kong Sign Language and Cantonese: A Comparative Study","authors":"Jieqiong Li, G. Tang","doi":"10.31009/feast.i3.04","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This comparative study aims to verify if the nominal-internal word order patterns of HKSL and Cantonese are accountable based on Universal 20 (Cinque’s 2005 version), just as has been discussed for other sign languages (e.g. Zhang 2007 on TSL, Mantovan and Geraci 2017 on LIS). Word order patterns of Cantonese have been documented in previous research. As for HKSL, we extracted data from 90 minutes of free conversations in HKSL to identify the patterns. The data came from 2 dyads of native Deaf signers of HKSL. Among the 4281 tokens of nominal word orders extracted, the majority are pronominals (e.g. pointing signs; 44%, 1872 tokens), bare nouns (16%, 696 tokens), bare/modified proper nouns or kinship terms (9%, 374 tokens), modified nouns (12%, 531 tokens) and other constructions (e.g. bare adjectives, bare quantifiers; 19%, 808 tokens). This study bases its analysis on the 12% of modified noun phrases with simple nominals (11%, 472 tokens), i.e. tokens with an overt head noun and at least one of any of the three modifiers: Dem, Num, Adj, excluding those involving a classifier expression. Results reveal that the word order patterns observed in HKSL as well as Cantonese align with the 14 attested patterns as stated in Cinque’s 2005 version of Universal 20; they also correspond to the patterns found in TSL and LIS.1","PeriodicalId":164096,"journal":{"name":"FEAST. Formal and Experimental Advances in Sign language Theory","volume":"30 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"FEAST. Formal and Experimental Advances in Sign language Theory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31009/feast.i3.04","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This comparative study aims to verify if the nominal-internal word order patterns of HKSL and Cantonese are accountable based on Universal 20 (Cinque’s 2005 version), just as has been discussed for other sign languages (e.g. Zhang 2007 on TSL, Mantovan and Geraci 2017 on LIS). Word order patterns of Cantonese have been documented in previous research. As for HKSL, we extracted data from 90 minutes of free conversations in HKSL to identify the patterns. The data came from 2 dyads of native Deaf signers of HKSL. Among the 4281 tokens of nominal word orders extracted, the majority are pronominals (e.g. pointing signs; 44%, 1872 tokens), bare nouns (16%, 696 tokens), bare/modified proper nouns or kinship terms (9%, 374 tokens), modified nouns (12%, 531 tokens) and other constructions (e.g. bare adjectives, bare quantifiers; 19%, 808 tokens). This study bases its analysis on the 12% of modified noun phrases with simple nominals (11%, 472 tokens), i.e. tokens with an overt head noun and at least one of any of the three modifiers: Dem, Num, Adj, excluding those involving a classifier expression. Results reveal that the word order patterns observed in HKSL as well as Cantonese align with the 14 attested patterns as stated in Cinque’s 2005 version of Universal 20; they also correspond to the patterns found in TSL and LIS.1
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
香港手语与广东话名词序之比较研究
本比较研究旨在验证基于Universal 20 (Cinque’s 2005版本)的香港手语和广东话的名义内部词序模式是否可问责,正如其他手语(如Zhang 2007年关于TSL, Mantovan和Geraci 2017年关于LIS)所讨论的那样。广东话的词序模式在前人的研究中有记载。至于HKSL,我们从90分钟的HKSL自由对话中提取数据来识别模式。数据来自两对香港手语聋人手语。在提取的4281个名义词序标记中,大多数是代词(如指向符号;44%, 1872个标记),裸名词(16%,696个标记),裸专有名词/修饰专有名词或亲属术语(9%,374个标记),修饰名词(12%,531个标记)和其他结构(例如,裸形容词,裸量词;19%, 808个代币)。本研究的分析基于12%带有简单名词的修饰名词短语(11%,472个标记),即带有明显的头名词和三个修饰语中的至少一个:Dem, Num, Adj,不包括涉及分类器表达的那些。结果显示,香港语和广东话的语序模式与2005年版《通用20》中的14种已证实的语序模式一致;它们也与TSL和lis1中的模式相对应
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Indexicals under role shift in Sign Language of the Netherlands Inherently reciprocal verbs in Brazilian Sign Language The relationship between place of articulation and semantic features in a corpus of astronomical neologisms in Quebec Sign Language Some properties of neg-raising in three sign languages Manual and nonmanual cues used for the prosodic encoding of contrastive focus in LSFB (French Belgian Sign Language)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1