Cover not available
Part of
Functionalist and Usage-based Approaches to the Study of Language: In honor of Joan L. Bybee
Edited by K. Aaron Smith and Dawn Nordquist
[Studies in Language Companion Series 192] 2018
► pp. 59–87

know and understand in ASL

A usage-based study of grammaticalized topic constructions

| University of Manitoba

Topic constructions in ASL are understood to be composed of information identifiable to the addressee that serves as the reference point from which to view the comment or comments immediately following it. This study compares the instances of use in a corpus of conversational ASL of KNOW and UNDERSTAND as lexical verbs and their grammaticalized form and function when they appear as topic markers, and with know as a discourse marker. Topic phrases introduced by know tend to have a wider domain as an identifiable reference point rather than a specific entity or event within the signer’s and addressee’s shared knowledge. Topic phrases introduced by understand tend to introduce an idea that the signer wishes to set as a reference point.

Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Grammaticalization in signed languages
  • 3.Topic marking and topic constructions in ASL
  • 4.Data
  • 5.Lexical know and know-topic constructions
    • 5.1 know tokens across the ASL conversational corpus
    • 5.2Lexical know
    • 5.3 know as a discourse marker
    • 5.4 know as a topic marker
    • 5.5Location variation in know tokens
  • 6.Lexical understand and understand-topic constructions
    • 6.1Lexical understand
    • 6.2 understand-topics
  • 7.The emergence of categories in ASL grammar
  • 8.Conclusion
  • Transcription key
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 1 March 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.192.03jan
References
Baker, Charlotte & Cokely, Dennis
1980 American Sign Language: A Teacher’s Resource Text on Grammar and Culture. Silver Spring MD: T.J. Publishers.Google Scholar
Brentari, Diane
1998 A Prosodic Model of Sign Language Phonology. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Brouland, Joséphine
1855 Spécimen d`un Dictionaire des Signes, suivi d’Explication du Tableau Spécimen d`un dictionaire des signes du langage mimique, mettant toute personne en état de l’apprendre seule. Paris: Boucquin, Imprimerie de l’Institution Nationale des Sourds-Muets de Paris.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan
2001 Phonology and language use. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006 From usage to grammar: The mind’s response to repetition. Language 82(4): 711–733. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010 Language, Usage and Cognition. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan L.
2013 Usage-based theory and exemplar representation. In The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar, Thomas Hoffman & Graeme Trousdale (eds), 49–69. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan & Eddington, David
2006 A usage-based approach to Spanish verbs of ‘becoming’. Language 82(2): 323–355. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan, Perkins, Revere & Pagliuca, William
1994 The evolution of grammar: Tense, Aspect and Modality in the Languages of the World. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan & Scheibman, Joanne
1999 The effect of usage on degrees of constituency: The reduction of don’t in English. Linguistics 37(4): 575–596. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Filmore, Charles J.
1982 Frame semantics. In Linguistics in the Morning Calm, Linguistic Society of Korea (ed.), 111–137. Seoul: Hanshin.Google Scholar
Frishberg, Nancy
1975 Arbitrariness and iconicity: Historical change in American Sign Language. Language 51: 696–719. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Givón, T.
1984 Syntax: A Functional-Typological Introduction, Vol. 1. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1986 Prototypes: Between Plato and Wittgenstein. In Noun Classes and Categorization [Typological Studies in Language 7], Colette Craig (ed.), 77–102. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haiman, John
1978 Conditionals are topics. Language 59: 781–819. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd & Kuteva, Tania
2002 World Lexicon of Grammaticalization. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007 The Genesis of Grammar: A Reconstruction. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Holmes, Janet
1986 Functions of you know in women’s and men’s speech. Language and Society 15(1): 1–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hopper, Paul
1991 On some principles of grammaticization. In Approaches to Grammaticalization, Vol. I: Focus on Theoretical and Methodological Issues, Elizabeth Closs Traugott & Bernd Heine (eds), 149–187. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hopper, Paul J. & Thompson, Sandra A.
1980 Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language 56: 251–299. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Janzen, Terry
1995 The Polygrammaticalization of FINISH in ASL. MA thesis, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg.Google Scholar
1998a Topicality in ASL: Information Ordering, Constituent Structure, and the Function of Topic Marking. PhD dissertation, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque NM.Google Scholar
1998b Multi-level iconic relationships in American Sign Language grammar. In Proceedings of the First High Desert Linguistics Society Conference, April 3–4, 1998, Vol. 1, Catie Berkenfield, Dawn Nordquist & Angus Grieve-Smith (eds), 159–172. Albuquerque NM: High Desert Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
1999 The grammaticization of topics in American Sign Language. Studies in Language 23(2): 271–306. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007 The expression of grammatical categories in signed languages. In Verbal and Signed Languages: Comparing Structures, Constructs and Methodologies, Elena Pizzuto, Paola Pietrandrea & Raffaele Simone (eds), 171–197. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2010 Pragmatics as start point; Discourse as end point. Keynote Presentation. 9th Conference of the High Desert Linguistic Society (HDLS), University of New Mexico, Albuquerque NM.Google Scholar
2012a Lexicalization and grammaticalization. In Sign Language: An International Handbook [Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Sciences (HSK) series], Markus Steinbach, Roland Pfau & Bencie Woll (eds), 816–841. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012b From embodied perspective to grammar in American Sign Language. Keynote Presentation, Conceptual Structure, Discourse and Language (CSDL) 11. University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada, 17–20 May.Google Scholar
Janzen, Terry & Shaffer, Barbara
2002 Gesture as the substrate in the process of ASL grammaticization. In Modality and Structure in Signed and Spoken Languages, Richard P. Meier, Kearsy Cormier & David Quinto-Pozos (eds), 199–223. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Janzen, Terry, Shaffer, Barbara & Wilcox, Sherman
1999 Signed language pragmatics. In Handbook of Pragmatics, Installment 1999, Jef Verschueren, Jan-Ola Östman, Jan Blommaert & Chris Bulcaen (eds), 1–20. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Lakoff, Robin
1975 Language and Women’s Place. New York NY: Harper Colophone.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W.
2008 Cognitive Grammar: A Basic Introduction. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leeson, Lorraine & Grehan, Carmel
2004 To the lexicon and beyond: The effect of gender on variation in Irish Sign Language. In To the Lexicon and Beyond: Sociolinguistics in European Deaf Communities, Mieke Van Herreweghe & Myriam Vermeerbergen (eds), 39–73. Washington DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Li, Charles N. & Thompson, Sandra A.
1976 Subject and topic: A new typology of language. In Subject and Topic, Charles N. Li (ed.), 457–490. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Long, J. Schuyler
1918 The Sign Language: A Manual of Signs. Omaha NE: Dorothy Long Thompson.Google Scholar
Mauk, Claude E.
2003 Undershoot in Two Modalities: Evidence from Fast Speech and Fast Signing. PhD dissertation University of Texas, Austin TX.Google Scholar
Mauk, Claude E. & Tyrone, Martha
2008 Sign lowering as phonetic reduction in American Sign Language. In Proceedings of the 8th International Seminar on Speech Production, Rudolph Sock, Suzanne Fuchs & Yves Laprie (eds), 185–188. Le Chesnay, France: INRIA.Google Scholar
Padden, Carol
1988 Interaction of Morphology and Syntax in American Sign Language. New York NY: Garland.Google Scholar
Renard, Marc & Delaporte, Yves
2004 Aux Origines de la Langue des Signes Française: Brouland, Pélissier, Lambert, les premiers illustrateurs 1855–1865. Paris: Langue des Signes Éditions Publications.Google Scholar
Russell, Kevin, Wilkinson, Erin & Janzen, Terry
2011 ASL sign lowering as undershoot: A corpus study. Laboratory Phonology 2(2): 403–422. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shaffer, Barbara
2000 A Syntactic, Pragmatic analysis of the Expression of Necessity and Possibility in American Sign Language. PhD dissertation, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque NM.Google Scholar
2002 CAN’T: The negation of modal notions in ASL. Sign Language Studies 3(1): 34–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2004 Information ordering and speaker subjectivity: Modality in ASL. Cognitive Linguistics 15(2) 175–195. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shaffer, Barbara & Janzen, Terry
2016 Modality and mood in American Sign Language. In The Oxford Handbook of Mood and Modality, Jan Nuyts & Johan van der Auwera (eds), 448–469. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Slobin, Dan I.
2006 Issues of linguistic typology in the study of sign language development of deaf children. In Advances in the Sign Language Development by Deaf Children, Brenda Schick, Mark Marschark & Patricia E. Spencer (eds), 20–45. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
2008 Breaking the molds: Signed languages and the nature of human languages. Sign Language Studies 8(2): 114–130. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stokoe, William C., Casterline, Dorothy C. & Croneberg, Carl G.
1965 A Dictionary of American Sign Language on Linguistic Principles. Washington DC: Gallaudet College Press.Google Scholar
Thompson, Sandra A. & Hopper, Paul J.
2001 Transitivity, clause structure, and argument structure: Evidence from conversation. In Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure [Typological Studies in Language 45], 27–60. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
1989 On the rise of epistemic meanings in English: An example of subjectification in semantic change. Language 65(1): 31–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vermeerbergen, Myriam, Leeson, Lorraine & Crasborn, Onno
(eds) 2007 Simultaneity in Signed Languages: Form and Function [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 281]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilcox, Phyllis
1998 GIVE: Acts of giving in American Sign Language. In The Linguistics of Giving [Typological Studies in Language 36], John Newmann (ed.), 175–207. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilcox, Phyllis Perrin
2000 Metaphor in American Sign Language. Washington DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Wilcox, Sherman
2004 Cognitive iconicity: Conceptual spaces, meaning, and gesture in signed language. Cognitive Linguistics 15(2): 119–147. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007 Routes from gesture to language. In Verbal and Signed Languages: Comparing Structures, Constructs and Methodologies, Elena Pizzuto, Paola Pietrandrea & Raffaele Simone (eds), 107–131. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Wilcox, Sherman & Wilcox, Phyllis
1995 The gestural expression of modality in ASL. In Modality in Grammar and Discourse [Typological Studies in Language 32], Joan Bybee & Suzanne Fleischman (eds), 135–162. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 4 other publications

Hochgesang, Julie A., Ryan Lepic & Emily Shaw
2023. Chapter 11. W(h)ither the ASL corpus?. In Advances in Sign Language Corpus Linguistics [Studies in Corpus Linguistics, 108], ► pp. 287 ff. DOI logo
Hou, Lynn
2022. LOOKing for multi-word expressions in American Sign Language. Cognitive Linguistics 33:2 ► pp. 291 ff. DOI logo
Makaroğlu, Bahtiyar
2023. The next station: chunking of değİl ‘not’ collocations in Turkish Sign Language. Cognitive Linguistics 34:3-4 ► pp. 371 ff. DOI logo
Pleyer, Michael, Ryan Lepic & Stefan Hartmann
2022. Compositionality in Different Modalities: A View from Usage-Based Linguistics. International Journal of Primatology DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 march 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.