2019
DOI: 10.1075/lab.17043.qua
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Code-blending with depicting signs

Abstract: Bimodal bilinguals sometimes use code-blending, simultaneous production of (parts of) an utterance in both speech and sign. We ask what spoken language material is blended with entity and handling depicting signs (DS), representations of action that combine discrete components with iconic depictions of aspects of a referenced event in a gradient, analog manner. We test a semantic approach that DS may involve a demonstration, involving a predicate which selects for an iconic demonstrational argument, and adopt … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2
2

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 20 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A number of functional elements that can typically surface in spoken languages, such as auxiliaries, prepositions, articles, clitics, and conjunctions, do not exist in sign languages as documented so far, and are therefore never «paired» in sign when uttered in a code-blend. The same holds, on the other hand, for so-called classifiers in sign languages, i.e., « morphemes with a non-specific meaning, expressed by particular configurations of the hands and which represent entities by denoting salient characteristics » (Zwitzerlood, 2012, p. 158), which have no grammatical equivalent in spoken languages (see de Quadros et al (2020) for an interesting analysis of what happens when blending involve depicting classifiers).…”
Section: Really Livementioning
confidence: 97%
“…A number of functional elements that can typically surface in spoken languages, such as auxiliaries, prepositions, articles, clitics, and conjunctions, do not exist in sign languages as documented so far, and are therefore never «paired» in sign when uttered in a code-blend. The same holds, on the other hand, for so-called classifiers in sign languages, i.e., « morphemes with a non-specific meaning, expressed by particular configurations of the hands and which represent entities by denoting salient characteristics » (Zwitzerlood, 2012, p. 158), which have no grammatical equivalent in spoken languages (see de Quadros et al (2020) for an interesting analysis of what happens when blending involve depicting classifiers).…”
Section: Really Livementioning
confidence: 97%