Question-answer pairs: the help of LSF

Abstract

A growing literature has emerged on sign languages describing a particular construction which looks like a question followed by its fragment answer, but which crucially is not interpreted as such. In sign language litterature, it has successively been referred to as pseudoclefts (Wilbur 1996, Branchini 2014), rhetorical questions (Hoza et al. 1997), question-answer constituents (Davidson, Caponigro, and Mayberry 2008), or, more recently, Question Answer Pairs (QAP) in Kimmelman and Vink (2017). This last work proposes the existence of a grammaticalization process starting with information seeking questions and ending with question-answer constituent, creating a bridge between two of the main analyses proposed. In our article, we extend the bridge to Wilbur's analysis and beyond. We demonstrate, based on an extensive depiction of French Sign Language's (LSF) QAP properties, that the grammaticalization scale proposed in Kimmelman and Vink (2017) has to be further developed to integrate pseudoclefts as its ending point. Through morpho-phonetic, syntactic and semantic evidences, we will show that LSF instantiates a construction which is syntactically closer to pseudoclefts than American Sign Language and Sign Language of the Netherlands but not yet at the point of Italian Sign Language (Branchini 2014), advocating in favor of an intermediate analysis.

Focus and contrast in Catalan Sign Language (LSC): Form and interpretation

“…It is important to notice that examples ( 16) and ( 17 In line with the analysis of Kimmelman & Vink (2017) for NGT, the variability in LSC data suggests that QAPs in LSC are undergoing a process of grammaticalization (cf. Kimmelman & Vink, 2017, Hauser, 2018. Kimmelman & Vink (2017) The difference in felicitousness between English and LSC that we…”

“…A first approach to the study of clefts in LSC has been provided. Regarding pseudoclefts LSC seems to be undergoing a process of grammaticalization just as stated by Kimmelman & Vink (2017) for NGT and by Hauser (2018) for LSF. The question-answer pair claimed to be a pseudocleft in some SLs (Wilbur 1996) is extremely rare in LSC in the context in which a pseudocleft would be completely felicitous.…”

A subject advantage in covert dependencies: The case ofwh‐question comprehension in French Sign Language

“…The gloss pi refers to the LSF relative pronoun identified inHauser & Geraci 2018. It is a d-like relative pronoun (like der, die, das in German and unlike qui, que in French and who in English, which are wh-like relative pronouns).…”