Agreement In Asl

Finally, let us comment on four other shortcomings: first, as far as we can tell, climate analysis has nothing to say about hindsight. As air conditioning is the real argument of verbs, the reverse pattern suggests that the syntactic structure is also reversed, the source being projected above the lens. However, to our knowledge, there is not only no evidence of this; On the contrary, the fact that the omission of subject markers systematically targets grammatical rather than thematic functions is particularly important for both classes of verbs to project their argument structure in the same way into the syntax. Second, climate analysis is obliged to assume that the fundamental phonological characteristics of the verbal strain (i.e. The beginning and end of the path) assimilate the two conditioners and not the other way around, which is at least quite unusual in typological terms (for phonological formation of the hand in the verbo-pronoun combinations in ASL, see Wilbur 1999). Moreover, this hypothesis is overgeneralized, as it cannot explain why the phonological assimilation of the path is blocked by simple verbs. Third, climate analysis for SOV languages such as DGS requires additional syntactic machines such as verb augmentation to get the correct order of verb and clitics (z.B CLSUB-V-CLOBJ) as well as aid and air conditioning mechanisms (z.B CLSUB-PAM-CLOBJ). Finally, note that there is no synchronous or diachronous evidence of an intermediate stage of the inclination of pronomic signs to verbs, not even in languages with emerging verbs like Nicaraguan SL (Senghas – Coppola 2001).23 None, Stefan. 2010. Case and agreement between Fringe and Core. A minimalist approach.

Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI: The asymmetry of the verb between simple verbs and verbs of concordance is thus independently motivated.2930 Wilbur, Ronnie B. 2013. The point of convergence: changing the way we think about sign language, gesture and agreement. Sign language and linguistic 16 (2). 221-258. DOI: Plain Words cannot accept, either because they do not express transmission (i.e. their LCS differs from that shown in (6) or because their phonological specification does not permit a merger with DIR. For example, the VERBE CLAIR DGS LIKE in (1c) may express an abstract transmission (i.e. the transmission of an emotion), but it is well aware of the body and cannot be detached from its place of articulation (chest) to obtain agreement. There are independent differences between the two structures that attest to our proposal; they all indicate very strongly that the verbs are closer to each other in the first structure (not separated by a clause limit): first, the modal verbs between V and PAM can intervene in (35b), but not in (35a) (for the combination modals and PAM, see also note 30 above). Second, WFP`s propensity for two-handed verbs by coalescence (Sandler 1999) is only possible in (35a) but not in (35b).

Third, a subject pronouncopy is possible between verb and PAM in (35b), but not in (35a). Fourth, we have preliminary evidence that there is a difference in the spread of the shake-head: while it is possible to shake your head on PAM with an optional diffusion on the verb in both examples, shaking the head can only appear on the verb in (35b).