Classifier constructions in sign languages: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 05:33, 30 July 2022

Revision as of 05:36, 30 July 2022

Line 68:

== Linguistic analyses ==

<!-- Introduction and representational analyses -->There is no consensus on how to analyze classifier constructions.{{Sfn|Brentari|2010|p=254}} Linguistic analyses can be divided into three major categories: representational, morphological, and lexical. Representational analyses were the first attempt at describing classifiers.{{Sfn|Zwitserlood|2012|p=159}} This analysis views them as manual representations of movements in the world. Because classifier constructions are highly [[Iconicity|iconic]], representational analyses argue that this form-meaning connection should be the basis for linguistic analysis. This was argued because finite sets of morphemes or parameters cannot account for all potentially meaningful classifier constructions.{{Sfn|DeMatteo|1977}}{{Sfn|Brentari|2010|p=256-257}} This view has been criticized because it predicts [[ungrammatical|impossible constructions]]. For example, in ASL, a walking classifier handshape cannot be used to represent the movement of an animal in the animal [[classifier (linguistics)|noun class]], even though it is an iconic representation of the event.{{Sfn|Brentari|2010|p=258-259}}{{Clarify|reason=what is a noun class?|date=August 2019}}

<!-- lexical analyses -->Lexical analyses view classifiers as [[lexicalization|partially lexicalized words]].{{Sfn|Liddell}}

<!-- morphological analyses -->Morphological analyses view classifiers as a series of morphemes.{{Sfn|Benedicto|Brentari|2004|p=}}{{Sfn|Supalla|1982}} Currently, this is the predominant school of thought.{{Sfn|Zwitserlood|2012|p=159; 165}}{{Sfn|Schembri|2003|p=18}} In this analyses, classifier verbs are combinations of verbal roots with numerous affixes.{{Sfn|Zwitserlood|2012|p=165}} If the handshape is taken to consist of several morphemes, it is not clear how they should be segmented or analyzed.{{Sfn|Zwitserlood|2012|p=159}}{{Sfn|Schembri|2003|p=18-20}} For example, the fingertips in [[Swedish Sign Language]] can be bent in order to represent the front of a car getting damaged in a crash; this led Supalla to posit that each finger might act as a separate morpheme.{{Sfn|Schembri|2003|p=18-20}} The morphological analysis has been criticized for its complexity.{{Sfn|Zwitserlood|2012|p=165}} Liddell found that to analyze a classifier construction in ASL where one person walks to another would require anywhere between 14 and 28 morphemes.{{Sfn|Liddell|p=205-206}} Other linguists, however, consider the handshape to consist of one, solitary morpheme.{{Sfn|Schembri|2003|p=19}} In 2003, Schembri stated that there is no convincing evidence that all handshapes are multi-morphemic. This was based on grammaticality judgments from native signers.{{Sfn|Schembri|2003|p=19}}

<!-- what is the root in morphological analyses -->Morphological analyses differ in what aspect of the construction they consider the root. Supalla argued that the morpheme which expresses motion or ___location is the verbal root to which the handshape morpheme is affixed.{{Sfn|Supalla|1982|p=}} Engberg-Pedersen disagreed with Supalla, arguing that the choice of handshape can fundamentally change how the movement is interpreted. Therefore, she claims the movement should be the root. For example, putting a book on a shelf and a cat jumping on a shelf both use the same movement in ASL, despite being fundamentally different acts.{{Sfn|Schembri|2003|p=21-22}}{{Sfn|Emmorey|2008|p=88-91}}{{Sfn|Zwitserlood|2012|p=166}} Classifiers are [[Affix|affixes]], meaning that they cannot occur alone and must be [[Bound and free morphemes|bound]].{{Sfn|Zwitserlood|2012|p=168}} Classifiers on their own are not specified for place of articulation or movement. This might explain why they are bound: this missing information is filled in by the root.{{Sfn|Zwitserlood|2012|p=168}}

<!-- pronouns -->Certain classifiers are similar to [[pronoun|pronouns]].{{Sfn|Zwitserlood|2012|p=166}}{{Sfn|Emmorey|2008|p=88-91}}{{Sfn|Marschark|Spencer|2003|p=321}} Like pronouns, the signer has to first introduce the referent, usually by signing or [[fingerspelling]] the noun.{{Sfn|Baker-Shenk|Cokely|p=287|1981}} The classifier is then taken to refer to this referent.{{Sfn|Zwitserlood|2012|p=166}} Signers do not have to re-introduce the same referent in later constructions; it is understood to still refer to the that referent.{{Sfn|Zwitserlood|2012|p=166}} Some classifiers also denote a specific group the same way that the pronoun "she" can refer to women or waitresses.{{Sfn|Baker-Shenk|Cokely|p=287|1981}} Similarly, ASL has a classifier which refers to vehicles, but not people or animals.{{Sfn|Baker-Shenk|Cokely|p=287|1981}} In this view, verbal classifiers may be seen as [[Agreement (linguistics)|agreement]] markers for their referents with the movement as its root.{{Sfn|Zwitserlood|2012|p=166}}

== Acquisition ==