Points, Depictions, Gestures and Enactment: Partly Lexical and Non-Lexical Signs as Core Elements of Single Clause-Like Units in Auslan (Australian Sign Language)Footnote

* We would like to acknowledge the support of the Australian Research Council grant #DP1094572; the members of the deaf community who have contributed to the Auslan Corpus; and the researchers and annotators who have enriched the corpus to its current state (in approximate chronological order, with the most recent first): Christopher Hansford, Donovan Cresdee, Michael Gray, Lindsay Ferrara, Julia Allen, Gerry Shearim, Karin Banna, Louise de Beuzeville, Dani Fried, Della Goswell and Adam Schembri. We are especially grateful to Lindsay Ferrara, Toby Gifford, Peter Petocz and two anonymous reviewers for their thoughtful and constructive comments that helped to improve this paper. Any errors are our own.

References

• Armstrong DF, WC Stokoe & S Wilcox 1995 Gesture and the Nature of Language Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Biber D 2010 ‘Corpus-based and corpus-driven analyses of language variation and use’ in B Heine & H Narrog (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 159–192.
   Google Scholar
• Bolinger D 1983 ‘Intonation and gesture’ American Speech 58: 156–174. doi:10.2307/455326
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boyes Braem P 1999 ‘Rhythmic temporal patterns in the signing of deaf early and late learners of Swiss German Sign Language’ Language and Speech 42(2–3): 177–208.
   Google Scholar
• Brentari D & L Crossley 2002 ‘Prosody on the hands and face: evidence from American Sign Language’ Sign Language and Linguistics 5(2): 105–130.
   Google Scholar
• Bybee JL 2003 ‘Cognitive processes in grammaticalization’ in M Tomasello (ed.) The New Psychology of Language: cognitive and functional approaches to language structure Mahweh, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Bybee JL & PJ Hopper (eds) 2001 Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Casey SK 2003 ‘Relationships between gestures and signed languages: indicating participants in actions’ in A Baker, B van den Bogaerde & O Crasborn (eds) Cross-Linguistic Perspectives in Sign Language Research Selected papers from TISLR 2000 Hamburg: Signum Verlag. pp. 95–118.
   Google Scholar
• Chafe W 1994 Discourse Consciousness and Time: the flow and displacement of conscious experience in speaking and writing Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Clark H & R Gerrig 1990 ‘Quotations as demonstrations’ Language 66: 764–805. doi:10.2307/414729
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cogill-Koez D 2000 ‘Signed language classifier predicates: linguistic structures or schematic visual representation?’ Sign Language and Linguistics 3(2): 153–207. doi:10.1075/sll.3.2.03cog
   Google Scholar
• Consten M & A Loll 2012 ‘Circularity effects in corpus studies – why annotations sometimes go round in circles’ Language Sciences 34: 702–714. doi:10.1016/j.langsci.2012.04.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cormier KA & S Smith 2011 ‘Defining and annotating constructed action constructed dialogue and role shift’ presented at the 33rd Annual Meeting of the German Linguistic Society Workshop on Sign Language Discourse, University of Gottingen, Germany, 23–25 February.
   Google Scholar
• Crasborn O & H Sloetjes 2008 ‘Enhanced ELAN functionality for sign language corpora’ in O Crasborn, T Hanke, E Efthimiou, I Zwitserlood & E Thoutenhoofd (eds) Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on the Representation and Processing of Sign Languages: Construction and Exploitation of Sign Language Corpora Paris: ELDA. pp. 39–43.
   Google Scholar
• Croft W 1995 ‘Intonation units and grammatical structure’ Linguistics 33: 839–882. doi:10.1515/ling.1995.33.5.839
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Croft W 2001 Radical Construction Grammar: syntactic theory in typological perspective Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Croft W 2007 ‘Intonation units and grammatical structure in Wardaman and in cross-linguistic perspective’ Australian Journal of Linguistics 27(1): 1–39. doi:10.1080/07268600601172934
   Google Scholar
• Croft W & A Cruse 2004 Cognitive Linguistics Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• de Beuzeville L 2006 Visual and linguistic representation in the acquisition of depicting verbs: a study of native signing deaf children of Auslan (Australian Sign Language), Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Newcastle, New South Wales.
   Google Scholar
• de Beuzeville L, T Johnston & A Schembri 2009 ‘The use of space with indicating verbs in Auslan: a corpus-based investigation’ Sign Language and Linguistics 12(1): 53–82.
   Google Scholar
• Diessel H 2007 ‘Frequency effects in language acquisition language use and diachronic change’ New Ideas in Psychology 25: 108–127. doi:10.1016/j.newideapsych.2007.02.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dingemanse M 2011 The meaning and use of ideophones in Siwu PhD dissertation, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen.
   Google Scholar
• Dingemanse M 2012 ‘Advances in the cross-linguistic study of ideophones’ Language and Linguistics Compass 6: 654–672. doi:10.1002/lnc3.361
   Google Scholar
• Du Bois JW 1987 ‘The discourse basis of ergativity’ Language 63: 805–855. doi:10.2307/415719
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Du Bois JW 2003 ‘Discourse and grammar’ in M Tomasello (ed.) The New Psychology of Language Vol. 2 Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. pp. 47–88.
   Google Scholar
• Emmorey K 2003 Perspectives on Classifier Constructions in Sign Languages Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Enfield N 2009 The Anatomy of Meaning: speech gesture and composite utterances Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fauconnier G & M Turner 2002 The Way We Think: conceptual blending and the mind's hidden complexities New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Fenlon J, T Denmark, R Campbell & B Woll 2007 ‘Seeing sentence boundaries’ Sign Language and Linguistics, 10(2): 177–200.
   Google Scholar
• Ferrara L 2012 The grammar of depiction: Exploring gesture and language in Australian Sign Language Auslan Unpublished PhD dissertation, Macquarie University, Sydney.
   Google Scholar
• Ferrara L & T Johnston 2014 ‘Elaborating who's what: a study of constructed action and clause structure in Auslan Australian sign language’ Australian Journal of Linguistics 34(2): 193–215.
   Google Scholar
• Givón T 2005 Context as Other Minds: the pragmatics of sociality cognition and communication Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Givón T 2009 The Genesis of Syntactic Complexity: diachrony ontogeny neuro-cognition evolution Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Green JA 2014 Drawn from the Ground: sound, sign and inscription in Central Australian sand stories Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
   Google Scholar
• Green JA & D Wilkins 2014 ‘With or without speech: Arandic sign language from Central Australia’ Australian Journal of Linguistics 34(2): 234–261.
   Google Scholar
• Gries ST 2008 ‘Dispersions and adjusted frequencies in corpora’ International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 13(4): 403–437. doi:10.1075/ijcl.13.4.02gri
   Google Scholar
• Gries ST 2010a ‘Useful statistics for corpus linguistics’ in A Sánchez & M Almela (eds) A Mosaic of Corpus Linguistics: selected approaches Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. pp. 269–291.
   Google Scholar
• Gries ST 2010b ‘Dispersions and adjusted frequencies in corpora: further explorations’ in S Th Gries, S Wulff & M Davies (eds) Corpus Linguistic Applications: current studies new directions Amsterdam: Rodopi. pp. 197–212.
   Google Scholar
• Halliday MAK 1994 An Introduction to Functional Grammar 2nd edition London: Edward Arnold.
   Google Scholar
• Hanke T & S Prillwitz 1995 ‘SyncWriter: integrating video into the transcription and analysis of sign language’ In H Bos, F Schermer & M Gertrude (eds) Sign Language Research 1994: Proceedings of the Fourth European Congress on Sign Language Research, Munich, September 1–3 (International Studies on Sign Language and Communication of the Deaf; 29) Hamburg: Signum Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Haspelmath M 2007 ‘Pre-established categories don't exist: consequences for language description and typology’ Linguistic Typology 11: 119–132. doi:10.1515/LINGTY.2007.011
   Google Scholar
• Haspelmath M 2008 ‘Frequency vs iconicity in explaining grammatical asymmetries’ Cognitive Linguistics 19: 1–33. doi:10.1515/COG.2008.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haspelmath M 2010 ‘Framework-free grammatical theory’ in B Heine & H Narrog (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Grammatical Analysis Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 341–365.
   Google Scholar
• Hodge G 2014 Patterns from a signed language corpus: clause-like units in Auslan (Australian sign language) Unpublished PhD dissertation, Macquarie University, Sydney.
   Google Scholar
• Janzen T 1995 The polygrammaticalization of Finish in ASL MA thesis, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg.
   Google Scholar
• Janzen T 2012 ‘Lexicalization and grammaticalization’ in R Pfau, M Steinbach & B Woll (eds) Sign Languages Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. pp. 816–841.
   Google Scholar
• Janzen T & B Schaffer 2002 ‘Gesture as the substrate in the process of ASL grammaticalization’ in RP Meier, KA Cormier & D Quinto-Pozos (eds) Modality and Structure in Signed and Spoken Languages Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 199–224.
   Google Scholar
• Johnston T 1996 ‘Function and medium in the forms of linguistic expression found in a sign language’ in WH Edmonson & R Wilbur (eds) International Review of Sign Linguistics Vol. 1 Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. pp. 57–94.
   Google Scholar
• Johnston T 2010 ‘From archive to corpus: transcription and annotation in the creation of signed language corpora’ International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 15(1): 106–131. doi:10.1075/ijcl.15.1.05joh
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnston T 2012 ‘Lexical frequency in signed languages’ Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 17(2): 163–193. doi:10.1093/deafed/enr036
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnston T 2013a Auslan Corpus Annotation Guidelines [ February version] Macquarie University, Sydney. Available at: http://wwwauslanorgau/about/annotations/
   Google Scholar
• Johnston T 2013b ‘Formational and functional characteristics of pointing signs in a corpus of Auslan (Australian sign language): are the data sufficient to posit a grammatical class of'pronouns’ in Auslan?’ Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 9: 109–159.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnston T, D Cresdee & A Schembri 2011 ‘Synchronic contextual variation and grammaticalization in a signed language: the case of two finish-related signs’ presented at the 11th International Cognitive Linguistics Conference 11–17 July, Xi'an International Studies University, China.
   Google Scholar
• Johnston T & L Ferrara 2012 ‘Lexicalization in signed languages – when is an idiom not an idiom?’ in C Hart (ed.) Selected Papers from UK-CLA Meetings (Vol. 1. pp. 229–248) UK: United Kingdom Cognitive Linguistics Association. Available at: http://www.uk-cla.org.uk/proceedings/volume_1/21-17
   Google Scholar
• Johnston T & A Schembri 2010 ‘Variation lexicalization and grammaticalization in signed languages’ Langage et Société 131: 19–35.
   Google Scholar
• Kendon A 1988 Sign Languages of Aboriginal Australia: cultural semiotic and communicative perspectives Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kendon A 2004 Gesture: visible action as utterance Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kita S (ed.) 2003 Pointing: where language, culture, and cognition meet Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Kockelman P 2005 ‘The semiotic stance’ Semiotica 157(1/4): 233–304.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Langacker RW 2008 Cognitive Grammar: a basic introduction Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• LaPolla RJ 2006 ‘On grammatical relations as constraints on referent identification’ in T Tsunoda & T Kageyama (eds) Voice and Grammatical Relations: Festschrift for Masayoshi Shibatani Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. pp. 139–151.
   Google Scholar
• Lehmann C 1988 ‘Towards a typology of clause linkage’ in J Haiman & SA Thompson (eds) Clause Combining in Grammar and Discourse Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. pp. 181–226.
   Google Scholar
• Liddell SK 2003 Grammar gesture and meaning in American Sign Language New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Liddell SK & M Metzger 1998 ‘Gesture in sign language discourse’ Journal of Pragmatics 30: 657–697. doi:10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00061-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mason P 2012 ‘Music dance and the total art work: choreomusicology in theory and practice’ Research in Dance Education 13: 5–24. doi:10.1080/14647893.2011.651116
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matsumoto K 2000 ‘Intonation units clauses and preferred argument structure in conversational Japanese’ Language Sciences 22: 63–86. doi:10.1016/S0388-0001(99)00004-2
   Google Scholar
• McKee D & G Kennedy 1998 ‘Sisters or cousins? A lexical comparison of Australian and New Zealand Sign Languages’ in A Schembri, J Napier, R Beattie & G Leigh (eds) Selected Papers from the Australian Deaf Studies Research Symposium, 22–23 August 1998 Renwick College Sydney: North Rocks Press. pp. 67–77.
   Google Scholar
• McKee D & G Kennedy 2006 ‘The distribution of signs in New Zealand Sign Language’ Sign Language Studies 6: 372–390. doi:10.1353/sls.2006.0027
   Google Scholar
• Metzger M 1995 ‘Constructed dialogue and constructed action in American Sign Language’ in C Lucas (ed.) Sociolinguistics in Deaf Communities Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press. pp. 255–271.
   Google Scholar
• Meyer D, A Zeileis & K Hornik 2003 ‘Visualizing independence using extended association plots’ in K Hornik, F Leisch & A Zeileis (eds) Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Distributed Statistical Computing Vienna, Austria: Distributed Statistical Computing. Available at: http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/Conferences/DSC-2003/Proceedings/
   Google Scholar
• Morford J & J MacFarlane 2003 ‘Frequency characteristics of American Sign Language’ Sign Language Studies 3: 213–225. doi:10.1353/sls.2003.0003
   Google Scholar
• Mulrooney KJ 2009 Extraordinary from the Ordinary: personal experience narratives in American Sign Language Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Naveda L & M Leman 2010 ‘The spatiotemporal representation of dance and music gestures using Topographical Gesture Analysis TGA’ Music Perception 28(1): 93–111. doi:10.1525/mp.2010.28.1.93
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nespor M & W Sandler 1999 ‘Prosody in Israeli sign language’ Language and Speech 42(2–3): 143–176. doi:10.1177/00238309990420020201
   Google Scholar
• Okrent A 2002 ‘A modality-free notion of gesture and how it can help us with the morpheme vs gesture questions in sign language linguistics or at least give us some criteria to work with’ in RP Meier, KA Cormier & D Quinto-Pozos (eds) Modality and Structure in Signed and Spoken Languages New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 175–198.
   Google Scholar
• Park J 2002 ‘Cognitive and interactional motivations for the intonation unit’ Studies in Language 26(3): 637–680. doi:10.1075/sl.26.3.07par
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Payne TE 1997 Describing Morphosyntax: a guide for field linguists Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pfau R & M Steinbach 2011 ‘Grammaticalization in sign languages’ in H Narrog & B Heine (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Grammaticalization Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 683–695.
   Google Scholar
• R Development Core Team 2012 R: a language and environment for statistical computing ISBN 3-900051-07-0 Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing Available at: http://wwwR-projectorg.
   Google Scholar
• Sandler W 1999 ‘Prosody in two natural language modalities’ Language and Speech 42(2/3): 127–142. doi:10.1177/00238309990420020101
   Google Scholar
• Schembri A 2003 ‘Rethinking ‘classifiers’ in signed languages’ in K Emmorey (ed.) Perspectives on Classifier Constructions in Sign Languages Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. pp. 3–34.
   Google Scholar
• Schembri A, C Jones & D Burnham 2005 ‘Comparing action gestures and classifier verbs of motion: evidence from Australian Sign Language, Taiwan Sign Language and nonsigners’ gestures without speech’ Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 10(3): 272–290. doi:10.1093/deafed/eni029
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schutz M 2008 ‘Seeing music? What musicians need to know about vision’ Empirical Musicology Review 3(3): 83–108.
   Google Scholar
• Streeck J 2008 ‘Depicting by gesture’ Gesture 8(3): 285–301. doi:10.1075/gest.8.3.02str
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sze F 2008 ‘Blinks and intonational phrasing in Hong Kong Sign Language’ in J Quer (ed.) Signs of the Time: selected papers from TISLR 2004 Hamburg: Signum. pp. 83–107.
   Google Scholar
• Tannen D 1989 Talking voices: repetition dialogue and imagery in conversational discourse Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson SA & PJ Hopper 2001 ‘Transitivity clause structure and argument structure: evidence from conversation’ in JL Bybee & PJ Hopper (eds) Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. pp. 27–60.
   Google Scholar
• Tomasello M 2003 Constructing a Language: a usage-based theory of language acquisition Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Van Valin RD & RJ LaPolla 1997 Syntax: structure meaning and function Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wilcox S 2004 ‘Cognitive iconicity: conceptual spaces, meaning, and gesture in signed languages’ Cognitive Linguistics 15(2): 119–147.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winston E 1991 ‘Spatial referencing and cohesion in American Sign Language text’ Sign Language Studies 73: 397–410. doi:10.1353/sls.1991.0003
   Google Scholar
• Winston E 1992 ‘Space and involvement in an American Sign Language lecture’ in J Plant-Moeller (ed.) Expanding Horizons: twelfth national convention of the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf Silver Spring, MD: Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf. pp. 93–105.
   Google Scholar