Emergent Morphology in Child Homesign: Evidence from Number Language

References

• Abner, N. (2012). The object of my POSSession. Proceedings of WCCFL (Vol. 30, pp. 21–31). University of California, Santa Cruz, CA.
   Google Scholar
• Abner, N., Flaherty, M., Stangl, K., Coppola, M., Brentari, D., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2019). The noun-verb distinction in established and emergent sign systems. Language, 95(2), 230–267. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2019.0030
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abner, N., & Wilbur, R. B. (2017). Quantification in American Sign Language. In (eds. Denis Paperno and Edward L. Keenan), Handbook of quantifiers in natural language: Volume II (pp. 21–59). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Aronoff, M., Meir, I., Padden, C., & Sandler, W. (2005). Morphological universals and the sign language type. In (eds. Geert E. Booij and Jaap van Marle), Yearbook of Morphology 2004 (pp. 19–39). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Brannon, E. M. (2005). What animals know about numbers. In (eds. Jamie I.D. Campbell),Handbook of mathematical cognition (pp. 85–107).
   Google Scholar
• Brentari, D., Coppola, M., Mazzoni, L., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2012). When does a system become phonological? Handshape production in gesturers, signers, and homesigners. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 30(1), 1–31. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-011-9145-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, R. (1973). A first language: The early stages. Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Butcher, C., Mylander, C., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (1991). Displaced communication in a self-styled gesture system: Pointing at the non-present. Cognitive Development, 6(3), 315–342. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0885-2014(91)90042-C
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carrigan, E. M., & Coppola, M. (2017). Successful communication does not drive language development: Evidence from adult homesign. Cognition, 158, 10–27. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2016.09.012
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coppola, M., & Senghas, A. (2010). Deixis in an emerging sign language. In D. Brentari (Ed.), Sign languages: A Cambridge language survey (pp. 543–569). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Coppola, M., & Newport, E. L. (2005). Grammatical subjects in home sign: Abstract linguistic structure in adult primary gesture systems without linguistic input. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102(52), 19249–19253. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0509306102
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coppola, M., Spaepen, E., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2013). Communicating about quantity without a language model: Number devices in homesign grammar. Cognitive Psychology, 67(1–2), 1–25. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2013.05.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corbett, G. (2000). Number. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Corbett, G. (2007). Canonical typology, suppletion, and possible words. Language, 83(1), 8–42. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2007.0006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corbett, G. (1996). Minor number and the plurality split. Rivista Le langage à la lumière des langues des signes.di linguistica, 8(1), 101–122.
   Google Scholar
• Cormier, K. (2002). Grammaticalization of indexic signs: How American Sign Language expresses numerosity [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Texas.
   Google Scholar
• Cuxac, C. (2005). Le langage à la lumière des langues des signes. Psychiatrie française, 36(11), 69–86.
   Google Scholar
• Dehaene, S. (1997). The number sense: How mathematical knowledge is embedded in our brains. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Diedenhofen, B. & Musch, J. (2015). cocor: A Comprehensive Solution for the Statistical Comparison of Correlations. PLoS ONE, 10(4): e0121945. doi:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0121945
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. V. (1969). The repertoire of nonverbal behavior: Categories, origins, usage, and coding. semiotica, 1(1), 49–98. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1515/semi.1969.1.1.49
   Google Scholar
• Everett, D. L. (2005). Cultural constraints on grammar and cognition in Pirahã. Current Anthropology, 46(4), 621–646. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1086/431525
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flaherty, M., Hunsicker, D., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2021). Structural biases that children bring to language learning: A cross-cultural look at gestural input to homesign. Cognition, 211, 104608. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104608
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flaherty, M., & Senghas, A. (2011). Numerosity and number signs in deaf Nicaraguan adults. Cognition, 121(3), 427–436. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2011.07.007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frajzyngier, Z. (1997). Grammaticalization of number: From demonstratives to nominal and verbal plural. Linguistic Typology, 1(2), 193–242. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1515/lity.1997.1.2.193
   Google Scholar
• Frank, M. C., Everett, D. L., Fedorenko, E., & Gibson, E. (2008). Number as a cognitive technology: Evidence from Pirahã language and cognition. Cognition, 108(3), 819–824. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.04.007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franklin, A., Giannakidou, A., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2011). Negation, questions, and structure building in a homesign system. Cognition, 118(3), 398–416. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2010.08.017
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frege, G. (1884). The foundations of arithmetic. A logic-mathematical enquiry into the concept of number ( John L. Austin, Trans.). Blackwell, 1950. German original: Die Grundlagen der Arithmetik. Eine logisch mathematische Untersuchung über den Begriff der Zahl (Breslau: Wilhelm Koebner, 1884).
   Google Scholar
• Frishberg, N. (1975). Arbitrariness and iconicity: Historical change in American Sign Language. Language, 51(3), 696–719. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/412894
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fusellier-Souza, I. (2006). Emergence and development of sign languages: From a semiogenetic point of view. Sign Language Studies, 7(1), 30–56. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1353/sls.2006.0030
   Google Scholar
• Goldin-Meadow, S. (1982). The resilience of recursion: A study of a communication system developed without a conventional language model. In E. Wanner & L. R. Gleitman (Eds.), Language acquisition: The state of the art. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goldin-Meadow, S. (2003). The resilience of language: What gesture creation in deaf children can tell us about how all children learn language. Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goldin-Meadow, S., Özyürek, A., Sancar, B., & Mylander, C. (2009). Making language around the globe: A cross-linguistic study of homesign in the United States, China, and Turkey. In J. Guo, E. Lieven, N. Budwig, & S. Ervin-Tripp (Eds.), Crosslinguistic approaches to the psychology of language: Research in the tradition of Dan Isaac Slobin (pp. 27–39). Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Goldin-Meadow, S. (2010). Widening the lens on language learning: Language in deaf children and adults in Nicaragua. Human Development, 53(5), 235–312. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1159/000321294
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldin-Meadow, S., Butcher, C., Mylander, C., & Dodge, M. (1994). Nouns and verbs in a self-styled gesture system: What’s in a name? Cognitive Psychology, 27(3), 259–319. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1994.1018
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldin-Meadow, S., & Feldman, H. (1977). The development of language-like communication without a language model. Science, 197(4301), 401–403. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1126/science.877567
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldin-Meadow, S., Gelman, S., & Mylander, C. (2005). Expressing generic concepts with and without a language model. Cognition, 96(2), 109–126. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2004.07.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldin-Meadow, S., & Mylander, C. (1983). Gestural communication in deaf children: Non-effect of parental input on language development. Science, 221(4608), 372–374. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1126/science.6867713
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldin-Meadow, S., & Mylander, C. (1984). Gestural communication in deaf children: The effects and non-effects of parental input on early language development. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 49(3), 1. No. 207. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/1165838
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldin-Meadow, S., & Mylander, C. (1998). Spontaneous sign systems created by deaf children in two cultures. Nature, 391(6664), 279–281. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1038/34646
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldin-Meadow, S., Mylander, C., & Butcher, C. (1995). The resilience of combinatorial structure at the word level: Morphology in self-styled gesture systems. Cognition, 56(3), 195–262. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(95)00662-I
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldin-Meadow, S., Mylander, C., & Franklin, A. (2007). How children make language out of gesture: Morphological structure in gesture systems developed by American and Chinese deaf children. Cognitive Psychology, 55(2), 87–135. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2006.08.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gordon, P. (2004). Numerical cognition without words: Evidence from Amazonia. Science, 306(5695), 496–499. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1094492
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halle, M., & Marantz, A. (1993). Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection. In K. Hale & S. J. Keyser (Eds.), The view from building 20 (pp. 111–176). MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Horton, L., Goldin-Meadow, S., Coppola, M., Senghas, A., & Brentari, D. (2015). Forging a morphological system out of two dimensions: Agentivity and number. Open Linguistics, 1(1), 596–613. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2015-0021
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hunsicker, D., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2012). Hierarchical structure in a self-created communication system: Building nominal constituents in homesign. Language, 88(4), 732–763. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2012.0092
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Izard, V., Sann, C., Spelke, E. S., & Streri, A. (2009). Newborn infants perceive abstract numbers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(25), 10382–10385. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0812142106
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janzen, T., & Shaffer, B. (2002). Gesture as the substrate in the process of ASL grammaticization. In R. Meier, K. Cormier, & D. Quinto-Pozos (Eds.), Modality and structure in signed and spoken languages (pp. 199–223). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kimmelman, V. (2017). Quantifiers in Russian Sign Language. In E. Keenan & D. Paperno (Eds.), Handbook of Quantifiers in Natural Language: Volume II (pp. 803–855). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Kouider, S., Halberda, J., Wood, J., & Carey, S. (2006). Acquisition of English number marking: The singular-plural distinction. Language Learning and Development, 2(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1207/s15473341lld0201_1
   Google Scholar
• Leybaert, J., & Van Cutsem, M. N. (2002). Counting in sign language. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 81(4), 482–501. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1006/jecp.2002.2660
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Locke, J. (1847[1690]). An essay concerning human understanding. Kay & Troutman.
   Google Scholar
• Núñez, R. E. (2011). No innate number line in the human brain. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 42(4), 651–668. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022111406097
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Padden, C. (1988). The interaction of morphology and syntax in American Sign Language. Garland Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Pizzuto, E., & Corazza, S. (1996). Noun morphology in Italian Sign language (LIS). Lingua, 98(1–3), 169–196. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(95)00037-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R Core Team. (2020). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/
   Google Scholar
• Secada, W. G. (1984). Counting in sign: The number string, accuracy and use [Doctoral dissertation]. Northwestern University.
   Google Scholar
• Spaepen, E., Coppola, M., Spelke, E., Carey, S., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2011). Number without a language model. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the United States of America, 108(8), 3163–3168. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1015975108
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spaepen, E., Flaherty, M., Coppola, M., Spelke, E., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2013). Generating a lexicon without a language model: Do words for number count? Journal of Memory and Language, 69(4), 496–505. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2013.05.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steinbach, M. (2012). Plurality. In (eds. R. Pfau, M. Steinbach, and B. Woll), Sign language: An international handbook (pp. 112–136).
   Google Scholar
• Supalla, T., & Newport, E. (1978). How many seats in a chair? The derivation of nouns and verbs in American sign language. In P. Siple (Ed.), Understanding language through sign language research.
   Google Scholar
• Wiese, H. (2003). Numbers, language, and the human mind. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wynn, K. (1990). Children’s understanding of counting. Cognition, 36(2), 155–193. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(90)90003-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wynn, K. (1992). Children’s acquisition of the number words and the counting system. Cognitive Psychology, 24(2), 220–251. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(92)90008-P
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yadroff, M., & Billings, L. (1998). The syntax of approximative inversion in Russian (and the general architecture of nominal expressions). Annual Workshop on Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics (Vol. 6, pp. 319–338). Storrs, CT
   Google Scholar
• Zeshan, U., Delgado, C. E. E., Dikyuva, H., Panda, S., & De Vos, C. (2013). Cardinal numerals in rural sign languages: Approaching cross-modal typology. Linguistic Typology, 17(3), 357–396. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1515/lity-2013-0019
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar