A recurrent question raised by the study of signed languages concerns the linguistic effect of the modality in which the language is produced. Is the modality difference between speech and sign reflected merely in the nature of the phonetic features that map into production and perception, or is it the case that there might. be higher level organizational differences between the two linguistic modalities? The present study addresses the nature of the modality effect inside the syllable, namely whether syllables in ASL display evidence of segmental composition. Data from backwards signing are presented to demonstrate that the phonological representations that must be available to signers when they perform backwards signing tasks cannot be adequately represented with the current models that posit segmental composition of ASL syllables. Instead, it is argued that it is sufficient to make reference to distinctive features, in syllable initial and syllable final positions, and that there is no support for any further internal segmental divisions.
AHN, S. -H. (1990). A structured-tiers model for ASL phonology. In C. Lucas (Ed.), Sign language research: Theoretical issues (pp. 11–26). Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
2.
ALLEN, G. D. (1972). The location of rhythmic stress beats in English speech. Parts I and II. Language and Speech, 15, 72–100, 179–195.
3.
ALLEN, G.D., WILBUR, R.B., & SCHICK, B. S. (1991). Aspects of rhythm in ASL. Sign Language Studies, 72, 297–320.
4.
ANDERSON, S. (1974). The organization of phonology.New York: Academic Press.
5.
BAGEMIHL, B. (1989). The crossing constraint and ‘backwards languages’. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 7, 481–549.
6.
BATTISON, R. (1978). Lexical borrowing in American Sign Language.Silver Spring, MD: Linstok.
7.
BRENTARI, D. (1990a). Licensing in American Sign Language handshape change. In C. Lucas (Ed.), Sign language research: Theoretical issues (pp. 57–70). Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
8.
BRENTARI, D. (1990b). Simultaneity in syllable structure: Co-extensive moras in American Sign Language. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, Chicago.
9.
BRENTARI, D. (1990c). Theoretical foundations of ASL phonology. Doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago.
10.
BRENTARI, D. (1993). Establishing a sonority hierarchy in American Sign Language: The use of simultaneous structure in phonology. Phonology, 10 (2), 281–306.
11.
BRENTARI, D. (1995). Sign language phonology: ASL. In J. Goldsmith (Ed.), The handbook of phonological theory (pp. 615–639). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
12.
BRENTARI, D. (1996). Evidence for inherent and prosodic features in American Sign Language. Unpublished manuscript, University of California at Davis.
13.
BROWMAN, C., & GOLDSTEIN, L. (1986). Towards an articulatory phonology. Phonology Yearbook, 3, 219–252.
14.
CAIRNS, C., & FEINSTEIN, M. (1982). Syllable structure and the theory of markedness. Linguistic Inquiry.13, 193–225.
15.
CHINCHOR, N. (1978). The syllable in ASL. Paper presented at the MIT Sign Language Symposium, Cambridge, MA.
16.
CHINCHOR, N. (1981). Numeral incorporation in American Sign Language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Brown University.
17.
CLEMENTS, G. (1988). The role of the sonority cycle in core syllabification. Working Papers of the Cornell Phonetics Laboratory, 2, 1–68.
18.
CLEMENTS, G., & KEYSER, S. (1983). CV phonology: A generative theory of the syllable [Linguistic Inquiry Monograph Nine].Cambridge, MA: TheMIT Press.
19.
CORINA, D. P. (1990). Handshape assimilation in hierarchical phonological representation. In C. Lucas (Ed.), Sign language research: Theoretical issues (pp. 27–49). Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
20.
CORINA, D. P. (1993). To branch or not to branch: Underspecification in ASL handshape contours. In G. Coulter (Ed.), Phonetics and phonology: Current issues in ASL phonology (pp. 63–94). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
21.
CORINA, D.P., & SAGEY, E. (1989). Predictability in ASL handshapes and handshape sequences, with implications for features and feature geometry. Unpublished manuscript, University of California, San Diego.
22.
CORINA, D.P., & SANDLER, W. (1993). On the nature of phonological structure in sign language. Phonology, 10 (2), 165–207.
23.
COULTER, G. (1982). On the nature of ASL as a monosyllabic language. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, San Diego, CA.
24.
COULTER, G. (1985). Lexical and emphatic stress in American Sign Language. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, Seattle, WA.
25.
COULTER, G. (1990). Emphatic stress in ASL. In S. Fischer & P. Siple (Eds.), Theoretical issues in sign language research: Linguistics (pp. 109–126). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
26.
COULTER, G. (ed.) (1993). Current issues in ASL phonology: Vol. 3. Phonetics and Phonology.San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
27.
COWAN, N. (1989). Acquisition of Pig Latin: A case study. Journal of Child Language, 16, 365–386.
28.
COWAN, N., BRAINE, M., & LEAVITT, L. (1985). The phonological and metaphonological representation of speech: Evidence from fluent backward talkers. Journal of Memory and Language, 24, 679–698.
29.
COWAN, N., CARTWRIGHT, C., WINTEROWD, C., & SHERK, M. (1987). An adult model of preschool children's speech memory. Memory and Cognition, 15, 511–517.
30.
COWAN, N., & LEAVITT, L. (1981). Talking backward: Exceptional speech play in late childhood. Journal of Child Language, 9, 481–491.
31.
COWAN, N., & LEAVITT, L. (1990). Speakers' access to the phonological structure of the syllable in word games. Chicago Linguistics Society, 26, 45–59.
32.
COWAN, N., LEAVITT, L., MASSARO, D., & KENT, R. (1982). A fluent backward talker. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 25, 48–53.
33.
CRAIN, R. C. (1996). Representing a sign as a single segment in ASL. Paper presented at the Fifth International Conference on Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research, Montreal.
34.
EDMONDSON, W. H. (1986a). Autosegmental phonology: The syllable and the sign. In B. Tervoort (Ed.), Signs of life: Proceedings of the Second European Congress on Sign Language Research.Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam, Institute of General Linguistics.
35.
EDMONDSON, W. H. (1986b). Issues in linearization: Prolegomena for a general theory of communication. Language and Communication, 6 (4), 225–266.
36.
EDMONDSON, W. H. (1990). Segments in signed languages: Do they exist and does it matter? In W. H. Edmondson & F. Karlsson (Eds.), SLR '87: Papers from the Fourth International Symposium on Sign Language Research (pp. 66–74). Hamburg: Signum-Verlag.
37.
FRISHBERG, N. (1978). The case of the missing length. Communication and Cognition, 11, 57–68.
38.
FROMKIN, V (1971). The non-anomalous nature of anomalous utterances. Language, 47, 27–52.
39.
FROMKIN, V (1973). Slips of the tongue. Scientific American, 229, 109–117.
40.
GOLDSMITH, J. (1989). Autosegmental and metrical phonology.New York: Basil Blackwell.
41.
GREEN, K. (1984). Sign boundaries in American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies, 42, 65–91.
42.
HAYES, B. (1989). Compensatory lengthening in moraic phonology. Linguistic Inquiry, 20, 253–306.
43.
HAYES, B. (1993). Against movement: Comments on Liddell's article. In G. Coulter (Ed.), Current issues in ASL phonology: Vol. 3. Phonetics and phonology (pp. 213–225). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
44.
HAYES, B. (1995). Metrical stress theory: Principles and case studies.Chicago: TheUniversity of Chicago Press.
45.
HULST, H. Van der (1993). Units in the analysis of signs. Phonology, 10 (2), 209–241.
46.
HYMAN, L. (1975). Phonology: Theory and analysis.New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
47.
HYMAN, L. (1984). A theory of phonological weight.Dordrecht: Foris.
48.
KAHN, D. (1976). Syllable-based generalizations in English phonology. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, MIT.
49.
KEGL, J., & WILBUR, R. B. (1976). When does structure stop and style begin? Syntax, morphology, and phonology vs. stylistic variation in American Sign Language. Chicago Linguistic Society, 12, 376–396.
50.
KENSTOWICZ, M., & KISSEBERTH, C. (1979). Generative phonology: Description and theory.New York: Academic Press.
51.
KLIMA, E.S., & BELLUGI, U. (1979). The signs of language.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
52.
LADEFOGED, P. (1982). A course in phonetics.New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
53.
LASS, R. (1984). Phonology: An introduction to basic concepts.Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
54.
LAYCOCK, D. (1969). Sublanguages in Buin: Play, poetry, and preservation. Pacific Linguistics, A.22, 1–23.
55.
LAYCOCK, D. (1972). Towards a typology of ludlings, or play languages. Linguistic Communications (Working Papers of the Linguistic Society of Australia), 6, 61–113.
56.
LIDDELL, S. (1982). Sequentiality in American Sign Language. Paper presented at the Summer meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, College Park, MD.
57.
LIDDELL, S. (1984). THINK and BELIEVE: Sequentiality in American Sign Language signs. Language, 60, 372–399.
58.
LIDDELL, S. (1990). Structures for representing handshape and local movement at the phonemic level. In S. Fischer & P. Siple (Eds.), Theoretical issues in sign language research: Linguistics (pp. 37–66). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
59.
LIDDELL, S. (1993). Holds and positions: Comparing two models of segmentation in ASL. In G. Coulter (Ed.), Current issues in ASL phonology: Vol. 3. Phonetics and phonology (pp. 189–210). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
60.
MEIER, R. (1993). A psycholinguistic perspective on phonological segmentation in sign and speech. In G. Coulter (Ed.), Current issues in ASL phonology: Vol. 3. Phonetics and phonology (pp. 169–186). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
61.
PADDEN, C. (1993). Response to Sandler's “Linearization of phonological tiers in ASL.” In G. Coulter (Ed.), Current issues in ASL phonology: Vol. 3. Phonetics and phonology (pp. 131–134). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
62.
PADDEN, C., & PERLMUTTER, D. (1987). American Sign Language and the architecture of phonological theory. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 5, 335–375.
63.
PERLMUTTER, D. (1988). A moraic theory of American Sign Language syllable structure. Paper presented at the Second Conference on Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research, Gallaudet University.
64.
PERLMUTTER, D. (1990). On the segmental representation of transitional and bidirectional movements in ASL phonology. In S. Fischer & P. Siple (eds.), Theoretical issues in sign language research: Linguistics (pp. 67–80). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
65.
PERLMUTTER, D. (1992). Sonority and syllable structure in American Sign Language. Linguistic Inquiry, 23, 407–442.
66.
PERLMUTTER, D. (1993). Sonority and syllable structure in American Sign Language. In G. Coulter (ed.), Current issues in ASL phonology: Vol. 3. Phonetics and phonology (pp. 213–225). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
67.
PIERREHUMBERT, J., & NAIR, R. (1995). Word games and syllable structure. Language and Speech, 38, 77–114.
68.
SANDLER, W. (1986). The spreading hand autosegment of American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies, 50, 1–28.
69.
SANDLER, W. (1987). Sequentiality and simultaneity in American Sign Language phonology. Doctoral dissertation, University of Texas, Austin.
70.
SANDLER, W. (1989). Phonological representation of the sign: Linearity and nonlinearity in American Sign Language, no. 32.Dordrecht: Foris.
71.
SANDLER, W. (1990). Temporal aspects and ASL phonology. In S. Fischer & P. Siple (eds.), Theoretical issues in sign language research: Linguistics (pp. 7–36). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
72.
SANDLER, W. (1993a). Linearization of phonological tiers in ASL. In G. Coulter (ed.), Current issues in ASL phonology: Vol. 3. Phonetics and phonology (pp. 103–127). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
73.
SANDLER, W. (1993b). A sonority cycle in American Sign Language. Phonology, 10 (2), 243–279.
74.
SHERZER, J. (1970). Talking backwards in Cuna: The sociological reality of phonological descriptions. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology, 26, 343–353.
75.
STERIADE, D. (1988). Review of Clements and Keyser's “CV phonology.”Language, 64, 118–129.
76.
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 (pp. 91–132). New York: Academic Press.
77.
TREIMAN, R. (1983). The structure of spoken syllables: Evidence from novel word games. Cognition, 15, 49–74.
78.
WILBUR, R.B. (1982). A multi-tiered theory of syllable structure for American Sign Language. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, San Diego, CA.
79.
WILBUR, R.B. (1985). Towards a theory of “syllable” in signed languages: Evidence from the numbers of Italian Sign Language. In W. Stokoe & V. Volterra (eds.), SLR '83: Sign language research (pp. 160–174). Silver Spring, MD: Linstok.
80.
WILBUR, R.B. (1987). American Sign Language: Linguistic and applied dimensions.Boston: College-Hill Press.
81.
WILBUR, R.B. (1990). Why syllables? What the notion means for ASL research. In S. Fischer & P. Siple (eds.), Theoretical issues in sign language research: Linguistics (pp. 81–108). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
82.
WILBUR, R.B. (1993). Syllables and segments: Hold the movements and move the holds. In G. Coulter (ed.), Current issues in ASL phonology: Vol. 3. Phonetics and phonology (pp. 135–168). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
83.
WILBUR, R.B. (1994a). Eyeblinks and ASL phrase structure. Sign Language Studies, 84, 221–240.
84.
WILBUR, R.B. (1994b). Foregrounding structures in American Sign Language. Journal of Pragmatics, 22, 647–672.
85.
WILBUR, R.B. (1994c, January). Stress, focus, and extrametricality in ASL. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, Boston.
86.
WILBUR, R. B. (in press). A prosodic/ pragmatic explanation for word order variation in ASL with typological implications. In K. Lee, E. Sweetser, & M. Verspoor (Eds.), Lexical and syntactic constructions and the construction of meaning (Vol. 1). Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
87.
WILBUR, R.B., & ALLEN, G.D. (1991). Perceptual evidence against internal structure in American Sign Language syllables. Language and Speech, 34, 27–46.
88.
WILBUR, R.B., KLIMA, E.S., & BELLUGI, U. (1983). Roots: On the search for the origins of signs in ASL. Chicago Linguistic Society, 19, 314–336.
89.
WILBUR, R.B., & NOLEN, S. (1986). The duration of syllables in American Sign Language. Language and Speech, 29, 263–280.
90.
WILBUR, R.B., & SCHICK, B.S. (1987). The effects of linguistic stress on sign movement in ASL. Language and Speech, 30, 301–323.
91.
YIP, M. (1982). Reduplication and C-V skeleta in Chinese secret languages. Linguistic Inquiry, 13, 637–661.
92.
YIP, M. (1994). Isolated uses of prosodic categories. In J. Cole & C. Kisseberth (eds.), Perspectives in phonology (pp. 293–311). Stanford, CA: Center for the Study of Language and Information.
