Trevor A Johnston
I am Adjunct Professor, Department of Linguistics, Macquarie University (Sydney, Australia) and Honorary Associate, Department of Linguitics, University of Sydney.
Address: Department of LInguistics
Macquarie University
Address: Department of LInguistics
Macquarie University
less
InterestsView All (11)
Uploads
Manuscript/Manual
This is the first revision of these guidelines since November 2019. The main changes are:
- Correction to text and expression throughout
- Removal of repetition
- Replacement of almost all interlinear glossed examples with screen grabs from ELAN annotation files (eafs) of actual examples from the Auslan Corpus.
- Major rewriting of the sections on Secondary annotations, especially sections on clause level annotation and clause complexity annotation.
Papers
This is the first revision of these guidelines since November 2019. The main changes are:
- Correction to text and expression throughout
- Removal of repetition
- Replacement of almost all interlinear glossed examples with screen grabs from ELAN annotation files (eafs) of actual examples from the Auslan Corpus.
- Major rewriting of the sections on Secondary annotations, especially sections on clause level annotation and clause complexity annotation.
Combining this observation with Slama-Cazacu’s suggestion that spoken strings that contain gestures as constituents display a “mixed syntax” which may force us to change our general outlook on grammar itself if we are to properly accommodate this phenomenon, we present an analysis of several thousand clauses (more accurately, ‘clause-like units’) sourced from the Auslan Corpus to show that the same cline of conventionalization can be said to apply to utterance units (i.e., multi-sign constructions) as it does to individual signs. In this case, the cline is one of syntacticization (Givón 1979, 2009) rather than lexicalization. This means that the thorough integration of gestural elements into Auslan, and by extension other signed languages (as acknowledged by many signed language scholars), can actually be understood in more than one way. One (the current standard mainstream view) is that gestural elements become linguistic when they are co-opted by signed languages. Another, which we argue for in this paper, is that some gestural elements remain gestural in signed languages, and the signed language utterance units of which they are a component often do not instantiate a syntagm (a syntactic construction). We concluded that symbolic constructions in signed languages, be they single sign or multi-sign, need not be linguistic, narrowly understood. Some may be enactments, some may be visual representations, and some may be complex mixtures of various linguistic and non-linguistic representational strategies.