Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

A Corpus-Based Typology of Negation Strategies in Turkish Sign Language

Year 2021, Volume: 32 Issue: 2, 111 - 147, 31.12.2021

Bahtiyar Makaroğlu

https://doi.org/10.18492/dad.853176
Cited By: 1

Abstract

This paper investigates the distribution of negation strategies in Turkish Sign Language (TİD) in the light of frequency-based data from a naturalistic TİD Corpus. On the basis of frequency occurrences, this study offers a novel account of negation on typological grounds: (i) by focusing on nonmanual markers, we propose that a clause can be negated with a nonmanual element only – a pattern that has been typologically proposed for other sign languages – while previous studies classified TİD as a manual dominant language in terms of Zeshan’s typology (Zeshan, 2006), (ii) Also, we argue that backward head tilt has a syntactic characteristic, not lexically specified for NOT contrast to Gökgöz (2011), (iii) on the other hand, in line with Pfau (2016), we show that TİD can easily be classified as Non-Strict NC language. In addition, by proposing frequency-based typological distinction, we argue that TİD can be classified a hybrid negating sign language.

Keywords

sign language negation typology corpus negative concord

References

  • Açan, Z. (2001). A study on sign languages and Turkish Sign Language. Ankara: Hacettepe University MA thesis.
  • Chan, H. T. & Kit, C. (2010). Two cores in Chinese negation system: A corpus-based view. 2010 International Conference on Asian Language Processing, (pp. 87–90). Harbin.
  • Coerts, J. (1992). Non-manual grammatical markers: An analysis of interrogatives, negations and topicalizations in Sign Language of the Netherlands. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.
  • Corblin, F., Déprez, V., Swart, H. & Tovena, L. (2004). Negative concord. In Francis Corblin & Henriëtte de Swart (eds.), Handbook of French semantics, (pp. 417–455). Stanford: CSLI Publications.
  • Dahl, Ö. (1979). Typology of sentence negation. Linguistics 17(1–2). 79–106.
  • Dahl, Ö. (2010). Typology of negation. In Laurence R. Horn (ed.), The expression of negation, (pp. 9–38). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
  • Déprez, V., Tubau, S., Cheylus, A. & Espinal, M. T. (2015). Double negation in a negative concord language: An experimental investigation. Lingua 163. 75–107.
  • Dikyuva, H. (2011). Aspectual non-manual expressions in Turkish Sign Language (TİD). Preston: University of Central Lancashire MA thesis.
  • Dikyuva, H., Makaroğlu, B. & Arık, E. (2017). Turkish Sign Language grammar. Ankara: Ministry of Family and Social Policies Press.
  • Fenlon, J., Schembri, A., Johnston, T. & Cormier, K. (2015). Documentary and corpus approaches to sign language research. In Eleni Orfanidou, Bencie Woll & Gary Morgan (eds.), Research methods in sign language studies: A practical guide, (pp. 157−169). Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
  • Geraci, C. (2005). Negation in LIS (Italian Sign Language). In Leah Bateman & Cherlon Ussery (eds.), Proceedings of the North Easy Linguistics Society (NELS 35). Amherst, MA: GLSA.
  • Giannakidou, A. (2000). Negative… concord?. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 18. 457−523.
  • Giannakidou, A. (2006). N-words and negative concord. In Martin Everaert & Henk van Riemsdijk (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Syntax, Volume III, (pp. 327−391). Oxford: Blackwell.
  • Gökgöz, K. (2009). Topics in Turkish Sign Language (Türk İşaret Dili – TİD) Syntax: Verb movement, negation and clausal architecture. İstanbul: Boğaziçi University MA thesis.
  • Gökgöz, K. (2011). Negation in Turkish Sign Language: The syntax of nonmanual markers. Sign Language & Linguistics 14(1). 49−75.
  • Gökgöz, K. (2021). Negation: Theoretical and experimental perspectives. In The Routledge Handbook of Theoretical and Experimental Sign Language Research (pp. 266-294). Routledge.
  • Göksel, A. & Kelepir, M. (2016). Observations on clausal complementation in Turkish Sign Language. In Roland Pfau, Markus Steinbach & Annika Herrmann (eds.), A matter of complexity: Subordination in sign languages, (pp. 65−94). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
  • Hendriks, B. (2008). Jordanian Sign Language: Aspects of grammar from a cross-linguistic perspective. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam dissertation.
  • Herrmann, A. & Pendzich, N. K. (2014). Nonmanual gestures in sign languages. In Cornelia Müller, Alan Cienki, Ellen Fricke, Silva H. Ladewig, David McNeill & Jana Bressem (eds.), Body – language – communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction (Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Science 38.2), (pp. 2149–2163). Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
  • Huddlestone, K. (2017). A preliminary look at negative constructions in South African Sign Language: Question answer clauses. In Alexander Andrason & Theresa Biberauer (eds.), Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics 48. A special issue in honor of Johan Oosthuize, (pp. 93–104).
  • 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.
  • Johnston, T. (2018). A corpus-based study of the role of headshaking in negation in Auslan (Australian Sign Language): Implications for signed language typology. Linguistic Typology 22(2). 185–231.
  • Johnston, T. & Schembri, A. (2010). Variation, lexicalization and grammaticalization in signed languages. Langage et société (1). 19–35.
  • Karabüklü, S. (2016). Time and aspect in Turkish Sign Language (TİD): Manual and nonmanual realizations of 'finish'. İstanbul: Boğaziçi University MA thesis.
  • Klomp, U., Oomen, M. & Pfau, R. (2019). Headshake patterns in Neg-raising sentences in Sign Language of the Netherlands. Paper presented at the SignNonmanuals2, University of Graz, 3–4 May.
  • Kubuş, O. (2008). An analysis of Turkish Sign Language (TİD) phonology and morphology. Ankara: Middle East Technical University MA thesis.
  • Kuder, A., Filipczak, J., Mostowski, P., Rutkowski, P. & Johnston, T. (2018). What corpus based research on negation in Auslan and PJM tells us about building and using sign language corpora. In Workshop Proceedings. 8th Workshop on the Representation and Processing of Sign Languages: Involving the Language Community. Language Resources and Evaluation Conference (LREC), (pp. 101–106). Miyazaki, Japan: ELRA.
  • Lee, J. H. (2008). A corpus-based study of short-form and long-form negations in Korean. Hye Sook Wang (ed.), Korean Language in America, vol. 13, (pp. 43–57). The American Association of Teachers of Korean.
  • Liddell, S. K. (1980). American Sign Language syntax. Den Haag: Mouton.
  • Loos, C., Cramer, J. & Napoli, D. (2020). The linguistic sources of offense of taboo terms in German Sign Language. Cognitive Linguistics, 31(1), 73-112.
  • Lucas, C. & Bayley, R. (2005). Variation in ASL: The role of grammatical function. Sign Language Studies 6(1). 38–75.
  • Lupyan, G. & R. Dale (2010). Language structure is partly determined by social structure. PLoS ONE 5(1), 1-10.)
  • Lutzenberger, H. (2017). Negation in Kata Kolok: Grammaticalization throughout three generations of signers. Graduate School for Humanities, Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam MA thesis.
  • Makaroğlu, B. (2021-accepted). What the frequency list can teach us about Turkish Sign Language?. Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics.
  • Marsaja, G. (2008). Desa Kolok – A deaf village and its sign language in Bali, Indonesia. Nijmegen: Ishara Press.
  • Martínez, I. M. P. (2003). Multiple Negation in Modern English. A preliminary corpus-based study. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 104(4). 477–498.
  • Mathur, G. & Rathmann, C. (2006). Variability in verbal agreement forms across four signed languages. In Louis Goldstein, Douglas Whalen & Catherina Best (eds.), Laboratory phonology VIII, (pp. 287–314). Berlin: Mouton.
  • Morris, C., & Schneider, E. (2012). On selected morphemes in Saudi Arabian Sign Language. Sign Language Studies, 13(1), 103-121.
  • Neidle, C., Kegl, J., MacLaughlin, D., Bahan, B. & Lee, R. G. (2000). The syntax of American Sign Language. Functional categories and hierarchical structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Oomen, M. & Pfau, R. (2017). Signing NOT (or not): A corpus-based study on negation in Sign Language of the Netherlands. Linguistic Typology 21(1). 1–51.
  • Payne, J. (1985). Negation. In Timothy Shopen (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description. Vol. 1: Clause structure, (pp. 197–242). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Pfau, R. (2002). Applying morphosyntactic and phonological readjustment rules in natural language negation. In: Richard Meier, Kearsy Cormier & David Quinto-Pozos (eds.), Modality and structure in signed and spoken languages, (pp. 263–295). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Pfau, R. (2008). The grammar of headshake: A typological perspective on German Sign Language negation. Linguistics in Amsterdam, 1(1), 37–74.
  • Pfau, R. (2016). A featural approach to sign language negation. In Pierre Larrivée & Chungmin Lee (eds.), Negation and Polarity. Experimental Perspectives, (pp. 45–74). Dordrecht: Springer.
  • Pfau, R. & Quer, J. (2002). V-to-Neg raising and negative concord in three sign languages. Rivista di Grammatica Generativa 27. 73–86.
  • Pfau, R. & Quer, J. (2007). On the syntax of negation and modals in Catalan Sign Language and German Sign Language. In Pamela Perniss, Roland Pfau & Markus Steinbach (eds.), Visible variation: Comparative studies on sign language structure, (pp. 129–161). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
  • Pfau, R. & Quer, J. (2010). Nonmanuals: Their grammatical and prosodic roles. In Diane Brentari (ed.), Sign languages: A Cambridge language survey, (pp. 381–402). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Puupponen, A., Jantunen, T., Takkinen, R., Wainio, T. & Pippuri, O. (2014). Taking non-manuality into account in collecting and analyzing Finnish Sign Language video data. In Eleni Efthimiou, Fotinea Stavroula-Evita, Thomas Hanke, Julie Hochgesang, Jette Kristoffersen & Johanna Mesch (eds.), Proceedings of the 6th Workshop on the Representation and Processing of Sign Languages: Beyond the manual channel, (pp. 143–48). Paris: ELRA.
  • Puskás, G. (2012). Licensing double negation in NC and non-NC languages. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 30(2). 611–649.
  • Quer, J. 2007 [2002]. Operadores negativos en Lengua de Signos Catalana. In Sandra B. Cvejanov (ed.), Lenguas de Señas: Estudios de Lingüística Teórica y Aplicada, 39–54. Neuquén: Editorial de la Universidad Nacional del Comahue, Argentina.
  • Quer, J. (2012). Negation. In Roland Pfau, Markus Steinbach & Bencie Woll (eds.), Sign language: An international handbook, (pp. 316–339). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
  • Quer, J. & Steinbach, M. (2019). Handling sign language data: the impact of modality. Frontiers in psychology 10. 483.
  • Sandler, W. (2012). Visual prosody. In Roland Pfau, Markus Steinbach & Bencie Woll (eds.), Sign language: An international handbook, (pp. 55–76). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
  • Sapountzaki, G. G. (2005). Free functional elements of tense, aspect, modality and agreement as possible auxiliaries in Greek Sign Language. Bristol: University of Bristol dissertation.
  • Sevinç, A. M. (2006). Grammatical relations and word order in Turkish Sign Language (TİD). Ankara: Middle East Technical University MA thesis.
  • Sloetjes, H. & Wittenburg, P. (2018). ELAN (version 5.2). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. https://tla.mpi.nl/tools/tla-tools/elan/ (accessed 20 November 2019).
  • Stamp, R., Schembri, A., Fenlon, J., Rentelis, R., Woll, B. & Cormier, K. (2014). Lexical variation and change in British Sign Language. PLoS One 9(4).
  • Tang, G. (2006). Questions and negation in Hong Kong sign language. In Ulrike Zeshan (ed.), Interrogative and negative constructions in sign languages, (pp. 198–224). Nijmegen: Ishara Press.
  • van Gijn, I. (2004). The quest for syntactic dependency: Sentential complementation in Sign Language of the Netherlands. Amsterdam: Universiteit van Amsterdam doctoral dissertation.
  • Wilbur, R. (2000). Phonological and prosodic layering of nonmanuals in American Sign Language. In Karen Emmorey & Harlan Lane (eds.), The signs of language revisited, (pp. 215–244). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Wood, S. K. (1999). Semantic and syntactic aspects of negation in ASL. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University MA thesis . Zeijlstra, H. (2004). Sentential negation and negative concord. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam dissertation.
  • Zeijlstra, H. (2008). Negative concord is syntactic agreement. Manuscript, University of Amsterdam.
  • http://ling.auf.net/lingBuzz/000645 (accessed 30 November 2019). Zeshan, U. (2003). Aspects of Türk İşaret Dili (Turkish Sign Language). Sign Language & Linguistics, 6 (1), 43-75.
  • Zeshan, U. (ed.). (2006a). Interrogative and negative constructions in Sign Languages. Nijmegen: Ishara Press.
  • Zeshan, U. (2006b). Negative and interrogative structures in Turkish Sign Language (TİD). In Ulrike Zeshan (ed.), Interrogative and negative constructions in Sign Languages, (pp. 128–164). Nijmegen: Ishara Press.

Türk İşaret Dilindeki Olumsuzluk Stratejilerinin Derlem-Tabanlı Tipolojisi

Year 2021, Volume: 32 Issue: 2, 111 - 147, 31.12.2021

Bahtiyar Makaroğlu

https://doi.org/10.18492/dad.853176
Cited By: 1

Abstract

Bu çalışma, doğal TİD derleminden elde edilen sıklık tabanlı veriye dayanarak Türk İşaret Dilindeki olumsuzluk stratejilerini incelemektedir. Sıklık görünümlerini temel alan araştırma, tipolojik temellerde olumsuzluğa yönelik yeni bir bakış açısı sunmaktadır: (i) el dışı belirleyicilere odaklanılarak, tümcenin sadece el dışı birimlerle olumsuzlanabildiği gösterilmektedir -bu örüntü, tipolojik olarak diğer işaret dilleri için öne sürülmektedir - öte yandan, TİD'e yönelik önceki çalışmalar Zeshan'ın tipolojisine göre TİD'i el baskın dil olarak kabul etmektedir (Zeshan, 2004; Zeshan, 2006), (ii) Gökgöz (2011)'in aksine başı geri yatırmanın sözdizimsel göreve olduğu ve DEĞİL ile sözlüksel olarak biçimlenmediği iddia edilmektedir. (iiii) Öte yandan, Pfau (2016)'ya koşut şekilde, TİD'in katı olmayan olumsuz uyum (Non-strict negative concord) dili olarak sınıflandırılabileceği gösterilmektedir. Ayrıca, sıklık-temelli tipolojik ulamlama öne sürülerek TİD'in hibrit olumsuzlama türündeki bir işaret dili olduğu ortaya konulmaktadır.

Keywords

işaret dili olumsuzluk tipoloji derlem olumsuz uyum

References

  • Açan, Z. (2001). A study on sign languages and Turkish Sign Language. Ankara: Hacettepe University MA thesis.
  • Chan, H. T. & Kit, C. (2010). Two cores in Chinese negation system: A corpus-based view. 2010 International Conference on Asian Language Processing, (pp. 87–90). Harbin.
  • Coerts, J. (1992). Non-manual grammatical markers: An analysis of interrogatives, negations and topicalizations in Sign Language of the Netherlands. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.
  • Corblin, F., Déprez, V., Swart, H. & Tovena, L. (2004). Negative concord. In Francis Corblin & Henriëtte de Swart (eds.), Handbook of French semantics, (pp. 417–455). Stanford: CSLI Publications.
  • Dahl, Ö. (1979). Typology of sentence negation. Linguistics 17(1–2). 79–106.
  • Dahl, Ö. (2010). Typology of negation. In Laurence R. Horn (ed.), The expression of negation, (pp. 9–38). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
  • Déprez, V., Tubau, S., Cheylus, A. & Espinal, M. T. (2015). Double negation in a negative concord language: An experimental investigation. Lingua 163. 75–107.
  • Dikyuva, H. (2011). Aspectual non-manual expressions in Turkish Sign Language (TİD). Preston: University of Central Lancashire MA thesis.
  • Dikyuva, H., Makaroğlu, B. & Arık, E. (2017). Turkish Sign Language grammar. Ankara: Ministry of Family and Social Policies Press.
  • Fenlon, J., Schembri, A., Johnston, T. & Cormier, K. (2015). Documentary and corpus approaches to sign language research. In Eleni Orfanidou, Bencie Woll & Gary Morgan (eds.), Research methods in sign language studies: A practical guide, (pp. 157−169). Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
  • Geraci, C. (2005). Negation in LIS (Italian Sign Language). In Leah Bateman & Cherlon Ussery (eds.), Proceedings of the North Easy Linguistics Society (NELS 35). Amherst, MA: GLSA.
  • Giannakidou, A. (2000). Negative… concord?. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 18. 457−523.
  • Giannakidou, A. (2006). N-words and negative concord. In Martin Everaert & Henk van Riemsdijk (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Syntax, Volume III, (pp. 327−391). Oxford: Blackwell.
  • Gökgöz, K. (2009). Topics in Turkish Sign Language (Türk İşaret Dili – TİD) Syntax: Verb movement, negation and clausal architecture. İstanbul: Boğaziçi University MA thesis.
  • Gökgöz, K. (2011). Negation in Turkish Sign Language: The syntax of nonmanual markers. Sign Language & Linguistics 14(1). 49−75.
  • Gökgöz, K. (2021). Negation: Theoretical and experimental perspectives. In The Routledge Handbook of Theoretical and Experimental Sign Language Research (pp. 266-294). Routledge.
  • Göksel, A. & Kelepir, M. (2016). Observations on clausal complementation in Turkish Sign Language. In Roland Pfau, Markus Steinbach & Annika Herrmann (eds.), A matter of complexity: Subordination in sign languages, (pp. 65−94). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
  • Hendriks, B. (2008). Jordanian Sign Language: Aspects of grammar from a cross-linguistic perspective. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam dissertation.
  • Herrmann, A. & Pendzich, N. K. (2014). Nonmanual gestures in sign languages. In Cornelia Müller, Alan Cienki, Ellen Fricke, Silva H. Ladewig, David McNeill & Jana Bressem (eds.), Body – language – communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction (Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Science 38.2), (pp. 2149–2163). Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
  • Huddlestone, K. (2017). A preliminary look at negative constructions in South African Sign Language: Question answer clauses. In Alexander Andrason & Theresa Biberauer (eds.), Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics 48. A special issue in honor of Johan Oosthuize, (pp. 93–104).
  • 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.
  • Johnston, T. (2018). A corpus-based study of the role of headshaking in negation in Auslan (Australian Sign Language): Implications for signed language typology. Linguistic Typology 22(2). 185–231.
  • Johnston, T. & Schembri, A. (2010). Variation, lexicalization and grammaticalization in signed languages. Langage et société (1). 19–35.
  • Karabüklü, S. (2016). Time and aspect in Turkish Sign Language (TİD): Manual and nonmanual realizations of 'finish'. İstanbul: Boğaziçi University MA thesis.
  • Klomp, U., Oomen, M. & Pfau, R. (2019). Headshake patterns in Neg-raising sentences in Sign Language of the Netherlands. Paper presented at the SignNonmanuals2, University of Graz, 3–4 May.
  • Kubuş, O. (2008). An analysis of Turkish Sign Language (TİD) phonology and morphology. Ankara: Middle East Technical University MA thesis.
  • Kuder, A., Filipczak, J., Mostowski, P., Rutkowski, P. & Johnston, T. (2018). What corpus based research on negation in Auslan and PJM tells us about building and using sign language corpora. In Workshop Proceedings. 8th Workshop on the Representation and Processing of Sign Languages: Involving the Language Community. Language Resources and Evaluation Conference (LREC), (pp. 101–106). Miyazaki, Japan: ELRA.
  • Lee, J. H. (2008). A corpus-based study of short-form and long-form negations in Korean. Hye Sook Wang (ed.), Korean Language in America, vol. 13, (pp. 43–57). The American Association of Teachers of Korean.
  • Liddell, S. K. (1980). American Sign Language syntax. Den Haag: Mouton.
  • Loos, C., Cramer, J. & Napoli, D. (2020). The linguistic sources of offense of taboo terms in German Sign Language. Cognitive Linguistics, 31(1), 73-112.
  • Lucas, C. & Bayley, R. (2005). Variation in ASL: The role of grammatical function. Sign Language Studies 6(1). 38–75.
  • Lupyan, G. & R. Dale (2010). Language structure is partly determined by social structure. PLoS ONE 5(1), 1-10.)
  • Lutzenberger, H. (2017). Negation in Kata Kolok: Grammaticalization throughout three generations of signers. Graduate School for Humanities, Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam MA thesis.
  • Makaroğlu, B. (2021-accepted). What the frequency list can teach us about Turkish Sign Language?. Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics.
  • Marsaja, G. (2008). Desa Kolok – A deaf village and its sign language in Bali, Indonesia. Nijmegen: Ishara Press.
  • Martínez, I. M. P. (2003). Multiple Negation in Modern English. A preliminary corpus-based study. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 104(4). 477–498.
  • Mathur, G. & Rathmann, C. (2006). Variability in verbal agreement forms across four signed languages. In Louis Goldstein, Douglas Whalen & Catherina Best (eds.), Laboratory phonology VIII, (pp. 287–314). Berlin: Mouton.
  • Morris, C., & Schneider, E. (2012). On selected morphemes in Saudi Arabian Sign Language. Sign Language Studies, 13(1), 103-121.
  • Neidle, C., Kegl, J., MacLaughlin, D., Bahan, B. & Lee, R. G. (2000). The syntax of American Sign Language. Functional categories and hierarchical structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Oomen, M. & Pfau, R. (2017). Signing NOT (or not): A corpus-based study on negation in Sign Language of the Netherlands. Linguistic Typology 21(1). 1–51.
  • Payne, J. (1985). Negation. In Timothy Shopen (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description. Vol. 1: Clause structure, (pp. 197–242). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Pfau, R. (2002). Applying morphosyntactic and phonological readjustment rules in natural language negation. In: Richard Meier, Kearsy Cormier & David Quinto-Pozos (eds.), Modality and structure in signed and spoken languages, (pp. 263–295). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Pfau, R. (2008). The grammar of headshake: A typological perspective on German Sign Language negation. Linguistics in Amsterdam, 1(1), 37–74.
  • Pfau, R. (2016). A featural approach to sign language negation. In Pierre Larrivée & Chungmin Lee (eds.), Negation and Polarity. Experimental Perspectives, (pp. 45–74). Dordrecht: Springer.
  • Pfau, R. & Quer, J. (2002). V-to-Neg raising and negative concord in three sign languages. Rivista di Grammatica Generativa 27. 73–86.
  • Pfau, R. & Quer, J. (2007). On the syntax of negation and modals in Catalan Sign Language and German Sign Language. In Pamela Perniss, Roland Pfau & Markus Steinbach (eds.), Visible variation: Comparative studies on sign language structure, (pp. 129–161). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
  • Pfau, R. & Quer, J. (2010). Nonmanuals: Their grammatical and prosodic roles. In Diane Brentari (ed.), Sign languages: A Cambridge language survey, (pp. 381–402). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Puupponen, A., Jantunen, T., Takkinen, R., Wainio, T. & Pippuri, O. (2014). Taking non-manuality into account in collecting and analyzing Finnish Sign Language video data. In Eleni Efthimiou, Fotinea Stavroula-Evita, Thomas Hanke, Julie Hochgesang, Jette Kristoffersen & Johanna Mesch (eds.), Proceedings of the 6th Workshop on the Representation and Processing of Sign Languages: Beyond the manual channel, (pp. 143–48). Paris: ELRA.
  • Puskás, G. (2012). Licensing double negation in NC and non-NC languages. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 30(2). 611–649.
  • Quer, J. 2007 [2002]. Operadores negativos en Lengua de Signos Catalana. In Sandra B. Cvejanov (ed.), Lenguas de Señas: Estudios de Lingüística Teórica y Aplicada, 39–54. Neuquén: Editorial de la Universidad Nacional del Comahue, Argentina.
  • Quer, J. (2012). Negation. In Roland Pfau, Markus Steinbach & Bencie Woll (eds.), Sign language: An international handbook, (pp. 316–339). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
  • Quer, J. & Steinbach, M. (2019). Handling sign language data: the impact of modality. Frontiers in psychology 10. 483.
  • Sandler, W. (2012). Visual prosody. In Roland Pfau, Markus Steinbach & Bencie Woll (eds.), Sign language: An international handbook, (pp. 55–76). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
  • Sapountzaki, G. G. (2005). Free functional elements of tense, aspect, modality and agreement as possible auxiliaries in Greek Sign Language. Bristol: University of Bristol dissertation.
  • Sevinç, A. M. (2006). Grammatical relations and word order in Turkish Sign Language (TİD). Ankara: Middle East Technical University MA thesis.
  • Sloetjes, H. & Wittenburg, P. (2018). ELAN (version 5.2). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. https://tla.mpi.nl/tools/tla-tools/elan/ (accessed 20 November 2019).
  • Stamp, R., Schembri, A., Fenlon, J., Rentelis, R., Woll, B. & Cormier, K. (2014). Lexical variation and change in British Sign Language. PLoS One 9(4).
  • Tang, G. (2006). Questions and negation in Hong Kong sign language. In Ulrike Zeshan (ed.), Interrogative and negative constructions in sign languages, (pp. 198–224). Nijmegen: Ishara Press.
  • van Gijn, I. (2004). The quest for syntactic dependency: Sentential complementation in Sign Language of the Netherlands. Amsterdam: Universiteit van Amsterdam doctoral dissertation.
  • Wilbur, R. (2000). Phonological and prosodic layering of nonmanuals in American Sign Language. In Karen Emmorey & Harlan Lane (eds.), The signs of language revisited, (pp. 215–244). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Wood, S. K. (1999). Semantic and syntactic aspects of negation in ASL. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University MA thesis . Zeijlstra, H. (2004). Sentential negation and negative concord. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam dissertation.
  • Zeijlstra, H. (2008). Negative concord is syntactic agreement. Manuscript, University of Amsterdam.
  • http://ling.auf.net/lingBuzz/000645 (accessed 30 November 2019). Zeshan, U. (2003). Aspects of Türk İşaret Dili (Turkish Sign Language). Sign Language & Linguistics, 6 (1), 43-75.
  • Zeshan, U. (ed.). (2006a). Interrogative and negative constructions in Sign Languages. Nijmegen: Ishara Press.
  • Zeshan, U. (2006b). Negative and interrogative structures in Turkish Sign Language (TİD). In Ulrike Zeshan (ed.), Interrogative and negative constructions in Sign Languages, (pp. 128–164). Nijmegen: Ishara Press.
There are 65 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Journal Section Research Articles
Authors

Bahtiyar Makaroğlu 0000-0002-7641-6665

Publication Date December 31, 2021
Published in Issue Year 2021Volume: 32 Issue: 2

Cite

APA Makaroğlu, B. (2021). A Corpus-Based Typology of Negation Strategies in Turkish Sign Language. Dilbilim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 32(2), 111-147. https://doi.org/10.18492/dad.853176

Cited By

The next station: chunking of değİl ‘not’ collocations in Turkish Sign Language
Cognitive Linguistics
https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2022-0050

88x31.png

This work is licensed under a

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 (CC BY-NC-ND) International License.


Journal DOI: 10.18492/dad