Dissertation announcement

[Rachel Channon]

Re: classifier discussionI'd like to announce the completion of my
dissertation on sign language phonology: Signs are single segments:
phonological representations and temporal sequencing in ASL and other sign
languages
It is available for download at
http://www.ling.umd.edu/Publications/Dissertations/index.html

Abstract: A single segment representation with dynamic features (Oneseg)
explains differences between the phonologies of spoken words and signs
better than current multiple segment representations of signs (Multiseg). A
segment is defined as the largest phonological unit where combinations of
features are contrastive, but permutations and repetitions are not. Hayes
(1993) distinguishes between static features (place, handshape) which don't
reference motion, and dynamic features (direction, repetition) which do.
Dynamic features are the only way that a single segment representation can
sequence motion.
Chapters 1 and 2 provide an overview and the theoretical background for
relevant concepts such as sequence, segment and dynamic feature.

Chapters 3 and 4 provide arguments for Oneseg based on repetition and
sequence.  Oneseg correctly predicts that number of repetitions is not
contrastive in signs, because repetition is the result of a dynamic feature
[repeat]. Multiseg incorrectly predicts that number of repetitions should be
contrastive. About 50% of all spoken words repeat irregularly (unintended,
hiphop); less than 1% repeat rhythmically (tutu, murmur). In contrast,
non-compound signs never repeat irregularly; about 50% repeat rhythmically.
Oneseg correctly predicts repetition in signs (but not words) based on the
probability of combinations including the feature [repeat]; Multiseg
correctly predicts repetition in words (but not signs) based on
combinations, permutations and repetition of segments.

Oneseg correctly predicts that signs never have more than two underlying
places. Multiseg predicts signs with any number of places. Some signs with
two places allow places to occur in either order; some are ordered by
constraints. Oneseg represents both without underlying sequence or
redundancy, but Multiseg's obligatory segmental sequence overgenerates or is
redundant.

Chapter 5 shows that inflected verbs and classifier predicates aren't
problems for Oneseg because they are predictably iconic. Predictable
iconicity is the same across all sign languages, is produced by non-signers,
and doesn't always obey the phonological rules of the language. Lexically
iconic elements have the reverse characteristics. Lexically iconic, but not
predictably iconic, elements are part of the phonological representation.

Chapter 6 proposes possible additional features and hierarchy for Oneseg and
shows that the representations produced can be economically sparse by
omitting redundant material.  Oneseg also explains historical assimilation
processes in compounds.



Rachel Channon

Linguistics Department

University of Maryland at College Park

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/slling-l/attachments/20020725/5ceace15/attachment.htm>