Phonology of numerals

[Adam Schembri]

Carol,

Thanks for your message. I see your point about the signs SIXTEEN to
NINETEEN in BSL - is anyone in print arguing that these signs, and
similar signs in other signed languages such as LIS (Italian SL) and
DGS (German SL), are indeed two one-handed signs? Would the argument
be that they represent some kind of simultaneous compound? The odd
thing about them in BSL is that, like some two-handed lexical signs,
they also occur without the non-dominant hand and yet this does not
change the meaning. I do not know if the same is true of numerals in
LIS or DGS.

I am familiar with the fact that classifier constructions are not
constrained by the symmetry or dominance condition :-). However, I
believe that the examples from Auslan cannot be analysed as
classifier constructions. These are clearly signs from the
monomorphemic core native lexicon. The Auslan signs MIDDLE and
COINCIDENCE involve a dominant B oriented pinky side downwards making
contact with a non-dominant Middle (the 5 hand with the middle finger
bent at the base joint). The signs LAST and MENSTRUAL-PERIOD involve
a dominant B handshape contacting a non-dominant I. They dominant
hand in each case is clearly the B handshape which moves and not the
Middle or I which are held still. The last sign (MENSTRUAL-PERIOD)
may have lexicalised from an enumeration complex meaning FOURTH (as
in 'fourth week'), but I do not feel it can be analysed as
multimorphemic synchronically. The other three do not seem to allow
any kind of multimorphemic analysis.

The dominance condition clearly holds for the majority of two-handed
signs in Auslan. In one analysis, I found that over 95% of two-handed
signs used an unmarked non-dominant handshape (5, G, S, C, O, A etc),
so the language clearly favours this pattern. But there do appear to
be some exceptions, and the four I have given here clearly use marked
non-dominant handshapes.

Adam


>Adam --
>
>I would argue that the reason why these forms are not constrained
>by the symmetry (or dominance) condition is because they are not
>two-handed signs, but two one-handed signs. I'm not sure I understand
>how your forms look, but I've seen similar "two-handed" numeral
>forms in other sign languages (e./g. Italian Sign Language) and a
>case could be made that these function as if both hands are one-
>handed.  Many classifier complexes are like these - the left hand
>is VEHICLE and the right hand is PERSON, 'walking past the car.'
>Movements can be simultaneous, and even lexicalized to some
>extent, but  because both hands can vary independently and
>meaningfully, they are not two-handed signs.
>
>Carol
>
>
>
>>BSL has at least four signs that appear not to be constrained by
>>Battison's (1978) symmetry condition. These are the signs SIXTEEN,
>>SEVENTEEN, EIGHTEEN and NINETEEN. These signs have a two-handed
>>variant in which the hands have the same location (neutral space) and
>>movement (an alternating up and down movement) but different hand
>>configurations on the dominant and non-dominant hand (the
>>non-dominant hand has a 5 handshape, while the other hand may have an
>>I, for example, in one form of the sign SIXTEEN). To my knowledge,
>>these variants are not found in the related variety, Auslan.
>>
>>Bencie Woll pointed out to me that numerals in BSL and Auslan have
>>other distinctive formational properties, such as hand configurations
>>not found in other core native signs, as in the closed hand with
>>only the pinky and ring finger extended used in some varieties of BSL
>>and Auslan for SEVEN, and the extended thumb, index, middle and ring
>>used in some varieties for NINE. Only signs related to SEVEN and
>>NINE use these handshapes (e.g., SEVENTEEN, NINETY, LAST-WEEK etc).
>>
>>I believe the same claim has been made in the literature for ASL
>>SEVEN.
>>
>>So do other sign languages use different formational features and
>>constraints for numerals? Can someone point me in the direction of
>>any published discussion of this issue (I seem to recall some
>>discussion of this on SLLING-L some time ago)?
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Adam
>>
>>PS Auslan also has a very small number of signs that appear to break
>>Battison's (1978) dominance condition, using marked handshapes on the
>>non-dominant hand.
>>
>>----------------------
>>Adam Schembri
>>Centre for Deaf Studies
>>University of Bristol
>>8 Woodland Rd
>>Bristol BS8 1TN
>>United Kingdom
>>Telephone: +44 (0)117 954 6909
>>Textphone: +44 (0)117 954 6920
>>Fax: +44 (0)117 954 6921
>>Email: Adam.Schembri at bristol.ac.uk
>>Website: www.bris.ac.uk/Depts/DeafStudies
>
>
>--
>
>-----------------------------------------------------
>Carol A. Padden
>Professor
>Department of Communication
>University of California, San Diego
>La Jolla, CA 92093-0503
>858.534.7571 tty
>858.534.7315 fax  ~ cpadden at ucsd.edu
>-----------------------------------------------------


--