دانلود کتاب On Relativization and Clefting: An Analysis of Italian Sign Language

فهرست مطالب :

Acknowledgements\nList of figures\nNotational conventions\nSign language acronyms\nGeneral Introduction\nPart I: Introducing Italian Sign Language (LIS)\n 1 Italian Sign Language and the Italian Deaf community\n 1.1 Historical background\n 1.2 The Italian Deaf community today\n 1.3 Linguistic research on LIS\n 2 A syntactic outline of Italian Sign Language (LIS)\n Introduction\n 2.1 Modality-specific characteristics\n 2.1.1 The internal structure of signs\n 2.1.2 The linguistic use of space and movement\n 2.1.2.1 Verb agreement\n 2.1.2.2 Space and referentiality\n 2.1.3 The non-manual component\n 2.2 Representing LIS syntactic structure\n 2.2.1 The CP layer\n 2.2.1.1 Interrogative pronouns\n 2.2.1.2 Relative pronouns\n 2.2.1.3 Representing the CP layer\n 2.2.2 The IP layer\n 2.2.3 The VP layer\n 2.2.4 The Determiner Phrase (DP)\n 2.2.4.1 Identifying D heads in LIS\n 2.2.4.2 Distribution of D-like elements in the sentence\n 2.2.4.3. Reduplication of D heads\n 2.2.4.4 Naked NPs\n 2.2.4.5 Heavy NPs\n 2.2.4.6 Summing up LIS DP\n 2.2.5 A structure\n 2.3 Introducing relative and cleft constructions in LIS: the challenges\n 2.4. Summary\nPart II: On Relativization\n 3 Relativization strategies in spoken languages\n Introduction\n 3.1 Defining relativization\n 3.2. The relative option: some constitutive elements\n 3.3 Syntactic typologies across languages\n 3.3.1 Internally Headed Relative Clauses (IHRCs)\n 3.3.2 Externally Headed Relative Clauses (EHRCs)\n 3.3.3 Free Relatives (FRs)\n 3.3.4 Correlative clauses\n 3.3.5 Summing up the properties displayed by the main syntactic typologies\n 3.4 Three semantic interpretations of relative clauses\n 3.4.1 Restrictive relative clauses\n 3.4.1.1 Antecedent-related properties\n 3.4.1.2 Relative pronouns and pied-piping phenomena\n 3.4.1.3 Scope phenomena\n 3.4.1.4 Reconstruction and binding phenomena\n 3.4.1.5 Extraposition\n 3.4.1.6 Stacking\n 3.4.1.7 Other properties\n 3.4.1.8 Summing up\n 3.4.2 Non-restrictive relative clauses\n 3.4.2.1 Head-related properties\n 3.4.2.2 Relative pronouns and pied-piping phenomena\n 3.4.2.3 Scope phenomena\n 3.4.2.4 Reconstruction and binding phenomena\n 3.4.2.5 Extraposition\n 3.4.2.6 Stacking\n 3.4.2.7 Other properties\n 3.4.2.8 Summing up\n 3.4.3 Maximalizing relative clauses: Grosu and Landman’s (1998) semantic scale\n 3.4.4 Summing up the syntactic properties exhibited by restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses\n 3.5 The syntactic representation of relative constructions\n 3.5.1 The raising analysis\n 3.5.1.1 Internally headed relative clauses\n 3.5.1.2 Externally headed relative clauses\n 3.5.1.3 Free relatives\n 3.5.1.4. Correlative clauses\n 3.5.1.5 Representing the semantic interpretation of relative structures\n 3.6 Summary\n 4 Relative clauses in sign languages: A typological survey\n Introduction\n 4.1 Relative constructions in American Sign Language (ASL)\n 4.2 Relative constructions in Brazilian Sign Language (LIBRAS)\n 4.3 Relative construnctions in German Sign Language (DGS)\n 4.4 Relative constructions in Turkish Sign Language (TID)\n 4.5 Relative constructions in Catalan Sign Language (LSC)\n 4.6 Relative constructions in Hong Kong Sign Language (HKSL)\n 4.7 Summary\n 5 Some methodological issues\n Introduction\n 5.1 Social influences on linguistic research\n 5.2 Linguistic variation within sign languages\n 5.3 Collection of linguistic data and research technology\n 5.3.1 Naturalistic data\n 5.3.2 Elicited data: collection procedures\n 5.3.3 Research technology\n 5.3.4 The informants\n 5.4 Some clarifications on the glosses\n 5.5 Summary\n 6 An internally headed relative clause analysis for LIS relative structures\n Introduction\n 6.1 A description of LIS relative structures\n 6.2 The paradigm\n 6.3 The plural head of the relative clause\n 6.4 The abstract head of the relative clause\n 6.5 Two competing analyses\n 6.5.1 A correlative analysis\n 6.5.2 Evidence for the nominal status of the relative CP\n 6.5.3 Evidence for the moved status of the relative CP\n 6.5.4 Evidence for the nature of the correlate as a trace\n 6.5.5 Concluding remarks\n 6.6 An internally-headed analysis\n 6.7 Extending the analysis to other languages\n 6.8 The position in the structure\n 6.9 A semantic interpretation for LIS internally-headed relative clauses\n 6.9.1 Cecchetto et al.’s arguments for an appositive interpretation: some counter-arguments\n 6.9.2 Testing the interpretation of LIS IHRCs: restrictive or appositive?\n 6.9.3 An alternative interpretation for LIS IHRCs: maximalizing or restrictive?\n 6.9.4 On the presence of appositive relative clauses\n 6.10 Summary\nPart III: On Clefting\n 7 Clefting in spoken languages\n Introduction\n 7.1 Cleft constructions in the world’s languages: toward a definition\n 7.2 The literature on clefts\n 7.2.1 The extraposition analysis\n 7.2.2 The expletive analysis\n 7.3 A cartographic perspective on clefts\n 7.4 Clefts vs. root left peripheral focalization\n 7.5 Clefts in pro-drop languages with a null copula\n 7.6 Summary\n 8 An analysis of LIS cleft constructions\n Introduction\n 8.1 The LIS data\n 8.2 Investigating the properties of LIS cleft constructions\n 8.2.1 The syntactic category of the clefted constituent\n 8.2.2 Is the clefted constituent base-generated or moved?\n 8.2.2.1 Reconstruction and binding phenomena\n 8.2.2.2 Scope phenomena\n 8.2.2.3 The NMM ‘cleft’\n 8.2.3 On the semantic interpretation of the clefted constituent\n 8.2.4 What is the position of PE?\n 8.2.5 On the nature of PE\n 8.2.6 Is the cleft clause a relative clause?\n 8.3 Pseudocleft constructions in LIS\n 8.4 Analyzing LIS clefts\n 8.4.1 An extraposition analysis: applying Percus’s (1997) implementation to LIS clefts\n 8.4.2 An expletive analysis: applying Kiss’s (1998) implementation to LIS clefts\n 8.5 Summary\nConclusions\nNotes\nReferences\nIndex