Cover not available

Article published In: Where do nouns come from?
Edited by John B. Haviland
[Gesture 13:3] 2013
► pp. 309–353

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

The emerging grammar of nouns in a first generation sign language

Specification, iconicity, and syntax

 | University of California, San Diego
Published online: 21 July 2014
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.13.3.04hav
A first generation family homesign system, dubbed “Z”, from the Tzotzil-speaking township of Zinacantán, in Chiapas, Mexico, provides insight into how a new sign language can begin to distinguish formally different “part-of-speech” categories. After describing the small signing community, consisting of 3 deaf sibling and their intermediate hearing sister, plus a younger cousin — the entire set of fluent adult signers — plus the hearing child of the oldest deaf signer, and setting out some of the theoretical issues surrounding the nature of “part-of-speech” in sign languages, the paper considers three sorts of mechanisms the language has developed to help distinguish signs that refer to objects from signs that refer to actions. These include a set of size-shape specifiers that co-occur with presumed nominal signs, an iconic contrast between different sign formational elements that somewhat inconsistently signal a noun/verb distinction, and, perhaps most interestingly, a construction involving a clearly grammaticalized locative or copular element that allows Z signers to make clear that they are referring to (physical) objects rather than actions. The paper concludes by considering the overall effect of these quite different formal strategies on the evolving language structure.
References (68)
Augustine, SaintBishop of Hippo, (1955). Confessions and enchiridion, newly translated and edited by Albert C. Outler. Philadelphia: Westminster Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
, (1992). Confessions, Commentary by James J. O’Donnell. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brentari, Diane, Marie Coppola, Laura Mazzoni, & Susan Goldin-Meadow (2012). When does a system become phonological? Handshape production in gesturers, signers, and homesigners. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 30 (1), 1–31. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brown, Penelope. (1994). The INS and ONS of Tzeltal locative expressions: the semantics of static descriptions of location. Linguistics, 32 (4/5), 743–790. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. (1996). Using language. New York & Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Coppola, Marie & Elissa L. Newport (2005). Grammatical subjects in home sign: Abstract linguistic structure in adult primary gesture systems without linguistic input. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 102 (52), 19249–19253.
Coppola, Marie & Wing Chee So (2005). Abstract and object-anchored deixis: Pointing and spatial layout in adult homesign systems in Nicaragua. In Alejna Brugos, Manuella R. Clark-Cotton, & Suengwan Ha (Eds.), Proceedings of the 29th Boston university conference on language development (pp. 144–155). Boston: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2006). The seeds of spatial grammar: Spatial modulation and coreference in homesigning and hearing adults. In David Bamman, Tatiana Magnitskaia, & Colleen Zaller (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th Boston university conference on language development (pp. 119–130). Boston: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Coppola, Marie & Annie Senghas (2010). The emergence of deixis in Nicaraguan signing. In Diane Brentari (Ed.), Sign languages: A Cambridge language survey (pp. 543–569). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cormier, Kearsey, Sandra Smith, & Zed Sevcikova (2013). Predicate structures, gesture and simultaneity in the representation of action in British sign language: Evidence from deaf children and adults. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 18 (3), 370–390. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cuxac, Christian. (2000). Iconicity of sign language. In Martin M. Taylor, Françoise Néel, & Don Bouwhuis (Eds.), The structure of multimodal dialogue (pp. 321–334). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2001). Les langues des signes: analyseurs de la faculté de langage. Acquisition Et Interaction En Langue Etrangère, 151, 11–36. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Danziger, Eve. (2008). A person a place or a thing? Whorfian consequences of syntactic bootstrapping in Mopan Maya. In Melissa Bowerman & Penelope Brown (Eds.), Crosslinguistic perspectives on argument structure: Implications for learnability (pp. 29–48). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Danziger, Eve & Elizabeth Keating (1996). Between anthropology and cognitive science: a reemerging dialogue. Symposium presented to the Annual Meetings of the American Anthropological Association , San Francisco, November, 1966.
de Vos, Connie. (2012). Sign-spatiality in Kata Kolok. Doctoral dissertation, Nijmegen, Radboud University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Du Bois, John W. (1987). The discourse basis of ergativity. Language, 641, 805–855. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Frishberg, Nancy. (1975). Arbitrariness and iconicity: Historical change in American sign language. Language, 51 (3), 696–719. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fusellier-Souza, Ivani. (2001). La création gestuelle des individus sourds isolés. Acquisition et interaction en langue étrangère, 151, 61–96. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2004). Sémiogenèse des langues des signes, Étude de langues des signes emergentes (LS ÉMG) pratiquées par des sourds brésiliens. Doctoral dissertation, Sciences du langage, Université Paris81.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2006). Emergence and development of sign languages: from a semiogenetic point of view. Sign Language Studies, 7 (1), 30–56. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldin-Meadow, Susan. (2003). The resilience of language: what gesture creation in deaf children can tell us about how all children learn language. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2012). Homesign: gesture to language. In Roland Pfau, Markus Steinbach, & Bencie Woll (Eds.), Sign language: An international handbook (pp. 601–625). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldin-Meadow, Susan, Cynthia Butcher, Carolyn Mylander, & Mark Dodge (1994). Nouns and verbs in a self-styled gesture system: What’s in a name? Cognitive Psychology, 271, 259–319. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haviland, John B. (2011). Nouns, verbs, and constituents in an emerging ‘Tzotzil’ sign language. In Rodrigo Gutiérrez-Bravo, Line Mikkelsen, & Eric Potsdam (Eds.), Representing language: Essays in honor of Judith Aissen (pp. 151–171). Santa Cruz, CA: California Digital Library eScholarship Repository, Linguistic Research Center, University of California, Santa Cruz.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd. (1997). Possession: Cognitive sources, forces, and grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul J. & Elizabeth Closs Traugott (1993). Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hunger, Barbara. (2006). Noun/verb pairs in Austrian sign language (ÖGS). Sign Language & Linguistics, 9 (1/2), 71–94. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Janzen, Terry. (2012). Lexicalization and grammaticalization. In Roland Pfau, Markus Steinbach, & Bencie Woll (Eds.), Sign language: An international handbook (pp. 816–841). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kegl, Judith & Gayla Iwata (1989). Lenguaje de Signos Nicaragüense: A pidgin sheds light on the “Creole?” ASL. In Robert Carlson, Scott DeLancey, Spike Gildea, Doris Payne, & Anju Saxena (Eds.), Proceedings of the fourth meeting of the Pacific linguistics conference (pp. 266–294). Eugene, Oregon: Department of Linguistics, University of Oregon.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kegl, Judith, Annie Senghas, & Maria Coppola (1999). Creation through contact: Sign language emergence and sign language change in Nicaragua. In Michel DeGraff (Ed.), Language creation and language change: Creolization, diachrony, and development (pp. 179–237). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kendon, Adam. (1980). A description of a deaf-mute sign language from the Enga Province of Papua New Guinea with some comparative discussion, Part II: The semiotic functioning of Enga signs. Semiotica, 321, 81–117.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (1988). Sign languages of Aboriginal Australia: Cultural, semiotic and communicative perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2004). Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Klima, Edward S. & Ursula Bellugi (1979). The signs of language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kuschel, Rolf. (1973). The silent inventor: The creation of a sign language by the only deaf-mute on a Polynesian Island. Sign Languages Studies, 2 (3), 1–27. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Langacker, Ron. (1990). Nouns and verbs. Language, 631, 53–94. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Le Guen, Olivier. (2012). An exploration in the domain of time: from Yucatec Maya time gestures to Yucatec Maya Sign Language time signs. In Ulrike Zeshan & Connie de Vos (Eds.), Endangered sign languages in village communities: Anthropological and linguistic insights (pp. 209–250). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter & Ishara Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
MacLeod, Catriona. (1973). A deaf man’s sign language. Its nature and position relative to spoken languages. Linguistics, 1011, 72–88.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mandel, Mark. (1977). Iconic devices in American Sign Language. In Lynn A. Friedman (Ed.), On the other hand: New perspectives on American sign language (pp. 57–107). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meir, Irit. (2010). Iconicity and metaphor: Constraints on metaphorical extension of iconic forms. Language, 861, 865–896. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meir, Irit, Carol A. Padden, Mark Aronoff, & Wendy Sandler (2007). Body as subject. Journal of Linguistics, 431, 531–563. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Morford, Jill P. (1996). Insights to language from the study of gesture: a review of research on the gestural communication of nonsigning deaf people. Language and Communication, 16 (2), 165–178. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Morford, Jill P. & Judy A. Kegl (2000). Gestural precursors to linguistic constructs: how input shapes the form of language. In David McNeill (Ed.), Language and gesture (pp. 358–387). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Morgan, Gary, Rosalind Herman, & Bencie Woll (2002). The development of complex verb constructions in British Sign Language. Journal of Child Language, 29 (3), 655–675. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Müller, Cornelia. (2010). Wie Gesten bedeuten. Eine kognitiv-linguistische und sequenzanalytische Perspektive. Sprache und Literatur, 411, 37–68 (Sonderheft: Sprache und Geste ). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2013a). Gestures as a medium of expression. The linguistic potential of gestures. In Cornelia Müller, Adam Cienki, Ellen Fricke, Silva Ladewig, & David McNeill (Eds.), Body – language – communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction (pp. 202–207). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2013b). Towards a grammar of gestures. A form based view. In Cornelia Müller, Adam Cienki, Ellen Fricke, Silva Ladewig, & David McNeill (Eds.), Body – language – communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction (pp. 707–703). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Padden, Carol. (1988). Interaction of morphology and syntax in American sign language. New York: Garland Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2010). In search of grammar. Paper presented to theoretical issues in sign language research, 10, Purdue, IN, October 1, 2010.
Padden, Carol, Irit Meir, Wendy Sandler, & Mark Aronoff (2010). Against all expectations: Encoding subjects and objects in a new language. In Donna B. Gerdts, John C. Moore, & Maria Polinsky (Eds.), Hypothesis A / hypothesis B: Linguistic explorations in honor of David M. Perlmutter (pp. 383–400). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Peirce, Charles Sanders. (1894/1992). What is a sign? In Nathan Houser & Christian Kloesel (Eds.), The essential Peirce: Selected philosophical writings (Vol. 21, pp. 4–10). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Perniss, Pamela & Ulrike Zeshan (2008). Possessive and existential constructions in Kata Kolok (Bali). In Ulrike Zeshan & Pamela Perniss (Eds.), Possessive and existential constructions in sign languages (pp. 125–150). Nijmegen: Ishara Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pfau, Roland & Markus Steinbach (2011). Grammaticalization in sign languages. In Heiko Narrog & Bernd Heine (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of grammaticalization (pp. 683–695). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Quine, Willard Van Orman. (1960). Word and object. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, Emmanuel Schegloff, & Gail Jefferson (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 501, 696–735. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sandler, Wendy, Irit Meir, Carol Padden, & Mark Aronoff (2005). The emergence of grammar: Systematic structure in a new language. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 102 (7), 2661–2665
Sapir, Edward. (1921). Language: An introduction to the study of speech. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schwager, Waldemar & Ulrike Zeshan (2008). Word classes in sign languages: criteria and classifications. Studies in Language, 32 (3), 509–545. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Supalla, Ted & Elissa L. Newport (1978). How many seats in a chair? The derivation of nouns and verbs in American sign language. In Patricia A. Siple (Ed.), Understanding language through sign language research (pp. 91–132). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Taub, Sarah. (2001). Language from the body: Iconicity and metaphor in American sign language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Washabaugh, William. (1979). Hearing and deaf signers on Providence Island. Sign Language Studies, 241, 191–214. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (1980a). The manu-facturing of a language. Semiotica, 29 (1/2), 1–37. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (1980b). The organization and use of Providence Island sign language. Sign Language Studies, 261, 65–92. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (1986). Five fingers for survival: Deaf sign language in the Caribbean. Ann Arbor: Karoma Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. (1958). Philosophical investigations. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yau, Shun-Chiu. (1992). Création gestuelle et débuts du langage, création de langues gestuelles chez des sourds isolés. Hong Kong: Langages Croisés.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (33)

Cited by 33 other publications

Cheng, Qi & Rachel I. Mayberry
2025. American Sign Language basic clause comprehension strategies used by late first-language learners: plausibility, animacy, and linguistic structure. Language Learning and Development ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Coppola, Marie
2025. Homesign Research, Gesture Studies, and Sign Language Linguistics: The Bigger Picture of Homesign and Homesigners. Topics in Cognitive Science 17:3 ► pp. 492 ff. DOI logo
Puspita, Vinka Ganita & Ardik Ardianto
2024. Code-Switching and Slang: An Analysis of Language Dynamics in the Everyday Lives of Generation Z. Linguistics Initiative 4:1 ► pp. 76 ff. DOI logo
German, Austin
2023. Abrupt grammatical reorganization of an emergent sign language. Diachronica DOI logo
German, Austin
2024. Metalinguistic Discourse in an Emerging Sign Language. Languages 9:7 ► pp. 240 ff. DOI logo
German, Austin
2025. The impact of interaction on variation in Zinacantec Family Homesign. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 10:1 DOI logo
Goico, Sara A. & Laura Horton
2023. Homesign: Contested Issues. Annual Review of Linguistics 9:1 ► pp. 377 ff. DOI logo
Edwards, Terra
2022. The difference intersubjective grammar makes in protactile DeafBlind communities. Lingua 273 ► pp. 103303 ff. DOI logo
Ergin, Rabia
2022. Emerging Lexicon for Objects in Central Taurus Sign Language. Languages 7:2 ► pp. 118 ff. DOI logo
Reed, Lauren W.
2022. Sign networks: Nucleated network sign languages and rural homesign in Papua New Guinea. Language in Society 51:4 ► pp. 627 ff. DOI logo
Goico, Sara A.
2021. Repeated assemblages in the interactions of deaf youth in Peru. International Journal of Multilingualism 18:2 ► pp. 267 ff. DOI logo
Pouw, Wim, Mark Dingemanse, Yasamin Motamedi & Aslı Özyürek
2021. A Systematic Investigation of Gesture Kinematics in Evolving Manual Languages in the Lab. Cognitive Science 45:7 DOI logo
Friedner, Michele & Annelies Kusters
2020. Deaf Anthropology. Annual Review of Anthropology 49:1 ► pp. 31 ff. DOI logo
ORTEGA, GERARDO & ASLI ÖZYÜREK
2020. Types of iconicity and combinatorial strategies distinguish semantic categories in silent gesture across cultures. Language and Cognition 12:1 ► pp. 84 ff. DOI logo
Safar, Josefina
2020. “When you were that little…”. Gesture 19:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Webster, Jenny & Josefina Safar
2020. Ideologies behind the scoring of factors to rate sign language vitality. Language & Communication 74 ► pp. 113 ff. DOI logo
Gawne, Lauren, Chelsea Krajcik, Helene N. Andreassen, Andrea L. Berez-Kroeker & Barbara F. Kelly
2019. Data transparency and citation in the journal Gesture . Gesture 18:1 ► pp. 83 ff. DOI logo
Motamedi, Yasamin, Marieke Schouwstra, Kenny Smith, Jennifer Culbertson & Simon Kirby
2019. Evolving artificial sign languages in the lab: From improvised gesture to systematic sign. Cognition 192 ► pp. 103964 ff. DOI logo
Rodríguez, Lydia
2019. “Time is not a line.” Temporal gestures in Chol Mayan. Journal of Pragmatics 151 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Nölle, Jonas, Marlene Staib, Riccardo Fusaroli & Kristian Tylén
2018. The emergence of systematicity: How environmental and communicative factors shape a novel communication system. Cognition 181 ► pp. 93 ff. DOI logo
Abner, Natasha
2017. Syntactic Categorization in Sign Languages * *I am extremely indebted to all of the individuals who have shared their language and their research with me and with the scientific community. I also thank Carlo Geraci and the editors for valuable feedback and suggestions. Any remaining errors are my own.. In Handbook of Categorization in Cognitive Science, ► pp. 549 ff. DOI logo
Cartmill, Erica A., Lilia Rissman, Miriam A. Novack & Susan Goldin-Meadow
2017. The development of iconicity in children’s co-speech gesture and homesign. Language, Interaction and Acquisition 8:1 ► pp. 42 ff. DOI logo
HWANG, SO-ONE, NOZOMI TOMITA, HOPE MORGAN, RABIA ERGIN, DENIZ İLKBAŞARAN, ARON SEEGERS MARIE, RYAN LEPIC & CAROL PADDEN
2017. Of the body and the hands: patterned iconicity for semantic categories. Language and Cognition 9:4 ► pp. 573 ff. DOI logo
Lempert, Michael
2017. Uncommon resemblance. Gesture 16:1 ► pp. 35 ff. DOI logo
de Vos, Connie & Roland Pfau
2015. Sign Language Typology: The Contribution of Rural Sign Languages. Annual Review of Linguistics 1:1 ► pp. 265 ff. DOI logo
Streeck, Jürgen
2015. Embodiment in Human Communication. Annual Review of Anthropology 44:1 ► pp. 419 ff. DOI logo
Streeck, Jürgen
2021. The emancipation of gestures. Interactional Linguistics 1:1 ► pp. 90 ff. DOI logo
Haviland, John B.
2014. Different strokes. In From Gesture in Conversation to Visible Action as Utterance, ► pp. 245 ff. DOI logo
Haviland, John B.
2015. Hey!. Topics in Cognitive Science 7:1 ► pp. 124 ff. DOI logo
Haviland, John B.
2019. Grammaticalizing the face in a first generation sign language. In Historical Linguistics 2015 [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory, 348], ► pp. 519 ff. DOI logo
Haviland, John B.
2022. How and When to Sign “Hey!” Socialization into Grammar in Z, a 1st Generation Family Sign Language from Mexico. Languages 7:2 ► pp. 80 ff. DOI logo
Hunsicker, Dea & Susan Goldin-Meadow
2013. How handshape type can distinguish between nouns and verbs in homesign. Gesture 13:3 ► pp. 354 ff. DOI logo
Hunsicker, Dea & Susan Goldin-Meadow
2015. How handshape type can distinguish between nouns and verbs in homesign. In Where do nouns come from? [Benjamins Current Topics, 70], ► pp. 111 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 9 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue