Abstract

Research on spoken languages has identified a “subject preference” processing strategy for tackling input that is syntactically ambiguous as to whether a sentence-initial NP is a subject or object. The present study documents that the “subject preference” strategy is also seen in the processing of a sign language, supporting the hypothesis that the “subject”-first strategy is universal and not dependent on the language modality (spoken vs. signed). Deaf signers of Austrian Sign Language (ÖGS) were shown videos of locally ambiguous signed sentences in SOV and OSV word orders. Electroencephalogram (EEG) data indicated higher cognitive load in response to OSV stimuli (i.e. a negativity for OSV compared to SOV), indicative of syntactic reanalysis cost. A finding that is specific to the visual modality is that the ERP (event-related potential) effect reflecting linguistic reanalysis occurred earlier than might have been expected, that is, before the time point when the path movement of the disambiguating sign was visible. We suggest that in the visual modality, transitional movement of the articulators prior to the disambiguating verb position or co-occurring non-manual (face/body) markings were used in resolving the local ambiguity in ÖGS. Thus, whereas the processing strategy of “subject preference” is cross-modal at the linguistic level, the cues that enable the processor to apply that strategy differ in signing as compared to speech.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.