Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-54qdv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-10T09:58:09.119Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Signed languages require spatial relations: Response to Law, Power, and Quinto-Pozos

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 March 2026

William J. Idsardi
William J. Idsardi*
Affiliation:
University of Maryland, College Park
*
[idsardi@umd.edu]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In response to the target article by Law, Power, and Quinto-Pozos, I argue that signed and spoken languages share a common core of phonological mental representations, consisting of events (points in time and/or space), features (monadic properties of events), and precedence (a dyadic relation of temporal order between events). In addition to this, signed languages also include dyadic spatial relations between events/points in space and time. Illustrations of the EFPS model for signed phonology are drawn from some simple ASL signs, and an ongoing diachronic change in ASL motorcycle is analyzed using parallel events, partial reduplication, and underspecification.

Keywords

speechsignsigned languagesphonologyfeatures

Information

Type
Perspectives
Information
Language , Volume 101 , Issue 3 , September 2025 , pp. e226 - e237
Copyright
Copyright © 2025 Linguistic Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Avery, Peter, and Idsardi, William J.. 2001. Laryngeal dimensions, completion and enhancement. Distinctive feature theory, ed. by Hall, T. Alan, 41–70. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI: 10.1515/9783110886672.41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Battison, Robbin M. 1978. Lexical borrowing in American Sign Language. Silver Spring, MD: Linstok.Google Scholar
Boyes Braem, Penny, and Sutton-Spence, Rachel L. (eds.) 2001. The hands are the head of the mouth: The mouth as articulator in sign languages. Hamburg: Signum.Google Scholar
Brentari, Diane. 1998. A prosodic model of sign language phonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI: 10.7551/mitpress/5644.001.0001.Google Scholar
Brentari, Diane. 2002. Modality differences in sign language phonology and morphophonemics. Modality and structure in signed and spoken languages, ed. by Meier, Richard P., Cormier, Kearsy, and Quinto-Pozos, David, 35–64. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511486777.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brentari, Diane. 2016. Linguistics: Phonology. The SAGE deaf studies encyclopedia, ed. by Gertz, Genie and Boudreault, Patrick, 628–34. Los Angeles: Sage. DOI: 10.4135/9781483346489.n199.Google Scholar
Brentari, Diane. 2019. Sign language phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/9781316286401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, Ying, and Crawford, J. Douglas. 2020. Allocentric representations for target memory and reaching in human cortex. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1464.142–55. DOI: 10.1111/nyas.14261.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chen, Ying, Monaco, Simona, Byrne, Patrick, Yan, Xiaogang, Henriques, Denise Y. P.; and Crawford, J. Douglas. 2014. Allocentric versus egocentric representation of remembered reach targets in human cortex. Journal of Neuroscience 34.12515–26. DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1445-14.2014.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chomsky, Noam, and Halle, Morris. 1968. The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Coleman, John, and Local, John. 1991. The ‘no crossing constraint’ in autosegmental phonology. Linguistics and Philosophy 14.295–338. DOI: 10.1007/BF00627405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Carvalho, Fernando O. 2017. Fricative debuccalization and primary split in Terena (Arawak) historical phonology. International Journal of American Linguistics 83.50937. DOI: 10.1086/691587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frishberg, Nancy. 1975. Arbitrariness and iconicity: Historical change in American Sign Language. Language 51(3).696–719. DOI: 10.2307/412894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallistel, C. R. 1980. The organization of action: A new synthesis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Gil, David. 2005. From repetition to reduplication in Riau Indonesian. Studies on reduplication, ed. by Hurch, Bernard, 31–64. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI: 10.1515/9783110911466.31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graf, Thomas. 2022. Subregular linguistics: Bridging theoretical linguistics and formal grammar. Theoretical Linguistics 48(3-4).145–84. DOI: 10.1515/tl-2022-2037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, Kathleen Currie, Aonuki, Yurika, Vesik, Kaili, Poy, April; and Tolmie, Nico. 2022. Sign Language Phonetic Annotator-Analyzer: Open-source software for formbased analysis of sign languages. Proceedings of the LREC2022 10th Workshop on the Representation and Processing of Sign Languages: Multilingual sign language resources, 59–66. Online: https://aclanthology.org/2022.signlang-1.10/.Google Scholar
Halle, Morris. 1983. On distinctive features and their articulatory implementation. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 1.91–105. DOI: 10.1007/BF00210377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heinz, Jeffrey. 2018. The computational nature of phonological generalizations. Phonological typology, ed. by Hyman, Larry M. and Plank, Frans, 126–95. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI: 10.1515/9783110451931-005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hollister, Anne, and Giurintano, David J.. 1995. Thumb movements, motions, and moments. Journal of Hand Therapy 8(2).106–14. DOI: 10.1016/S0894-1130(12)80307-3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Icard, Thomas F., and Moss, Lawrence S.. 2023. A simple logic of concepts. Journal of Philosophical Logic 52.705–30. DOI: 10.1007/s10992-022-09685-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Idsardi, William J. 2022. Underspecification in time. Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique 67.670–82. DOI: 10.1017/cnj.2022.36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Idsardi, William J. 2025. SMPLish concepts for phonology. Paper presented at the North American Phonology Conference, Montreal.Google Scholar
Idsardi, William J., and Raimy, Eric. 2008. Reduplicative economy. Rules and constraints in contemporary phonological theory, ed. by Vaux, Bert and Nevins, Andrew, 149–84. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199226511.003.0005.Google Scholar
Klatt, Dennis H. 1976. Linguistic uses of segmental duration in English: Acoustic and perceptual evidence. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 59.1208–21. DOI: 10.1121/1.380986.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Law, Danny, Power, Justin M.; and Quinto-Pozos, David. 2025. Bringing signed languages into the study of regular sound change. Language 101(3).e166–e201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Guen, Oliver, and Baas, José Alfredo Tuz. 2024. Spatial cognition, modality and language emergence: Cognitive representation of space in Yucatec Maya Sign Language (Mexico). Languages 9:278. DOI: 10.3390/languages9080278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Papillon, Maxime. 2020. Precedence and the lack thereof: Precedence-relation-oriented phonology. College Park: University of Maryland dissertation. Online: http://hdl.handle.net/1903/26391.Google Scholar
Pfau, Roland, and Quer, Josep. 2010. Nonmanuals: Their grammatical and prosodic roles. In Brentari, 381-402. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511712203.018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pietroski, Paul M. 2018. Conjoining meanings: Semantics without truth values. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198812722.001.0001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pietroski, Paul M., and Icard, Thomas F.. 2024. Minimal meanings: Adequacy from below. Rutgers University and Stanford University, ms.Google Scholar
Pratt-Hartmann, Ian. 2023. Fragments of first-order logic. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780192867964.001.0001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raimy, Eric. 2000. The phonology and morphology of reduplication. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI: 10.1515/9783110825831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sagey, Elizabeth. 1988. On the ill-formedness of crossing association lines. Linguistic Inquiry 19.109–18. Online: https://www.jstor.org/stable/4178577.Google Scholar
Sherrington, Charles. 1947. The integrative action of the nervous system. 2nd edn. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Soubeyrand, Marc, Assabah, Bouchra, Bégin, Matthieu, Laemmel, Elisabeth, Santos, Alexandre Dos; and Crézé., Maud 2017. Pronation and supination of the hand: Anatomy and biomechanics. Hand Surgery & Rehabilitation 36(1).2–11. DOI: 10.1016/j.hansur.2016.09.012.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stokoe, William C. 1960. Sign language structure: An outline of the visual communication systems of the American deaf. (Studies in Linguistics: Occasional papers 8.) Buffalo, NY: University of Buffalo.Google Scholar
Stokoe, William C., Casterline, Dorothy C.; and Croneberg, Carl G.. 1965. Dictionary: American Sign Language. Washington, DC: Gallaudet College Press.Google Scholar
Taylor, Craig L., and Schwarz, Robert J.. 1955. The anatomy and mechanics of the human hand. Artificial Limbs 2.22–35. Online: http://www.oandplibrary.org/al/1955_02_022.asp.Google ScholarPubMed
Weissman, Benjamin, Engelen, Jan, Thamsen, Lena; and Cohn, Neil. 2024. Compositional affordances of emoji sequences. Language@Internet 22.57–73. DOI: 10.14434/li.v22.40795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wickens, Delos D. 1938. The transference of conditioned excitation and conditioned inhibition from one muscle group to the antagonistic group. Journal of Experimental Psychology 22(2).101–23. DOI: 10.1037/h0058007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wickens, Delos D. 1939. A study of voluntary and involuntary finger conditioning. Journal of Experimental Psychology 25(2).127–40. DOI: 10.1037/h0059493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar