Hostname: page-component-6898cfcb55-kwdml Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-11T21:49:15.742Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Space, Time, and Person Reference in American Sign Language

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2026

Lynn A. Friedman
Lynn A. Friedman*
Affiliation:
University of California, Berkeley
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The study of sign language reveals the effect of the modality of communication on the language system. This paper presents a comprehensive description and discussion of the manifestation of time, space, and person reference in American Sign Language. It is in this area that the effect of the modality on information transmission appears most clearly. Various aspects of space, time, and person are discussed: the manner in which visual language allows for deictic and anaphoric locative, temporal, and ‘pronominal’ reference, the surface manifestation of the conceptualization of time, the specialized use of the dominant and non-dominant articulators, the contrast between the ‘segmental’ nature of oral-language spatial terms and the continuous nature of locative expressions in ASL, and the manner in which verbs may incorporate agent and/or patient and manner adverbials.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 51 , Issue 4 , December 1975, pp. 940 - 961
Copyright
Copyright © 1975 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

Battison, Robbin. 1971. Some observations on sign language, semantics, and aphasia. MS, University of California. San Diego.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J. 1968. The case for case. Universals in linguistic theory, ed. by Bach, E. & Harms, R. T., 1–88. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J. 1971a. Toward a theory of deixis. (PCCLLU papers, 3.4.) Honolulu: University of Hawaii.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J. 1971b. May we come in? Space, time. Deixis I. Coming and going. Deixis II. Unpublished series delivered at University of California, Santa Cruz.Google Scholar
Friedman, Lynn A. 1974a. On the physical manifestation of stress in the American Sign Language, MS, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Friedman, Lynn A. 1974b. A comparative analysis of oral and visual language phonology, MS, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Stokoe, William C Jr. 1960. Sign language structure: an outline of the visual communication systems of the American deaf. (Studies in linguistics, occasional papers, 8.) Buffalo.Google Scholar
Stokoe, William C Jr; Casterline, D.; and Croneberg, C. 1965. A dictionary of American Sign Language on linguistic principles. Washington, D.C.: Gallaudet College Press.Google Scholar
Woodward, James. 1971. Implications for sociolinguistic research among the deaf. Paper delivered at LSA Annual Meeting.Google Scholar