The Spatial Domain in TİD

Because of the visual-spatial modality of sign languages, sign languages make use of three-dimensional space to convey spatial constructions. Spatial relations are a large part of sign languages and are realized at most of its linguistic levels, including phonology, morphology, syntax and discourse. Such spatial analyses, however, are problematic because … describing a spatial locus in terms of some type of phonological or phonetic feature has proven to be extremely difficult and there is currently no satisfactory feature system capable of doing this (Liddell 2003, p. 136). Indexing, as well as the use of pronouns, agreement verbs, and classifier predicates, greatly interact with spatial locus. Whether loci should be regarded as gestural (visual imagery) representations, or gradient and analogue systems (Liddell 2000, 2003; Emmorey & Herzig 2003), has been hotly debated.

As discussed in Section 2.2.3.3, Liddell uses blended space to explain that locations are the projections of conceptual space onto sign space, rather than simply a part of the linguistic system. He claims that this approach resolves the difficulties of dealing with the issue of listability of location realized in pointing, loci in agreeing verbs (indicating verbs), and classifier predicates (depicting verbs). Similarly, Emmorey and Herzig (2003, p. 244) have found through a series of experiments that while the handshape feature of classifiers can be labeled as a

categorical morpheme, the location feature does not fall into this group. Because gestural loci are a part of the greater gestural category, sign languages interact with gestures through the use of spatial relations. In this next section, I will introduce some of the basic properties of the spatial domain in TİD and address their functions.

2.2.6.1. (Gestural) Signing Space

Signers are confined to signing within a specific range – the area where their hands can reach (see Perniss 2012). The potential signing area is subdivided into subareas, with each subarea containing specific locations available for signing. These spaces include the head, the area above the head, the body and the empty space in front of the body, as well as the area to the left and right of the body. Within a signer’s signing space, innumerable locations exist in which a given sign can occur. Due to the difference in modality between signed and spoken languages, signing space applies to many linguistic levels, including morphosyntax and discourse. It has been shown that verb agreement (for example see Lillo-Martin & Meier 2011) and the construction of classifiers (for example see Zwitserlood 2012) mostly rely on the use of signing space.

2.2.6.2. Indexical Pointing

Perhaps the most multifaceted issue in the sign language literature is pointing, most often using the 1-handshape form (,&#,), and realized in many areas: pronouns, determiners (i.e. this book), person referents (nominal establishment: Sandler & Lillo-Martin 2006), pointing to real objects, spatial adjustments (locative pointing), and temporal adjustments (time reference).

As previously noted, the sign language subcategory ‘person’, which is marked by agreement verbs, can be categorized as either first or non-first. This categorization can also be applied to pronouns: first and non-first person pronoun (ASL: Meier 1990). The index is phonetically realized as having one specified handshape: the 1-handshape (DSL: Engberg-Pedersen 1993). The first person is generally articulated at a signer’s chest and is fixed, while non-first person pronouns cover a set of unlimited loci in the sign space. While these same

classifications can be applied to TİD, the 1-handshape is not always used as the index sign. There are, for example, two variants of the first person singular pronoun in TİD. The first variant resembles the pointing handshape, listed above (,/), while the second uses the flat hand and requires the signer’s palm to make contact with their chest. Dual and plural forms of pronouns have also been observed. There are also different aspects of pronominal index classification.

Berenz (2002), for instance, claims that eye gaze, though addressed to the addressee in second person, does not occur in third person. McBurney (2002), offers another example, in which she argues there is no such classification. The readers are referred to the valuable summary on various pronominal systems and their classification by Cormier (2012).

Although it is also possible for a signer to use their signing space to point to real world objects, not every example of pointing necessarily refers to a real world object. For example, instead of a real world object, a signer may create an abstract referential locus in space to refer to a person, and can use that locus to refer back to the previously established person. This process is called nominal establishment (Sandler & Lillo-Martin 2006, p. 25), and is often observed in discourse. Signers disambiguate referents by establishing their locations at the beginning of a conversation, and continue to use the same locations to talk about the referents throughout the conversation.

Pointing can also be used to indicate locative expressions, such as here, and there. In order to refer to the signer’s location, the index finger must face downward (here). If the angle of the finger is reversed 180 degrees, its meaning changes, and it now refers to something in the area above the signer’s head.

According to Senghas & Coppola (2011), the locative expressions are probably much closer to gestural roots than to (pro)nominal pointings. They discovered that the nominal pointings are used significantly more in the third cohort of Nicaraguan Sign Language users. Senghas & Coppola (2011) explain that this process involves pointing signs becoming language-like throughout time, integrating into the language.

Temporal expressions are often conveyed using a combination of pointing and signing space. To illustrate, observe the similarities between the ASL signs now and here. Both signs use the area directly in front of the signer‘s body and a downward movement. Furthermore, the areas both in front of and behind the signer’s body are used in temporal expressions of the past (i.e. yesterday), and future (tomorrow), respectively (Friedman 1975 as cited in Emmorey 2001). The signs BUGÜN ‘today’ and DÜN ‘yesterday’ are articulated using the index finger.

In contrast, the sign for YARIN ‘tomorrow’ is indicated by twisting the hand forward, using the A-bar handshape, (a closed fist with an upward pointing thumb).

Considering all of the various functions of pointings discussed above, Pfau

& Steinbach (2006) and Pfau (2011) propose a grammaticalization process, which can be modality specific. They suggest that gestural pointings are a part of the linguistic system, functioning as demonstrative pronouns. These pronouns can evolve into demonstrative pronouns, and then into personal pronouns or relative pronouns, and finally into agreement markers or agreement auxiliary based on the facts and hypotheses that they provide (Pfau & Steinbach 2006, p. 61 and Pfau 2011, p. 155).

2.2.6.3. Time References

Time references in signed languages are not limited to yesterday, today and tomorrow. Most signed languages employ various methods to make time references in signing space. According to Emmorey (2001, pp. 109-111), three timelines in ASL can be observed: (i) deictic, a timeline parallel to the z line on the xz plane (i.e. FRIDAY is further on the z line than TUESDAY). (ii) anaphoric, the time line parallel to the x=z line on xz plane (i.e. 1960s is farther on the x=z line than 1970s. (iii) sequence time line: the time line on the horizontal line (parallel to x line on xz plane). These three timelines are also applicable to TİD.

2.2.6.4. Sequential and Simultaneous Expressions in Sign Languages Using Spatial Expressions

Because sign languages differ from spoken languages in terms of modality, sign languages allow simultaneous constructions, meaning that two (or if allowable, three), articulators referring to different entities or events can be articulated at the same time, (for a detailed summary on simultaneous constructions, see Perniss 2007). Perniss lists the detailed functions of such construction as follows:

(1) Referent representation on both hands to express locative information (in the depiction of the spatial relationship between two referents).

(2) Referent representation on both hands to express the temporal and spatial simultaneity of events (in the depiction of action or interaction between referents).

(3) An expression of (the) temporal simultaneity of events or states (aspectual information).

(4) A topic hold on one hand, and signs relating further topic information on the second hand (topic – comment structure).

(5) An enumeration morpheme hold on one hand, while the second hand provides signs conveying further topic information.

(6) An index sign hold on one hand, while the second hand produces further topic-related signs (p. 40).

Perniss categorizes simultaneous constructions into two groups: Constructions (1) – (3) indicate perceptual structure, while (4), (5) and (6) refer to discourse structure. In the following section, I will provide several examples for each structure in TİD.

2.2.6.4.1. Locative Expressions

Turkish Sign Language, like many other signed languages, is unique from spoken language because of its ability to articulate simultaneously with both hands. Entity classifiers, as discussed in Section 2.2.3.3., are the semantic

categories through which the hands represent entities. For instance, the right hand, referring to a person, takes the V-handshape, whereas the left hand takes the form of a flat-handshape, indicating a wall. Through the use of simultaneous construction, the signer indicates that a person is jumping over the wall.

In their work, Özyürek et al. (2010), investigated which strategies TİD native signers use to show the relationship between Figure and Ground. If we use an example of simultaneous construction, the wall can be considered Ground, while the man jumping over the wall is defined as Figure. The authors found a few simultaneous occurrences showing this relationship between Figure and Ground, and claim that simultaneous locative expressions are not the default mode for TİD signers. Rather, native signers employed strategies, generally through the use of entity classifiers, after the Ground has been expressed. This is not to say, however, that TİD never makes use of simultaneous expression in terms of locative expressions.

2.2.6.4.2. Hold Morphemes

Simultaneous occurrences in TİD are not limited to locative expressions.

Temporal and event organizations have also been observed. For example, a signer uses the sign KAYIT ‘registration’ then preserves the sign on the non-dominant hand (CL: flat hand, a CL handshape referring to ‘paper’), while using the dominant hand to form the sign for BAŞVURMAK ‘application’. In this example, the flat hand can be considered a hold-morpheme. The hold-morpheme in this case corresponds to the Ground referent referred to earlier (Engberg-Pedersen 1993 as cited in Perniss 2007).

2.2.6.4.3. Buoys

Signers sometimes use the non-dominant hand for reference purposes, which Liddell (2003, p. 223) has termed buoys. He categorizes buoys in four ways:

(i) list, (ii) theme, (iii) fragment, and (iv) pointer. The first three types are products of conceptual blends, whereas the pointer buoy functions by using the non-dominant hand to point (ibid, p. 260).

In the buoy subcategory ‘list’, each finger is used to represent an ordinal number. For example, signers often point to the non-dominant thumb to refer to something as ‘first’, and use the pinky finger to signify ‘fifth’. In ASL, the signer’s fingers can be used both to denote the first four weeks of something, and provide a ranking of topics or people (ibid). List buoys can also be referred to as enumeration morphemes (Vermeerbergen 2001). While investigating list buoys cross-linguistically (NSL: Norwegian Sign Language and SSL: Swedish Sign Language), Liddell et al. (2007) discovered some slight differences, such as a MANY-LIST sign in NSL that is absent in SSL, and hand configuration differences in both languages. With regard to my small corpus in TİD, several list buoys have been observed. Generally, the index finger is the first element to which the signer makes reference. In this example, the signer describes three women at the beginning of the story, and then refers back to them throughout the narration using these previously established list buoys.

A theme buoy occurs when an important discourse theme is being discussed (Liddell 2003, p. 242). The weak hand takes the 1-handshape, while the signer continues to give related topic information using the dominant hand. Fragment buoys are created by associating the meaning of a sign with all or part of its final state of production (Liddell et al. 2007, p. 208). Pointer buoys, however, differ completely from all other buoy types. They use pointing (with the weak hand), as an element in discourse (Liddell 2003, p. 250), and are very often observed as relative elements (see for example Section 5.1.3.3.).