Publications

Displaying 1101 - 1107 of 1107
  • Zeshan, U., Escobedo Delgado, C. E., Dikyuva, H., Panda, S., & De Vos, C. (2013). Cardinal numerals in rural sign languages: Approaching cross-modal typology. Linguistic Typology, 17(3), 357-396. doi:10.1515/lity-2013-0019.

    Abstract

    This article presents data on cardinal numerals in three sign languages from small-scale communities with hereditary deafness. The unusual features found in these data considerably extend the known range of typological variety across sign languages. Some features, such as non-decimal numeral bases, are unattested in sign languages, but familiar from spoken languages, while others, such as subtractive sub-systems, are rare in sign and speech. We conclude that for a complete typological appraisal of a domain, an approach to cross-modal typology, which includes a typologically diverse range of sign languages in addition to spoken languages, is both instructive and feasible.
  • Zeshan, U. (2004). Basic English course taught in Indian Sign Language (Ali Yavar Young National Institute for Hearing Handicapped, Ed.). National Institute for the Hearing Handicapped: Mumbai.
  • Zeshan, U. (2004). Interrogative constructions in sign languages - Cross-linguistic perspectives. Language, 80(1), 7-39.

    Abstract

    This article reports on results from a broad crosslinguistic study based on data from thirty-five signed languages around the world. The study is the first of its kind, and the typological generalizations presented here cover the domain of interrogative structures as they appear across a wide range of geographically and genetically distinct signed languages. Manual and nonmanual ways of marking basic types of questions in signed languages are investigated. As a result, it becomes clear that the range of crosslinguistic variation is extensive for some subparameters, such as the structure of question-word paradigms, while other parameters, such as the use of nonmanual expressions in questions, show more similarities across signed languages. Finally, it is instructive to compare the findings from signed language typology to relevant data from spoken languages at a more abstract, crossmodality level.
  • Zeshan, U. (2004). Hand, head and face - negative constructions in sign languages. Linguistic Typology, 8(1), 1-58. doi:10.1515/lity.2004.003.

    Abstract

    This article presents a typology of negative constructions across a substantial number of sign languages from around the globe. After situating the topic within the wider context of linguistic typology, the main negation strategies found across sign languages are described. Nonmanual negation includes the use of head movements and facial expressions for negation and is of great importance in sign languages as well as particularly interesting from a typological point of view. As far as manual signs are concerned, independent negative particles represent the dominant strategy, but there are also instances of irregular negation in most sign languages. Irregular negatives may take the form of suppletion, cliticisation, affixing, or internal modification of a sign. The results of the study lead to interesting generalisations about similarities and differences between negatives in signed and spoken languages.
  • Ziegler, A., DeStefano, A. L., König, I. R., Bardel, C., Brinza, D., Bull, S., Cai, Z., Glaser, B., Jiang, W., Lee, K. E., Li, C. X., Li, J., Li, X., Majoram, P., Meng, Y., Nicodemus, K. K., Platt, A., Schwarz, D. F., Shi, W., Shugart, Y. Y. and 7 moreZiegler, A., DeStefano, A. L., König, I. R., Bardel, C., Brinza, D., Bull, S., Cai, Z., Glaser, B., Jiang, W., Lee, K. E., Li, C. X., Li, J., Li, X., Majoram, P., Meng, Y., Nicodemus, K. K., Platt, A., Schwarz, D. F., Shi, W., Shugart, Y. Y., Stassen, H. H., Sun, Y. V., Won, S., Wang, W., Wahba, G., Zagaar, U. A., & Zhao, Z. (2007). Data mining, neural nets, trees–problems 2 and 3 of Genetic Analysis Workshop 15. Genetic Epidemiology, 31(Suppl 1), S51-S60. doi:10.1002/gepi.20280.

    Abstract

    Genome-wide association studies using thousands to hundreds of thousands of single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) markers and region-wide association studies using a dense panel of SNPs are already in use to identify disease susceptibility genes and to predict disease risk in individuals. Because these tasks become increasingly important, three different data sets were provided for the Genetic Analysis Workshop 15, thus allowing examination of various novel and existing data mining methods for both classification and identification of disease susceptibility genes, gene by gene or gene by environment interaction. The approach most often applied in this presentation group was random forests because of its simplicity, elegance, and robustness. It was used for prediction and for screening for interesting SNPs in a first step. The logistic tree with unbiased selection approach appeared to be an interesting alternative to efficiently select interesting SNPs. Machine learning, specifically ensemble methods, might be useful as pre-screening tools for large-scale association studies because they can be less prone to overfitting, can be less computer processor time intensive, can easily include pair-wise and higher-order interactions compared with standard statistical approaches and can also have a high capability for classification. However, improved implementations that are able to deal with hundreds of thousands of SNPs at a time are required.
  • De Zubicaray, G. I., Acheson, D. J., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (Eds.). (2013). Mind what you say - general and specific mechanisms for monitoring in speech production [Research topic] [Special Issue]. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. Retrieved from http://www.frontiersin.org/human_neuroscience/researchtopics/mind_what_you_say_-_general_an/1197.

    Abstract

    Psycholinguistic research has typically portrayed speech production as a relatively automatic process. This is because when errors are made, they occur as seldom as one in every thousand words we utter. However, it has long been recognised that we need some form of control over what we are currently saying and what we plan to say. This capacity to both monitor our inner speech and self-correct our speech output has often been assumed to be a property of the language comprehension system. More recently, it has been demonstrated that speech production benefits from interfacing with more general cognitive processes such as selective attention, short-term memory (STM) and online response monitoring to resolve potential conflict and successfully produce the output of a verbal plan. The conditions and levels of representation according to which these more general planning, monitoring and control processes are engaged during speech production remain poorly understood. Moreover, there remains a paucity of information about their neural substrates, despite some of the first evidence of more general monitoring having come from electrophysiological studies of error related negativities (ERNs). While aphasic speech errors continue to be a rich source of information, there has been comparatively little research focus on instances of speech repair. The purpose of this Frontiers Research Topic is to provide a forum for researchers to contribute investigations employing behavioural, neuropsychological, electrophysiological, neuroimaging and virtual lesioning techniques. In addition, while the focus of the research topic is on novel findings, we welcome submission of computational simulations, review articles and methods papers.
  • Zwitserlood, I., Perniss, P. M., & Ozyurek, A. (2013). Expression of multiple entities in Turkish Sign Language (TİD). In E. Arik (Ed.), Current Directions in Turkish Sign Language Research (pp. 272-302). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

    Abstract

    This paper reports on an exploration of the ways in which multiple entities are expressed in Turkish Sign Language (TİD). The (descriptive and quantitative) analyses provided are based on a corpus of both spontaneous data and specifically elicited data, in order to provide as comprehensive an account as possible. We have found several devices in TİD for expression of multiple entities, in particular localization, spatial plural predicate inflection, and a specific form used to express multiple entities that are side by side in the same configuration (not reported for any other sign language to date), as well as numerals and quantifiers. In contrast to some other signed languages, TİD does not appear to have a productive system of plural reduplication. We argue that none of the devices encountered in the TİD data is a genuine plural marking device and that the plural interpretation of multiple entity localizations and plural predicate inflections is a by-product of the use of space to indicate the existence or the involvement in an event of multiple entities.

Share this page