MoL-2023-08: Gaasbeek, Anne Marleen (2023) Polar Questions in Sign Language of the Netherlands (NGT) and Dutch. [Report]
![[thumbnail of MoL-2023-08.text.pdf]](https://eprints.illc.uva.nl/style/images/fileicons/text.png) |
Text
MoL-2023-08.text.pdf - Published Version Download (22MB) |
Abstract
This project examines polar questions in both Sign Language of the Netherlands (NGT) and Dutch.
The NGT part of the project aims at getting a better understanding of the use of (non-)manual markers in polar questions in NGT. The manual marker of PALMS - UP and the non-manuals markers − which are expressed by the torso, head, and face − of body position, eyebrows, eye gaze, eye shape, head, lip corners, nose, and shoulders are annotated in polar questions in the Corpus NGT. These annotations are in accordance with the annotator guideline which is created as part of this project. The annotated polar questions are grouped in clusters by applying both principal component analysis as dimension reduction technique and k-means as clustering method, on the coded data set. Based on the clustering result, global patterns of (non-)manual marking in polar questions in NGT are identified. This project also describes five syntactic structures, which each consists of a radical combined with one of the following tags: ‘toch’ (translation: ‘right’), ‘of niet’ (translation: or not), hesitation, disbelief, and confirmation. For each of these tags the required (non-)manuals are determined. This project results in the formulation of the following generalisations, which are preliminary because they are essentially based on corpus data (which implies a lot of variation) and therefore they require further testing.
1. Polar questions in NGT are not necessarily expressed through marked − or specifically raised − eyebrows;
2. The use of lowered eyebrows and squeezed eye shape coincide, and wide eye shape only occurs when raised eyebrows are present;
3. The marker of nodding only occurs when the marker of chin in is present, and forward body position only occurs when the marker of chin out is present;
4. The syntactic structure which combines a radical and a ‘toch’ tag requires that no polarity is expressed at the radical, and that at the tag the markers of nodding and PALMS- UP are present;
5. The syntactic structure which combines a radical and an ‘of niet’ tag requires that the radical expresses no negative polarity, and that at the tag the markers of shaking, PALMS- UP, and no eyebrow marking are present;
6. The syntactic structure which combines a radical and a hesitation tag requires that no polarity is expressed at the radical, and that at the tag the markers of lip corners down, body position forward, chin out, shaking or neutral head movement, and PALMS- UP are present;
7. The syntactic structure which combines a radical and a disbelief tag requires that at the tag the markers of shaking, chin in, and wide PALMS - UP are present;
8. The syntactic structure which combines a radical and a confirmation tag requires that at the tag the markers of nodding, shoulders up, wide PALMS - UP, and no eyebrow marking are present.
The part of the project which is concerned with polar questions in Dutch analyses the felicitous use of two types of biased questions: both questions consist of a declarative anchor followed by a toch or hè with rising intonation. The question types are named after their sentence final elements, the Dutch particle toch (toch questions) and the Dutch particle hè (hè questions). To accurately capture their felicity conditions the distinction in neutral, positive, and negative speaker’s prior belief and contextual evidence is not sufficient. This project therefore proposes a distinction in two declarative anchor types: matter-of-fact and personal taste. The contextual evidence also needs a further specification: the evidence source (addressee or external), the evidence quality (direct or deduced), and to whom the evidence is new (addressee, speaker, or both) is specified. This project results in the formulation of the felicity conditions of both question types:
1. A toch question q with declarative anchor α = P (x), that expresses a matter of fact, is felicitous if all following conditions are fulfilled:
(a) the speaker must have a positive prior belief in α
(b) the speaker must consider it possible that the addressee might agree (potentially after some thought) about the truth of α
(c) the speaker is not certain both participants agree about the truth status of α
2. A toch question q with declarative anchor α = P (x), that expresses a personal taste, is felicitous if all following conditions are fulfilled:
(a) the speaker must be certain that α is true, independent of the judgement provided by the addressee
(b) the speaker must consider it possible that the addressee agrees about the truth of α, independent of the judgement of the speaker
(c) the speaker must initiate the experience of x or share her expectation that x will have property P
3. A hè question q with declarative anchor α = P (x), that expresses a matter of fact or personal taste, is felicitous if all following conditions are fulfilled:
(a) the speaker must be certain that α is true, independent of the information or the judgement provided by the addressee
(b) the speaker must consider it possible that the addressee agrees about the truth of α, independent of the information or judgement provided by the speaker
| Item Type: | Report |
|---|---|
| Report Nr: | MoL-2023-08 |
| Series Name: | Master of Logic Thesis (MoL) Series |
| Year: | 2023 |
| Subjects: | Language |
| Depositing User: | Dr Marco Vervoort |
| Date Deposited: | 04 Jul 2023 12:57 |
| Last Modified: | 04 Jul 2023 12:57 |
| URI: | https://eprints.illc.uva.nl/id/eprint/2249 |
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |
