Typology of cardinal numerals and University of Central Lancashire numeral incorporation in sign languages Keiko Sagara and Ulrike Zeshan iSLanDS Institute, University of Central Lancashire Introduction Methodology and data The iSLanDS Sign Language Typology project has been set up with the aim of Data have been collected on number, colour and kinship in over developing (1) typologically informed documentation of linguistic diversity across 30 sign languages (see the map below) through questionnaires sign languages, (2) empirically substantiated generalizations leading towards a completed by contacts in many different countries. Elicitation materials were provided in order to collect data for specific theory of variation, (3) re-assessment of the relationship between signed and parameters. We have also tried to promote mentoring between spoken languages. The project focuses on three domains: number, colour and experienced researchers and new ones. The aim was collect a kinship terms. wide geographical sample to enable substantial cross-linguistic A comparative cross-linguistic study of number structures has now been comparison. Informants using elicitation materials in undertaken, and preliminary findings reveal similarities and differences for cardinal Japan. numerals and numeral incorporation across signed languages. Cardinal number systems Sign languages use several different systems to express cardinal number. These include use of the following strategies: additive (94: NINETY FOUR), subtractive (94: SIX LESS 100), multiplicative (including numeral incorporation), and spatial modification (See below). Half of the sign languages in the survey also use a digital strategy (94: NINE FOUR). Additive and multiplicative strategies are used by around two-thirds of sign languages to express the categories that we have looked at (1-19; multiples of 10, 100, 1000; and large numbers), but other strategies (such as subtraction and spatial modification) are much rarer cross-linguistically. 100 1,000 100,000 Non-specific large number A map showing the location of sign languages that have been included in the project. Spatial modification of numbers in Alipur Sign Language. sign language time money school Numeral incorporation British + + - China + + + One cross-linguistically common form entails the Options for expressing numerals cross-linguistically Czech + + + production of a sign from a certain paradigm, Estonia + - - While 27 sign languages use the O-hand or F-hand to express ‘0’, there are four sign using the handshape of the sign from the Finland + + + languages that use other variants, including the S-hand and the C-hand. corresponding cardinal numeral, which is known Greek + + + For numbers ‘6’ to ‘9’, sign languages have been be grouped as using either one or two as numeral incorporation (Liddell 1996). Hungary + + + hands, and the number of sign languages in each group is almost the same. For three Iceland + - - Numeral incorporation is used by nearly all sign sign languages, it seems possible to use a mix of one and two hands for these numbers, India + + + languages, and is often highly productive, or the second hand is optional. Indonesia - - - functioning with a large range of parameters. The There are often several options for expressing ’10’. Israel + + - table on the left shows the sign languages that Of the sign languages for which data are available, almost two-thirds use separate Japan + + - have paradigms in the domains of time, money lexical forms to express ‘11’ and ‘12’. Two sign languages use digital strategies to Kata Kolok + + + and school grade. express ‘11’ and ‘12’, while 15 use additive strategies and numeral incorporation. For 13 Kosovo + - + -19, lexical forms are much rarer. Mexico + + + An implicational hierarchy can be detected, New Zealand + + - whereby if a sign language has a paradigm for Base numbers Poland + + + money and/or school grade, it will also have Spain + - + incorporation for time. The vast majority of sign languages are base-10 (and some have sub-base 5), but a few Sri Lanka + + + sign languages have been found to use other bases too. For example, Chican Sign Turkey + - + Language and Mardin Sign Language use base 20, while these and Alipur Sign Language Uganda + + - also use base 50). Lexicalisation Iconicity Several number signs show evidence of having undergone a process of lexicalisation, following compound formation rules (Liddell and Johnson 1986). For example, the number Iconic structures exploit the physical resemblance between linguistic items and their ’25’ in ASL can be signed in at least two different ways, as separate signs (TWO FIVE) or meanings (Taub 2001:8). These structures have several sources, which may include body as a lexicalised sign (see below for this, and other examples). parts, such as fingers and toes. Further sources for other iconic numeral signs include currency and sign names. 25 in American Sign Language Another source for iconic structures is the shapes of written forms. For example, several strategies A variant of 12 are used cross-linguistically to refer to the in Japanese Sign Language number of zeros; representations include a ‘0’ handshape, tracing movements, and the use of Signs for 100 in the eyes. Ugandan Sign Language The table on the right shows the influence of three different alphabets separate compound fusion lexicalised on the expression of cardinal numbers. signs The lexicalisation continuum Acknowledgements References We would like to thank the following contributors to the typology project for their support: Adrian Kacsinko, Akira Morita, Liddell, S. K. (1997) ‘Numeral incorporating roots & non-incorporating prefixes in American Sign Language’ in Sign Language Studies, Ana Fernández-Soneira, Arnfinn Muruvik, Beata Szeker, Bernadet Hendriks, Bettina Eitzen, Brayan Susantha, Ernesto Escobedo, vol. 92, pp. 201-226 Galini Sapountzaki, Gergo Toth, Hasan Dikyuva, Haya Qubain, Hend Alshowaire, Herminda Otero-Doval, Hitomi Akahori, Inmaculada Liddell, S. K. and Johnson, R. E (1986) ‘American Sign Language compound formation processes, lexicalization and phonological rem- Báez-Montero, Joke Schuit, Judith Collins, Junhui Yang, Kang-Suk Byun, Klara Richterova, Klisman Ibrahimi, Kristin Lena, Liivi nants’ in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 445-513 Hollman, Lucía González-Carballás, Mohamed Abushaira, Nemzetkozi Halloke, Nick Palfreyman, Odd-Inge Schrøder, Odette Swift, Onno Crasborn, Patricia Álvarez-Sánchez, Paweł Rutkowski, Rachel McKee, Rannveig Sverrisdottir, Ritva Takkinen, Robert Adam, Sam Taub, S. F. (2001) Language from the Body: Iconicity and Metaphor in American Sign Language. New York: Cambridge University Press Lutalo-Kiingi, Sara Lanesman, Sibaji Panda, Tashi Bradford, Valmira Avdullaj, and anyone else whose name is accidentally omitted. .