University of Chicago, Department of Psychology, 5848 S. University Ave., Chicago, IL 60637, United States.
Cogn Psychol. 2013 Aug-Sep;67(1-2):1-25. doi: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2013.05.003. Epub 2013 Jul 17.
All natural languages have formal devices for communicating about number, be they lexical (e.g., two, many) or grammatical (e.g., plural markings on nouns and/or verbs). Here we ask whether linguistic devices for number arise in communication systems that have not been handed down from generation to generation. We examined deaf individuals who had not been exposed to a usable model of conventional language (signed or spoken), but had nevertheless developed their own gestures, called homesigns, to communicate. Study 1 examined four adult homesigners and a hearing communication partner for each homesigner. The adult homesigners produced two main types of number gestures: gestures that enumerated sets (cardinal number marking), and gestures that signaled one vs. more than one (non-cardinal number marking). Both types of gestures resembled, in form and function, number signs in established sign languages and, as such, were fully integrated into each homesigner's gesture system and, in this sense, linguistic. The number gestures produced by the homesigners' hearing communication partners displayed some, but not all, of the homesigners' linguistic patterns. To better understand the origins of the patterns displayed by the adult homesigners, Study 2 examined a child homesigner and his hearing mother, and found that the child's number gestures displayed all of the properties found in the adult homesigners' gestures, but his mother's gestures did not. The findings suggest that number gestures and their linguistic use can appear relatively early in homesign development, and that hearing communication partners are not likely to be the source of homesigners' linguistic expressions of non-cardinal number. Linguistic devices for number thus appear to be so fundamental to language that they can arise in the absence of conventional linguistic input.
所有的自然语言都有用于表达数量的形式手段,无论是词汇手段(例如 two, many)还是语法手段(例如名词和/或动词的复数标记)。在这里,我们探讨了在没有从一代传递到下一代的情况下,是否会出现用于数量的语言手段。我们研究了一些聋人,他们没有接触过可用的传统语言模式(手语或口语),但他们仍然发展了自己的手势,称为家庭手语,用于交流。研究 1 考察了四位成年家庭手语使用者及其每个家庭手语使用者的听力交流伙伴。成年家庭手语使用者产生了两种主要类型的数量手势:表示集合的手势(基数标记)和表示一与多的手势(非基数标记)。这两种类型的手势在形式和功能上都类似于已建立的手语中的数量符号,因此完全融入了每个家庭手语使用者的手势系统中,从这个意义上说,是具有语言性质的。家庭手语使用者的听力交流伙伴所产生的数量手势表现出了一些,但不是全部,家庭手语使用者的语言模式。为了更好地理解成年家庭手语使用者所展示的模式的起源,研究 2 考察了一位儿童家庭手语使用者及其听力母亲,发现该儿童的数量手势表现出了与成年家庭手语使用者的手势相同的所有特征,但他母亲的手势却没有。这些发现表明,数量手势及其语言使用可能在家庭手语发展的早期就出现了,而听力交流伙伴不太可能是家庭手语使用者非基数数量表达的语言表达的来源。因此,用于数量的语言手段似乎是语言的基础如此之深,以至于它们可以在没有传统语言输入的情况下出现。