Emerging sign languages have been a focus of study for about twenty years now. They have created a sense of excitement in the scientific community, as researchers have felt that these languages enable us to gain deeper understanding of human language. We think that we are now in a position to assess what we have learned from the study of these languages so far. We would like to take this workshop as an opportunity to think together about the question: What can research on emerging signing systems and sign languages teach us about the nature and evolution of human language?
During this workshop, we will focus on these four questions:
During this workshop, we will focus on these four questions:
- When can we say that a language “has syntax”? What sorts of evidence do we need? Can a language be “syntactic” in certain aspects but not in others? Can a language be (in some respects) syntactic without invoking recursion? Can there be prosodic organization in the absence of demonstrable syntax? And if so, how much work can it do in mapping between phonology and meaning, in the (relative) absence of syntax?
- When can we say that a language “has morphology”? What sorts of evidence do we need? Can a language have morphology without syntactic categories, building words solely on semantic grounds (e.g. actor or instrument of an action without nouns and verbs)? How can we distinguish having syntax from having morphology?
- When can we say that a communication system is a language? Do we have to draw a sharp boundary? How much conventionalization across the community is necessary? How much one-off improvisation is tolerable, and should it be considered “part of the language”? What do we mean when we contrast ‘full-fledged languages’ with ‘non-full-fledged systems’?
- What ingredients do you need to ‘start’ a language? What are the routes along which emerging languages can develop? Is there a single uniform progression, or are there multiple fronts on which elaboration can proceed (e.g. lexicon, phonology, syntax, morphology)?