Hostname: page-component-5f7774ffb-7hcng Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-02-20T05:08:37.838Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Limitations on simultaneity in sign language

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 February 2026

Donna Jo Napoli  and
Rachel Sutton-Spence
Donna Jo Napoli*
Affiliation:
Swarthmore College
Rachel Sutton-Spence*
Affiliation:
University of Bristol
*
Napoli Department of Linguistics Swarthmore College 500 College Ave. Swarthmore, PA 19081, [donnajonapoli@gmail.com]
Sutton-Spence Centre for Personal and Professional Development 8–10 Berkeley Square Clifton Bristol BS8 1HH Great Britain, [Rachel.spence@bristol.ac.uk]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Sign languages have two primary articulation tracts: the two hands. They also have secondary articulation tracts that can be partitioned: the nonmanuals. Thus multiple propositions can be conveyed simultaneously. We have attested at most four simultaneously articulated independent propositions in sign languages, and suggest that this limit follows at least partly from limitations on visual short-term memory to cope with the information received. It appears further that the simultaneous propositions must be connected, often sharing arguments or verbs, an account of which concerns matters of production and of cognitive load. A brief look at simultaneity in spoken language suggests that similar if not identical limitations apply.

Keywords

sign languagesimultaneitygesturesvisual short-term memorycognitionsyntax

Information

Type
Short Report
Information
Language , Volume 86 , Issue 3 , September 2010 , pp. 647 - 662
Copyright
Copyright © 2010 Linguistic Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Alvarez, George, and Franconieri, Steven. 2005. How many objects can you track? Evidence for a flexible tracking resource. Journal of Vision 5.641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnold, Jennifer. 2008. Reference production: Production-internal and addressee-oriented processes. Language and Cognitive Processes 23. 495–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, Charlotte, and Padden, Carol. 1978. Focusing on the nonmanual components of American Sign Language. Understanding language through sign language research, ed. by Siple, Patricia, 25–57. San Francisco: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Battison, Robbin. 1978. Lexical borrowing in American Sign Language. Silver Spring, MD: Linstok.Google Scholar
Boyes Braem, Penny, and Sutton-Spence, Rachel (eds.) 2001. The hands are the head of the mouth: The mouth as articulator in sign languages. Hamburg: Signum.Google Scholar
Busso, Carlos, and Narayanan, Shrikanth. 2007. Interaction between speech and facial gestures in emotional utterances: A single subject study. IEEE Transactions on Audio, Speech and Language Processing 15. 2331–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Jamie (ed.) 2004. The handbook of mathematical cognition. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Campbell, Ruth, Woll, Bencie, Benson, Philip; and Wallace, Simon. 1999. Categorical perception of face actions: Their role in sign language and in communicative facial displays. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A: Human Experimental Psychology 52. 67–95.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carey, Susan. 2001. Cognitive foundations of arithmetic: Evolution and ontogenesis. Mind & Language 16. 37–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carey, Susan. 2004. Bootstrapping & the origin of concepts. Daedalus 133. 59–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chase, William, and Simon, Herbert. 1973. Perception in chess. Cognitive Psychology 4. 55–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cowan, Nelson. 2001. The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24. 87–185.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Crasborn, Onno. 2007. How to recognize a clause when you see one. Sign Language & Linguistics 10. 103–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cuxac, Christian. 1985. Esquisse d'une typologie des langues des signes. Autour de la langue des signes, ed. by Cuxac, Christian, 35–60. Paris: Académie de Paris.Google Scholar
Cuxac, Christian. 2000. La Langue des Signes Française: Les voies de l'iconicité. Paris: Ophrys.Google Scholar
Dudis, Paul. 2004. Body partitioning and real-space blends. Cognitive Linguistics 15. 223–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ekman, Paul, and Friesen, Wallace. 1975. Unmasking the face: A guide to recognizing emotions from facial clues. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Emmorey, Karen. 2002. Language, cognition, and the brain: Insights from sign language research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Engberg-Pedersen, Elisabeth. 1993. Space in Danish Sign Language: The semantics and morphosyntax of the use of space in a visual language. (International studies on sign language research and communication of the Deaf 19.) Hamburg: Signum.Google Scholar
Feigenson, Lisa, Dehaene, Stanislas; and Spelke, Elizabeth. 2004. Core systems of number. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 8. 307–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ferreira, Fernanda, and Engelhardt, Paul. 2006. Syntax and production. Handbook of psycholinguistics, 2nd edn., ed. by Traxler, Matthew and Gernsbacher, Morton, 61–91. Oxford: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, Lynn A. 1975. Space, time, and person reference in American Sign Language. Language 51. 940–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldin-Meadow, Susan. 2003. The resilience of language: What gesture creation in deaf children can tell us about how all children learn language. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Goldin-Meadow, Susan. 2007. Pointing sets the stage for learning language—and creating language. Child Development 78. 741–45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grodner, Daniel, and Gibson, Edward. 2005. Consequences of the serial nature of linguistic input for sentential complexity. Cognitive Science 29. 261–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hanna, Joy, and Brennan, Susan. 2007. Speakers' eye gaze disambiguates referring expressions early during face-to-face conversation. Language-Vis ion Interaction 57. 596–615.Google Scholar
Hurford, James. 2007. The origins of meaning: Language in the light of evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Johansson, Roland, Theorin, Anna, Westling, Göran, Andersson, Mikael, Ohki, Yukari; and Nyberg, Lars. 2006. How a lateralized brain supports symmetrical bimanual tasks. Public Library of Science Biology 4.el58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, Trevor, Vermeerbergen, Myriam, Schembri, Adam; and Leeson, Lorraine. 2007. ‘Real data are messy’: Considering cross-linguistic analysis of constituent ordering in Auslan, VGT, and ISL. Visible variation: Comparative studies on sign language structure, ed. by Perniss, Pamela, Pfau, Roland, and Steinbach, Markus, 163–206. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, Daniel, Treisman, Anne; and Gibbs, Brian. 1992. The reviewing of object files: Object-specific integration of information. Cognitive Psychology 24. 175–219.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaufman, E. L., Lord, M. W., Reese, T. W.; and Volkmann, J.. 1949. The discrimination of visual number. American Journal of Psychology 62. 498–525.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaneko, Michiko. 2008. The poetics of sign language haiku. Bristol: University of Bristol dissertation.Google Scholar
Kelso, J. A. Scott. 1984. Phase transitions and critical behavior in human bimanual coordination. American Journal of Physiology 246.R1000–1004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kendon, Adam. 2004. Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laurence, Stephen, and Margolis, Eric. 2007. Linguistic determinism and the innate basis of number. The innate mind: Foundations and the future, ed. by Carruthers, Peter, Laurence, Stephen, and Stich, Stephen, 139–70. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Liddell, Scott. 1998. Grounded blends, gestures, and conceptual shifts. Cognitive Linguistics 9. 283–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liddell, Scott. 2000. Blended spaces and deixis in sign language discourse. In McNeill, 331–57.Google Scholar
Liddell, Scott. 2003. Grammar, gesture, and meaning in American Sign Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Magnussen, Svein, and Greenlee, Mark. 1997. Competition and sharing of processing resources in visual discrimination. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 23. 1603–16.Google ScholarPubMed
McNeill, David (ed.) 2000. Language and gesture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meir, Irit, Padden, Carol, Aronoff, Mark; and Sandler, Wendy. 2007. Body as subject. Journal of Linguistics 43. 531–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miles, Dorothy. 1998. Bright memory: The poetry of Dorothy Miles, ed. by Read, Don. Feltham Middlesex: British Deaf History Society. [Recorded in 1985.]Google Scholar
Milkovic, Marina, Bradaric-Joncic, Sandra; and Wilbur, Ronnie. 2007. Information status and word order in Croatian Sign Language. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 21. 1007–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, Christopher. 1994. Simultaneous constructions in Quebec Sign Language. Word-order issues in sign language: Working papers, ed. by Brennan, Mary and Turner, Graham H., 89–112. Durham: International Sign Linguistics Association.Google Scholar
Miller, George. 1956. The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review 63. 81–97.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, Mary Beth. 1992. Live at SMI Burtonsville, MD: Sign Media. [Videorecording.]Google Scholar
Morford, Jill, and MacFarlane, James. 2003. Frequency characteristics of American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies 3. 213–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Napoli, Donna Jo, and Wu, Jeff. 2003. Morpheme structure constraints on two-handed signs in American Sign Language: Notions of symmetry. Sign Language & Linguistics 6. 123–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nobe, Shuichi. 2000. Where do most spontaneous representational gestures actually occur with respect to speech? In McNeill, 186–98.Google Scholar
Novak, Peter. 2000. Shakespeare's Twelfth night: An American Sign Language translation. Online: http://www.yale.edu/asl12night/index.html. Accessed January 12, 2010.Google Scholar
Olzak, Lynn, and Wickens, Thomas. 1997. Discrimination of complex patterns: Orientation information is integrated across spatial scale; spatial-frequency and contrast information are not. Perception 26. 1101–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Padden, Carol. 1988. Interaction of morphology and syntax in American Sign Language. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Pizzuto, Elena, Rossini, Paolo, Sallandre, Marie-Anne; and Wilkinson, Erin. 2008. Deixis, anaphora, and highly iconic structures: Cross-linguistic evidence on American (ASL), French (LSF), and Italian (LIS) signed languages. Sign languages: Spinning and unraveling the past, present and future (TISLR9), ed. by de Quadros, Ronice Müller, 47–95. Petropolis: Editora Arara Azul.Google Scholar
Pylyshyn, Zenon. 1989. The role of location indexes in spatial perception: A sketch of the FINST spatial index model. Cognition 32. 65–97.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pylyshyn, Zenon. 1994. Some primitive mechanisms of spatial attention. Cognition 50. 363–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pylyshyn, Zenon. 2000. Situating vision in the world. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 4. 197–207.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pylyshyn, Zenon. 2007. Things and places: How the mind connects with the world. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pylyshyn, Zenon, and Storm, Ron. 1988. Tracking multiple independent targets: Evidence for a parallel tracking mechanism. Spatial Vision 3. 179–97.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sampson, Geoffrey. 1996. From central embedding to empirical linguistics. Using corpora for language research: Studies in honor of Geoffrey Leech, ed. by Thomas, Jenny and Short, Mick, 14–26. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Scholl, Brian, and Pylyshyn, Zenon. 1999. Tracking multiple items through occlusion: Clues to visual objecthood. Cognitive Psychology 38. 259–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scott, Paul. 2003. The hare and the tortoise. Online: http://www.let.ru.nl/sign-lang/echo. Accessed June 2008.Google Scholar
Scott, Paul. 2006. Three queens. Paul Scott's BSL poetry DVD. Coleford: Forest Books.Google Scholar
Sears, Christopher, and Pylyshyn, Zenon. 2000. Multiple object tracking and attentional processing. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology 54. 1–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Semjen, Andras, Summers, Jeffery; and Cattaert, Daniel. 1995. Hand coordination in bimanual circle drawing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 21. 1139–57.Google Scholar
Sherzer, Joel. 1983. Kuna ways of speaking: An ethnographic perspective. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Sherzer, Joel. 1993. Pointed lips, thumbs up, and cheek puffs: Some emblematic gestures in social interactional and ethnographic context. Texas Linguistic Forum 33. 196–211.Google Scholar
Spelke, Elizabeth. 2003. What makes us smart? Core knowledge and natural language. Language in mind, ed. by Gentner, Dedre and Goldin-Meadow, Susan, 277–311. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutton-Spence, Rachel, and Napoli, Donna Jo. 2009. Humour in sign languages: The linguistic underpinnings. Dublin: Trinity College Dublin Press.Google Scholar
Thomas, James, Magnussen, Svein; and Greenlee, Mark. 2000. What limits simultaneous discrimination accuracy? Vision Research 40. 3169–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Trick, Lana, and Pylyshyn, Zenon. 1994. Why are small and large numbers enumerated differently? A limited-capacity preattentive stage in vision. Psychological Review 101. 80–102.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
VanRullen, Rufin, and Koch, Christof. 2003. Competition and selection during visual processing of natural scenes and objects. Journal of Vision 3. 75–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vasishth, Shravan, and Lewis, Richard. 2006. Argument-head distance and processing complexity: Explaining both locality and antilocality effects. Language 82. 767–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vermeerbergen, Myriam. 2006. Past and current trends in sign language research. Language & Communication 26. 168–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vermeerbergen, Myriam, Leeson, Lorraine; and Crasborn, Onno. 2007. Simultaneity in signed languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Volterra, Virginia, and Erting, Carol. 1994. From gesture to language in hearing and deaf children. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Woll, Bencie. 2001. The sign that dares to speak its name: Echo phonology in British Sign Language. In Boyes Braem & Sutton-Spence, 87–98.Google Scholar
Wulf, Alyssa, and Dudis, Paul. 2005. Body partitioning in ASL metaphorical blends. Sign Language Studies 5. 317–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yau, Shun Chiu. 2008. The role of visual space in sign language development. Space in languages of China, ed. by Xu, Dan, 143–74. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar