In his target article, Schlenker argues that sign languages play a crucial role in the foundations of semantics because of two key properties: visibility and iconicity. The first property allows some crucial semantic elements, which are covert in spoken language, to be overtly represented in sign language. The second property refers to the possibility to have amapping between form andmeaning which, as argued by Schlenker, “...makes sign languages more expressive than spoken languages.” After presenting several studies (e.g. visibility of variables, iconic loci, roleshift, etc.) that support this line of argument, Schlenker concludes from the comparison between spoken and sign languages that two theoretical directions are possible. The first possibility states that spoken language semantics is a simplified version of sign language semantics. This is so because the iconic system of spoken languages is not as powerful as the one of sign languages. By contrast, the second possibility states that there is no difference between spoken and sign language semantics once we include co-speech gestures to the study of the former, as also proposed by Goldin-Meadow and Brentari (2017). The last hypothesis can be supported by the fact that several sign language iconic phenomena behave like gestural contributions. For example, sign language high loci can be disregarded under ellipsis, just like co-speech gestures (Schlenker, 2015). Furthermore, role-shifted signs have a demonstrative component which leaves open the possibility to analyze them in terms of signs plus incorporated gestures, as proposed by Davidson (2015). Here, we bring data in favor of the second hypothesis, namely spoken language semantics plus gestures corresponds to sign language semantics. Focusing on Italian Sign Language (LIS) we show that (i) the iconic component of absolute gradable adjectives can be analyzed as gestural elements and (ii) the semantic

中文翻译：

---

标志性成分作为手势元素：LIS案例

Schlenker在他的目标文章中指出，手语在语义学的基础上起着至关重要的作用，因为它具有两个关键特性：可见性和象似性。第一个属性允许将某些重要的语义元素（以口头语言隐蔽）用手语公开表示。第二个属性是在形式和含义之间进行适应的可能性，正如Schlenker所说，“ ...使手语比口语更具表现力。” 在提出了支持这一论点的几项研究（例如变量的可见性，标志性基因座，角色转换等）后，Schlenker从口语和手语之间的比较得出结论，两个理论方向都是可能的。第一种可能性指出口语语义是手语语义的简化版本。之所以这样，是因为口头语言的图标系统不如手语那么强大。相比之下，第二种可能性指出，一旦我们将共同语音手势包括在前者的研究中，口语和手语语义之间就没有区别，这也是Goldin-Meadow和Brentari（2017）提出的。最后的假设可以得到以下事实的支持：几种手语标志性现象的行为就像手势的贡献。例如，就像共语音手势一样，在省略号下可以忽略手语高位（Schlenker，2015）。此外，角色转换的标志具有说明性成分，这使得根据戴维森（Davidson）（2015）提出的根据标志加合并手势进行分析的可能性成为可能。在这里，我们提出支持第二种假设的数据，即口语语义加上手势对应于手语语义。着眼于意大利手语（LIS），我们表明（i）绝对可分级形容词的图标性成分可以作为手势元素进行分析，以及（ii）语义