Reviewed by:

• Sign Language Phonology by Diane Brentari
• Amelia A. Becker (bio)

This book outlines the research on the phonetics, phonology, and prosodic structure of sign languages (SiLs). This volume would be most suitable for readers with a strong understanding of theoretical phonology, and exposure to a SiL would be helpful but not necessary for following the discussion. Some major themes recur throughout the book (e.g., the role of iconicity), but each chapter could stand alone as, for instance, an assigned course reading.

The first chapter outlines the topics to be covered and identifies big-picture questions that SiL research can inform, including the role of Universal Grammar, how languages evolve and emerge, and hypotheses related to critical periods. Distinctions between language and gesture are also introduced, with gesture defined as "lack[ing] hierarchical combinatorial structure," "more gradient," and "more variable" than language, and as "often produced below the level of awareness" (7). Phonological systems, in contrast, are characterized by systematic dispersion of contrasts throughout articulatory and perceptual space. This chapter also provides a history of the phonological study of SiLs since Stokoe (1960) and introduces the division of SiL lexicons into the core, spatial, and "nonnative" components.

Chapter 2 discusses how visual perception and manual/bodily articulation affect phonological structure in SiLs (i.e., modality effects) and provides background on auditory and visual processing approaches. The author describes complexity (i.e., markedness) as a characteristic of phonological units, frequency, and acquisition in SiLs. The hierarchical structure of phonological units is argued to fundamentally differ between sign and spoken languages: the segment is [End Page 253] dominated by features in SiLs as a result of "having direct access to the features" (61). The chapter then provides evidence that, despite the lack of a sonority sequencing principle, movement units constitute syllable nuclei in SiLs and can be placed on a sonority hierarchy.

The thesis of chapter 3 is that iconic resemblance motivates form in phonology and morphology, but that distribution reflects other pressures, such as ease of perception. Different types of iconicity ("firstorder," "metaphorical," and "affective" [78]) are defined, and evidence is cited (Emmorey and Herzig 2003) that iconicity is applied gradually in gesture but categorically in phonology. The author points out that iconic categories exist at all levels of SiL phonology. Event structure (Wilbur 2010), classifier constructions, features, and verb agreement are all addressed as examples of how iconicity shapes SiL grammars. The chapter concludes with research on iconicity's impact on language processing, indicating population differences between groups such as signers versus nonsigners and native signers versus adult learners.

Chapter 4 summarizes phonology's interaction with gesture and with other grammatical components. The shared modality of gesture and SiL is argued to make interface phenomena between these systems distinct from most speech–gesture interactions. Gesture is argued to be responsible for obligatory components of SiL at the word, morphological, and clausal levels. The remainder of the chapter addresses interactions between phonological/prosodic units and other grammatical components. For instance, categorical perception of handshapes is presented to exemplify the phonetics–phonology interface. This chapter also discusses the functions of nonmanual gestures in morphology, discourse, and syntax. Facial expressions are shown to be componential and language-specific and, therefore, grammatical. Finally, this chapter discusses how prosodic and morphosyntactic boundaries serve as the domain for spread of nondominant-hand features in two-handed signs.

The relative isolation of deaf individuals and communities means that SiLs and other signed systems like homesign can provide insight about early stages of a language's development. Chapter 5 presents some of these insights as they pertain to phonology. The gesture–language distinction is again addressed since gestures from a surrounding hearing culture can be incorporated into a SiL. Findings from the analysis of three types of signing systems are compared: homesign, [End Page 254] community SiLs (where homesigners come together, usually in a deaf school), and village SiLs. Pressures such as alignment, dispersion, faithfulness, and ease of articulation (Optimality Theory; Prince and Smolensky 1993) are applied to explain the continuum of properties found to...

审核人：

• 黛安·布伦塔里（Diane Brentari）的手语语音学
• 阿米莉亚·贝克尔（生物）

Ť他的书中概述了在语音学，音韵学研究，并用符号语言（SILS）的韵律结构。该卷最适合对理论音系学有深刻理解的读者，并且接触到SiL会有所帮助，但对于进行后续讨论不是必需的。全书中反复出现一些主要主题（例如，标志性的作用），但每一章都可以独立存在，例如，作为分配的课程读物。

第一章概述了要涵盖的主题，并确定了SiL研究可以告知的大问题，包括通用语法的作用，语言如何演变和出现以及与关键时期有关的假设。还介绍了语言和手势之间的区别，手势定义为“缺乏分层组合结构”，“比语言更多的梯度”和“更多的可变性”，并且定义为“通常在意识水平以下产生”（7） 。相比之下，语音系统的特点是在整个发音和感知空间中系统地分散了对比。本章还提供了自Stokoe（1960）起对SiL进行语音研究的历史，并介绍了将SiL词典划分为核心，空间和“非本义”成分的过程。

第2章讨论了视觉感知和手动/身体发音如何影响SiL中的语音结构（即情态效果），并提供了听觉和视觉处理方法的背景知识。作者将复杂性（即标记）描述为SiL中语音单位，频率和获取的特征。语音单位的层次结构被认为在手语和口头语言之间存在根本差异：由于“可以直接访问特征”，该段在[结束页253]中被SiL中的特征所控制。然后，本章提供了证据，尽管缺乏音阶排序原理，但运动单元仍构成了声级语言中的音节核，并且可以置于音阶层次结构中。

第三章的论点是，符号相似在动机学和形态学上是形成形式的，但是这种分布是反映了其他压力，例如易于感知。定义了不同类型的象似性（“一阶”，“隐喻”和“情感” [78]），并引用了证据（Emmorey and Herzig 2003），逐渐将象似性应用在手势中，但在语音学中则进行了分类。作者指出，标志性类别存在于SiL语音学的各个级别。事件结构（Wilbur 2010），分类器构造，特征和动词一致都作为标志性如何塑造SiL语法的示例进行了介绍。本章以对象似性对语言处理的影响进行研究作为结尾，指出了象签名者与未签名者之间的群体差异，以及母语学习者与成人学习者之间的群体差异。

第四章总结了语音学与手势以及其他语法成分的相互作用。手势和SiL的共享模式被认为可以使这些系统之间的界面现象不同于大多数语音-手势交互。据认为，手势是单词，形态和子句级别上的SiL强制成分的原因。本章的其余部分介绍了语音/韵律单元与其他语法成分之间的相互作用。例如，提出了对手形的分类感知，以举例说明语音-语音界面。本章还讨论了非手动手势在形态，语篇和语法中的功能。面部表情被证明是成分性的和特定于语言的，因此是语法性的。最后，

聋人和聋人的相对隔离意味着SiL和其他签名系统（如homesign）可以提供有关语言发展早期阶段的见识。第5章介绍了与语音学有关的一些见解。由于可以将周围听力文化的手势合并到SiL中，因此再次解决了手势与语言的区别。比较了对三种类型的签名系统的分析结果：homesign，[End Page 254]社区SiL（通常是在聋哑学校中，homesigners聚集在一起）和乡村SiL。诸如对齐，分散，忠实和易于表达的压力（最优性理论； Prince和Smolensky 1993）被用来解释发现...