{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.04085733422638982, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0026791694574681848, 'mean_word_length': 5.073170731707317, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Modal signs and scope relations in TID

In this paper, we test Bross and Hole’s (2017) bodily-mapping hypothesis originally proposed for DGS. They found that operators with high scope (above T) are expressed using physically high articulators (mainly the eyebrows) and lower (IP-internal) categories are expressed manually in German Sign Language. In this way, scope is iconically mapped onto the signer’s body (high scope = high articulator; low scope = low articulator). Additionally, they found that descending the scopal height of IP-internal categories, the higher ones (e. g., deontic modality) are concatenated from left to right and the lower ones (e. g., root modality) from right to left. Here, we put the bodily-mapping hypothesis to test by discussing the categories of epistemic (above T), deontic, and root modality (both below T) in Turkish Sign Language. Additionally, we investigate whether concatenation strategies for deontic and root modality differ. We show that, in Turkish Sign Language, epistemic modality, in contrast to deontic and root modality, requires nonmanual markings with the upper face, in line with the bodily-mapping hypothesis. Turkish Sign Language, however, differs from German Sign Language in that the former requires an additional manual modal sign for epistemic modality. We suggest two modeling possibilities to account for this finding: one assuming base-generation of the modals in their scope-taking position and one based on a movement account.