Abstract:
The aim of the present study is to contribute to the linguistic understanding of short-term
memory (STM) processing of complex syntactic structures, namely argumentative object sentences.
Short-term memory has been known to actively influence the linguistic performance of speakers,
since it has a fundamental role in storing temporary information necessary to understand and
produce speech. This study starts from Geraci, Cecchetto and Zucchi’s theory (2006) on center-
embedded argumentative object sentences of Italian Sign Language (LIS). They believe that the
heavy memory load that these structures require could be accounted for as the main reason why
they are banned and ungrammatical in LIS. In this project, I want to examine whether STM can be
responsible for differences in the results and for the variations between groups of participants.
The study involved a sample of adults divided into three different groups: hearing non-signers,
deaf signers, and bimodal bilinguals highly competent in both Italian and LIS. Participants were
tested with a syntactic STM test created by the graduand, consisting in argumentative object
sentences and declarative filler sentences. The initial hypothesis is based on the idea that
argumentative object sentences in center-embedded position are not the sole structures challenging
STM systems of speakers and precisely of LIS users. If other syntactic constructions of LIS require
a greater memory effort but are still considered perfectly grammatical, this could mean that
memory is not the only factor responsible for the banning of center-embedded constructions and
so Geraci, Cecchetto and Zucchi’s hypothesis (2006) could be somehow revisited.
After conducting the test and the analysis I can confirm that deaf signers have important
difficulties in STM sentence recall. Moreover, some categories like objective sentences in left
dislocation appear to be more challenging than others, leading to poor memory results in this
population. However, these sentences are not classified as ungrammatical. From this evidence, I
believe that STM capacity is not be considered as the sole factor intervening in defining the
grammaticality of a syntactic structure. For example, it could be the case for center-embedded
object sentences to be banned from informal communication, but to be allowed in emphatic or
artistic expressions. Finally, I believe that more studies are necessary to clarify both Cecchetto,
Geraci and Zucchi’s hypothesis and my final assumptions.
