LINGUIST List 12.1923

Sat Jul 28 2001

Review: McNeill, Language and Gesture

Editor for this issue: Terence Langendoen <terrylinguistlist.org>


What follows is another discussion note contributed to our Book Discussion Forum. We expect these discussions to be informal and interactive; and the author of the book discussed is cordially invited to join in.

If you are interested in leading a book discussion, look for books announced on LINGUIST as "available for discussion." (This means that the publisher has sent us a review copy.) Then contact Simin Karimi at siminlinguistlist.org or Terry Langendoen at terrylinguistlist.org.


Directory

  • Schulz Peter, Review: McNeill, Language and Gesture

    Message 1: Review: McNeill, Language and Gesture

    Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 17:11:26 +0200
    From: Schulz Peter <Peter.Schulzlu.unisi.ch>
    Subject: Review: McNeill, Language and Gesture


    McNeill, David, ed. (2000) Language and Gesture. Cambridge University Press, hardback ISBN: 0-521-77166-8, ix+409pp.

    Reviewed by Peter Schulz, Faculty of Communication Sciences, University of Lugano, Switzerland

    This collection of articles addresses the role of gestures in relation to speech and thought. The contributions were written after a conference ("Gestures Compared Cross-Linguistically") held in 1995 in Albuquerque. Its 18 chapters cover a wide range of topics and different approaches with interesting theoretical tensions between them.

    The volume is divided into four sections, each filled with respective contributions in the form of individual chapters (their brief descriptions can be found below): Part I considers the function of gestures in contexts of social interaction, part II presents detailed investigations into gestures and their interrelations with thoughts, part III deals with computational models of gesture-speech performance, while the final part describes ways to make the transition from gesticulation to sign.

    Introduction The short introduction by the editor is crucial for at least two reasons: David McNeill presents a classification model of gesture which helps to distinguish movements that are equally well called "gestures". Refering to Kendon (1982), who singles out four points "gesticulation," "pantomime," "emblem," and "sign language", McNeill develops this continuum, focusing on gesture's relationship to speech, linguistic properties, conventions, and semiosis. Furthermore, the editor briefly surveys antecedents on the subject and establishes the links between the chapters.

    Part One - Gesture in action

    1. Pointing, gesture spaces, and mental maps (John Haviland) The author examines the occurences of pointing gestures in two different cultures - the Mayan culture of the Tzotzil, and the Australian Aborigine culture of the Guugu Yimithirr. Although the respective language codes offer almost opposite resources for how they describe orientations in space, the pointing gestures are quite similar. Hence Haviland claims that space is a tool that makes cognition interactively available, even interactively constructed.

    2. Language and gesture: unity or duality? (Adam Kendon) Within the classical controversy about the relationship between 'Language' and 'gesture' Kendom emphasizes that gestures and speech, used in conversation, serve different but complementary roles. The author illustrates the diverse ways in which gesture may participate in the construction of the utterance's meaning with a good number of examples taken from the Neapolitan culture. Taking into consideration the different roles of gesture (e.g. contextualizing the spoken expressions, adding to the propositional content of the utterance, expressing the speech-act status of the utterance), Kendon argues that gestures are an integral part of the communication process.

    3. The influence of addressee location on spatial language and representational gestures of direction (Asli Oezyuerek). The aim of this chapter is to test the hypothesis that gestures are themselves shaped by the social interactive context. We usually assume that speaker's verbal and gestural expressions of space represent or encode the spatial relations as experienced. Instead of this assumption Oezyuerek argues that reference by spatial language and gestures has to be explained in relation to the social and spatial context in which they are produced. He shows, how speaker's memory and thought are altered by changes in addressee location.

    4. Gesture, aphasia, and interaction (Charles Goodwin). The author of this chapter provides an exploration of the communicative solution invented by a patient, Chil, suffering seriously aphasia and his conversational co-participants. Chil is able to speak only three words (Yes, No, and And). However, he is able to communicate with his relatives using limited gestures. Goodwin's study allows to look in detail at a range of different kinds of meaning-making practices that are relevant to the organization of gesture.

    5. Gestural interaction between the instructor and the learner in origami instruction (Nobuhiro Furuyama) In this chapter, Furuyama documents the role of gestures in the interactive context of instruction. The author reports the results of an experiment on origami (the Japanese paper-folding art). Eighteen students were divided in pairs, in which the more experienced one had to instruct his fellow student in the construction of an origami balloon without any verbal description. Furuyama describes listener gestures and listener co-manipulation of speaker gestures.

    6. Gestures, knowledge, and the world (Curtis Le Baron and Juergen Streeck) Aim of this chapter is to describe the different roles hand gestures play in the formation and distribution of knowledge within specific 'communities of practice' (Lave 1991). By analyzing examples from 'material-rich learning setting' the authors provide evidence for the foundations of symbolic gestures in "practical, instrumental, non-symbolic action and experience".

    Part Two - Gesture in Thought

    7. Growth points in thinking-for-speaking (David McNeill and Susan D. Duncan). This chapter is intended to develop and justify a rationale for viewing speech-synchronized gestures as "enhanced windows"into the process of thinking and speaking. McNeill and Duncan present an elaborated version of the Growth points theory (preliminary version in McNeill 1992). The growth point, the name that the authors give to an analytic unit combining imagery and linguistic categorical content, are "inferred from the totality of communicative events with special focus on speech-gesture synchrony and co-expressivity' (144). With the growth point framework the authors consider the function of co-verbal gestures in three languages (English, Spanish, and Chinese) focusing on the semantic domain of motion. They present evidence that different languages create different modes of thinking-for-speaking as well as different strategies for meaning representations in speech and gesture.

    8. How representational gestures help speaking (Sotaro Kita) What is 'the speaker-internal motivation to produce representational gestures'? This is the question that the author tries to answer in this chapter. Kita's thesis is that the cognitive function of representational gestures could be described by means of the Information Packaging Hypothesis. According to that hypothesis representational gestures help speakers in organizing spatio-motoric information into packages suitable for linguistic expression. Moreover, spatio-motoric thinking would help speaking 'by providing an alternative informational organization that is not readily accessible to analytic thinking' (163).

    9. Where do most spontaneous representational gestures actually occur with respect to speech? (Shuichi Nobe) This chapter discusses first different types of models concerning the temporal relationship between gestures and speech. According to Nobe it is misleading to state a contradiction between the two models of McNeill (1985) and Butterworth & Hadar (1989), as Beattie & Aboudan (1994) suggest. Furthermore, Nobe presents the findings of an experiment for his thesis that the onsets of most spontaneous representational gestures occur during speech articulation, disproving the assumption that they start during silent pauses in fluent phases.

    10. Gesture production during stuttered speech: insights into the nature of gesture-speech integration (Rachel I. Mayberry and Joselynne Jaques) In this chapter the authors present findings of two studies on the gesture-speech relationship in individuals with chronic stuttering. According to Mayberry and Jaques, the results suggest that gesture and speech are planned and integrated by the central nervous system "at some point prior to their actual physical execution"(208). Moreover, their findings and observations indicate a higher probability of what the authors, following Kendon (1980) and McNeill (1985), call the 'integrated system framework': that is that gesture and speech together form an integrated communication system for the single purpose of linguistic expression.

    11. The role of gestures and other graded language forms in the grounding of reference in perception (Elena T. Levy and Carol A. Flowler) This chapter deals with some pragmatic aspects of nonverbal communication. Levy and Flowler are demonstrating that there is a non-arbitrary relation between some properties of communicative activities and the messages that the activities convey. In particular, the authors study the role of metanarrative statements (McNeill:1992) in which an origo (Buehler:1990 [1934]) shifting normally occurs. Furthermore, the study presents evidence for 'an association between the occurence of metanarrative statements and the use of longer, more transparent referring expressions [...] and of gestures (231).

    12. Gesture and the transition from one- to two-word speech: when hand and mouth come together (Cynthia Butcher and Susan Goldin-Meadow) This chapter deals with the relationship between communicative symbolic gesture and speech in young children. An experiment with six children, video-taped in their homes, is made. Videotaping started when each child was in the one-word period of language development, and continued until they produced two-word combinations. During the first period, the gestures were not synchronous with speech sounds of any sort (meaningful or not). In the next period, gesture and speech become more fully integrated. According to the authors, these findings reinmforces McNeill's (1992) view, that gesture and speech form an integrated system in terms of temporal synchrony as well as in terms of semantic coherence.

    Part Three - Modeling Gesture performance

    13. Lexical gestures and lexical access: a process model (Robert M. Krauss, Yihsiu Chen and Rebecca F. Gottesman) The authors describe a new model of the process by which lexical gestures are produced. Reader's attention is first driven towards the different gesture typologies and functions. Relatively uncontroversial are the three gesture categories (1) Symbolic gestures, (2) Deictic gestures, and (3) Motor gestures. Less easy to define is the fourth major category, what the authors call the 'lexical gestures', also called "representational gestures" (McNeill, Cassell & McCullough 1994) or "illustrators" (Ekman & Friesen 1972). The model of Kraus, Chen and Gottesman propose a way to add gesture to the Speaking model presented by Levelt in 1989. Levelt refers to the three stages for the speaking process as "conceptualizing", "formulating", and "articulating". According to the authors of this chapter, the model of Levelt provides a partial answer to the question of the origin and function of lexical gestures. The origin of the gesture would correspond with the stage of "conceptualizing".

    14. The production of gesture and speech (Jan Peter de Ruiter) Similar to the former chapter, also De Ruiter presents a general processing architecture for gesture production as an extension of Levelt's (1989) model for speech production. But in several details de Ruiter's socalled "Sketch Model" is quite different. First of all, "Sketch Model" aims to consider and explain different gesture types with a modular Information Processing Model. Furthermore, within the Sketch Model gestures are produced in three stages: (1) the selection of the information to be expressed in gesture; (2) the generation of a motor program and (3) the execution of it. Last, but not least: predictions can be generated by the Sketch Model.

    15. Catchments and contexts: non-modular factors in speech and gesture production (David McNeill) This chapter joins the previous by McNeill & Duncan to state the concept of a growth point. McNeill shows how the growth point theory is suitable for explaining the communicative dynamism, especially because it considers the context as a fundamental component of thinking-for-speaking. The context incorporation makes the growth point theory more adapted than other information-processing models, where context is inevitably excluded.

    Part Four - From gesture to sign

    16. Blended spaces and deixis in sign language discourse (Scott K. Liddell) Liddell presents an analysis of space use in American Sign Language. Focusing on deictic gestures, he argues that the use of space in sign languages is carried out through a combination of linguistic features and gestural pointing. Particulary interesting is the concept of a grounded mental space (see Liddell 1995), a term which Liddell uses to label a mental space "whose entities are conceived of as present in the immediate environment"(342). Refering to the fact, that both speakers and signers need to make clear to their addressees that elements of a grounded space are in discussion, the author claims, that the difference between spoken and signed languages is not be as great as it appears. "The need to gesture toward elements of grounded mental space is met in the case of sign languages by creating classes of signs which combine sign and gesture" (354).

    17. Gestural precursors to linguistic constructs: how input shapes the form of language (Jill P. Morford and Judy A. Kegl) In this chapter Morford and Kegl describe the remarkable situation of deaf people in Nicaragua since the Sandinista Revolution. The people who previously had been isolated were brought together for the first time. In this manner a new-born signed language has emerged. The authors show how much idiosyncratic gestures (homesigns) shaped this new language.

    18. Gesture to sign (language) (William C. Stokoe) Stokoe deals in this chapter with the ancient idea, that language may have begun with gestural expression. Enriching this idea with data about evolution and human physiology and cognitive functioning, he comes to some new hypothesis: Instrumental manual actions may have been transformed in symbolic gestures; Motoric expression and visual reception of connected thought and emotion would have been the key of language evolution; Finally, language would be a natural consequence of the evolving body, senses and cognitive powers, "requiring no extraordinary intervention" by the new genus Homo.

    Critical evaluation

    I would like to advice strongly anyone interested not only in gesture but in the relation between gesture and language to read this book. It does not merely give a panoramic, state-of-the-art account of research in the important work realized on gesture in the past, and pointers toward future research in the same direction (e.g. McNeill's Growth points theory; the question, whether synchronous speech-gestures combinations comprise single idea units or not). What's more, it also provides some fascinating discussions on classical questions in gesture studies (e.g. Should we consider gesture and language as different and independent phenomena, or are they two modalities of an integrated system? What about the origin and function of gesture?, etc.) as well as on modeling gesture performance. We cannot conclude but that this is a considerable achievement.

    References Beattie, G. & Aboudan, R. 1994. Gestures, pauses and speech: an experimental investigation of the effects of changing social context on their precise temporal relationships. Semiotica 99:239-272. Buehler, K. 1990. Theory of Language: The Representational Function of Language, trans. D.F.Goodwin. Amsterdam: Benjamins. (Originally published 1934.) Butterworth, B. & Hadar, U. 1989. Gesture, speech, and computational stages: a reply to McNeill. Psychological Review 96:168-174. Ekman, P. & Friesen, W.V. 1972. Hand movements. Journal of Communication 22:353-374. Levelt, W.J.M. 1989. Speaking: From Intention to Articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Liddell, S. K. 1995. Real, surrogate, and token space: grammatical consequences in ASL. In: Emmorey, K. & J. Reilly (eds.) Sign, Gesture, and Space. Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum, pp. 19-41. McNeill, D. 1985. So you think gestures are nonverbal? Psychological Review 92:350-371. McNeill, D. 1992. Hand in Mind: What Gestures Reveal about Thought. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. McNeill, D., Cassell, J. & McCullough, K.-E. 1994. Communicative effects of speech-mismatched gestures. Language and Social Interaction 27:223-237. Kendon, A. 1980. Gesticulation and speech: two aspects of the processes of utterance. In M.R.Key (ed.). The Relation between Verbal and Nonverbal Communication. The Hague: Mouton, pp. 207-227. Kendon, A. 1982. The study of gesture: some remarks on its history. Semiotic Inquiry 2:45-62. Lave, J. 1991. Situating learning in communities of practice. In Resnick, Levine & Teasley (eds.), pp. 63-83.

    About the reviewer: Peter J. Schulz teaches semiotics at the Faculty of Communication Sciences at the University of Lugano, Switzerland. His research interests include theories of linguistic signs, subjectivity and intersubjectivity in a semiotic perspective. He is the Executive Editor of the journal Studies in Communication Sciences.