Adam Kendon

Movement coordination in social interaction: Some examples described

Abstract Sound films of social interaction are analysed and some detailed descriptions of the interrelations of the movements of speakers ans listeners are given. These descriptions provide further examples of ‘interactional synchrony’, first described by Condon and Ogston (1966). It is found that the flow of movement in the listener may be rhythmically coordinated with the speech and movements of the speaker. It is also shown how the way in which individuals may be in synchrony with one another can vary, and that these variations are related to their respective roles in the interaction. Some of the implications of the phenomenon of interactional synchrony are discussed.

Gestures as illocutionary and discourse structure markers in Southern Italian conversation

Abstract In Southern Italy gesture use is prominent and many gestures are conventional. These include ‘pragmatic’ gestures that indicate type of speech act or aspects of discourse structure and ‘substantive’ gestures that express utterance content. Drawing from video-recordings of natural conversations made near Salerno, Italy, the contexts of use of four conventional ‘pragmatic’ gestures are described. The first two, the Mano a borsa (‘purse hand’) and the Mani giunte (‘praying hands’) are well known and have recognition as ‘quotable gestures’ or ‘emblems’. They express the illocutionary intent of the spoken utterances associated with them. The second two relate to discourse structure: The Finger Bunch, which is similar to the ‘purse hand’ in form, marks ‘topic’ as distinct from ‘comment’; the Ring, in which the tips of the index finger and thumb are brought into contact forming a circle, marks the ‘locality’ of a unit in relation to the theme. These latter do not have recognition as ‘emblems’ but they may be related to gestures that are similar in form that do. Factors that contribute to the conventionalization of gesture, and implications for the status of gestures in relation to language are discussed.

Language, Communication, Chimpanzees [and Comments and Reply]

In the last ten years, entirely new experiments have been undertaken in the field of animal communication. The works of Allen and Beatrice Gardner with the chimpanzee Washoe and David and Ann Premack with Sarah should have held the attention of linguists and semiologists more than they have up to now. It is from this standpoint that they are examined here.

Semiotic diversity in utterance production and the concept of ‘language’

Sign language descriptions that use an analytic model borrowed from spoken language structural linguistics have proved to be not fully appropriate. Pictorial and action-like modes of expression are integral to how signed utterances are constructed and to how they work. However, observation shows that speakers likewise use kinesic and vocal expressions that are not accommodated by spoken language structural linguistic models, including pictorial and action-like modes of expression. These, also, are integral to how speaker utterances in face-to-face interaction are constructed and to how they work. Accordingly, the object of linguistic inquiry should be revised, so that it comprises not only an account of the formal abstract systems that utterances make use of, but also an account of how the semiotically diverse resources that all languaging individuals use are organized in relation to one another. Both language as an abstract system and languaging should be the concern of linguistics.

A description of a deaf-mute sign language from the Enga Province of Papua New Guinea with some comparative discussion

The analysis presented in Part I made possible a systematic account of how Enga signs are formed as motor acts and it has allowed us to point to some interesting parallels in the way in which signs are formed in other sign languages. Here we shall turn to the question of how the signs may be related in their form to the referents they signify. It is widely recognized that signs in sign languages are often found to have an iconic or analogic relationship with their referents; Enga sign language offers no exception to this. Indeed, as has been noted in Part I, there is often a rather obvious relationship between the locus of articulation or the movement pattern of a sign and its referent. In this section we shall provide a systematic account of the various ways in which Enga signs may relate to their referents and, as we shall see, in most cases this relationship is one that may broadly be termed iconic. It is important to be clear about the significance of iconicity in sign language. Showing that the form a sign has bears a relationship to the form of its referent does not necessarily mean that this relationship is invoked by a recipient of the sign as a means of understanding what was intended by it. Indeed, there is much evidence to show that for users of sign language the iconicity of particular signs is usually irrelevant. Furthermore, naive observers of signs cannot deduce the meaning of a sign from its appearance. This has been demonstrated by Hoemann (1975) and by Bellugi and Klima (1976) in experiments in which nonusers of signs were asked to guess the meanings of a series of signs that were presented to them. It was found that their guesses were overwhelmingly incorrect. Bellugi et al (1975) have also presented a study in which signers were asked to recall signs shown them. In the study of the patterns of error in recall shown by the subjects, it became clear that sign users do not identify signs in terms of any iconic relationship they might have to their referents; rather, they do this in terms of the formational features of locus of

Knowledge of Sign Language in an Australian Aboriginal Community

A sample of Warlpiri women from fifteen to over sixty years of age living at Yuendumu, central Australia, were interviewed for their knowledge of Warlpiri sign language. The youngest in the sample commanded some sign language vocabulary, but only those over thirty showed extensive knowledge. Although women who had been widowed showed more knowledge of sign language than those who had not, the main correlate of sign language knowledge was found to be age. It is suggested that sign language is acquired as part of the process of integration into the social and ritual life of older women and not only in connection with mourning. Sign vocabulary was found to be acquired at markedly different rates in different semantic domains.

Andrea de jorio— The first ethnographer of gesture?

Andrea De Jorios classic work of 1832 on Neapolitan gesture is described. Besides containing remarkably clear descriptions of gestures it includes interesting discussion of theoretical and methodological issues still pertinent today. De Jorios insistence on studying gestures in their contexts of use and his use of pictorial tableaux as a way of illustrating how the gestures he describes function in interaction is of particular interest. The value of the book for studies of gesture diachrony and for studies in the historical ethnography of communication conduct is briefly discussed.

A description of a deaf-mute sign language from the Enga Province of Papua New Guinea with some comparative discussion. Part III: Aspects of utterance construction

So far, in these papers, in considering how signs are formed (Part I) and how they may relate to their referents (Part II), signs have been dealt with individually.* In this part we turn to the question of how the signs in the usage of Imanoli, Lanyela, and Ngangane are organized into sequences to create utterances. We shall approach this in two ways. First, we shall consider the way in which the activity of sign making is combined with activity in other parts of the body; we shall see that among the several functions of such concurrent activity one of the most important is that of linking sequences of signs into complex units of discourse. Secondly, we shall consider a number of grammatical issues, including juncture, sign order, subject-object verb relationships, tense, and interrogation. This part will end with a final section in which the findings of this entire investigation are summarized, and some general conclusions offered.

Gesture units, gesture phrases and speech

The survey in Chapter 6 showed that most writers accept that speakers use gestures in several different ways, including deictic reference, as a means of depicting objects or actions and as a way of punctuating, marking up or displaying aspects of the structure of their spoken discourse. However, if we are to have a better appreciation of the significance of this, we need to know in more detail how and when it is that speakers do these things. Without detailed analysis of how speakers deploy gestures as a part of their utterances we shall not have precise ideas about how speech and gesture function in relation to one another. Audio-visual technology, easily available only very recently, and available only to some of the writers whose classification schemes we have considered, now makes possible the kind of descriptive analysis of gesture use that we believe is needed. It is this that will be offered in the chapters that follow: a descriptive survey of gesture use, based upon the analysis of specimens drawn from a large collection of video recordings of occasions of conversational interaction in many different settings. In this chapter and the next one, we look at aspects of how gesturing and speaking are organized in relation to one another. The units of gestural action we consider are the gesture phrase and the gesture unit .

The domain of gesture

Willingly or not, humans, when in co-presence, continuously inform one another about their intentions, interests, feelings and ideas by means of visible bodily action. For example, it is through the orientation of the body and, especially, through the orientation of the eyes, that information is provided about the direction and nature of a persons attention. How people arrange their bodies and how they orient them and place them in relation to each other or to features in the environment, provides important information about how they are engaged with one another and about the nature of their intentions and attitudes. Activities in which objects in the environment are being manipulated, modified or rearranged, are indispensable for grasping a persons aims and goals and interests. Of equal importance, however, are actions that are seen to be purely expressive. Here we find those configurations of action in the face and body that appear as displays of feeling and emotion, as well as actions that often play a central role in the accomplishment of important moments in social interaction. Greeting, showing gratitude or affection, challenge, threat, submission, compliance, all are accomplished through a range of different expressive actions. Beyond this, however, are those actions that are employed as a part of the process of discourse, as a part of uttering something to another in an explicit manner.