Relative independence from ambient spoken languages. But it may not be independent of influence from ambient gesture ?after all, deaf signers can easily see the gestures produced by the hearing community. Moreover, in language innovation, signers and homesigners1 frequently lexicalize and grammaticalize gestures of the ambient hearing community as part of their emerging linguistic system (Franklin, Giannakidou, and GoldinMeadow 2011; Frishberg 1975; Janzen and Shaffer 2002; Nyst 2015; Zeshan 2000). For example, signers of Nicaraguan Sign Language, as well as Nicaraguan homesigners, use emblem-like gestures from the surrounding Spanish-speaking community as the basis for lexicalized signs like COME and CHILD (Spaepen et al. 2013). Needless to say, much more work is needed to fully understand typological patterns in gesture variation, how typologically defined gesture groups may or may not overlap with typologically defined language groups (and, relatedly, the extent to which “gesture typologies” and “language typologies” can be unified), and how patterns in co-speech gesture may influence sign language development.Author Manuscript Author Manuscript Author Manuscript Author Manuscript5. Gesture and cognitionThe discussion thus far has been devoted to establishing and exploring the intimate relationship between language and gesture in human communication. But in addition to its OxaliplatinMedChemExpress Oxaliplatin communicative side, gesture also has a no less interesting cognitive side (Kelly, Manning, and Rodak 2008 provide a more comprehensive overview of this aspect of gesture). One clue that gesture plays a role in cognition is the fact that people continue to gesture even when those gestures cannot possibly be communicative. People gesture when their interlocutor is not visible (Alibali, Heath, and Myers 2001) ?for instance, when on the telephone (Bavelas et al. 2008) or when completing tasks alone at a computer (Chu and Kita 2011) ?and blind people gesture, even when PF-04418948 supplier talking to others they know to be blind as well (Iverson and Goldin-Meadow 1998). This feature of gesture, too, is analogous to language. It has been independently proposed that language communicates, but may not fundamentally, nor solely, serve a communicative purpose (Chomsky 1966, 2010). Thus, both speech and gesture serve a dual purpose as both communicative and cognitive channels. Here, we turn our attention to the cognitive functions of gestures. Gesture provides a window onto the speaker’s thoughts and can reveal thoughts that are not conveyed in speech. Speakers will, at times, describe one explanation for their beliefs in speech, while conveying a different explanation in gesture (Goldin-Meadow 2003a). A child who has not yet mastered Piagetian conservation may, for example, believe that the amount1Homesigners are deaf individuals who are unable to learn spoken language and have not been exposed to sign language. These individuals invent gestures, called homesigns, to communicate with the hearing individuals who surround them (Goldin-Meadow 2003b). Lang Linguist Compass. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2016 November 01.Abner et al.Pageof water has changed when poured from a tall thin glass into a short wide dish. In justifying this belief, one child said, “It’s different because this one is high and this one is low,” while indicating with her hands the skinny diameter of the glass and then the wider diameter of the dish. Note that, while this is clearly not a redundant use of gesture, it is n.Relative independence from ambient spoken languages. But it may not be independent of influence from ambient gesture ?after all, deaf signers can easily see the gestures produced by the hearing community. Moreover, in language innovation, signers and homesigners1 frequently lexicalize and grammaticalize gestures of the ambient hearing community as part of their emerging linguistic system (Franklin, Giannakidou, and GoldinMeadow 2011; Frishberg 1975; Janzen and Shaffer 2002; Nyst 2015; Zeshan 2000). For example, signers of Nicaraguan Sign Language, as well as Nicaraguan homesigners, use emblem-like gestures from the surrounding Spanish-speaking community as the basis for lexicalized signs like COME and CHILD (Spaepen et al. 2013). Needless to say, much more work is needed to fully understand typological patterns in gesture variation, how typologically defined gesture groups may or may not overlap with typologically defined language groups (and, relatedly, the extent to which “gesture typologies” and “language typologies” can be unified), and how patterns in co-speech gesture may influence sign language development.Author Manuscript Author Manuscript Author Manuscript Author Manuscript5. Gesture and cognitionThe discussion thus far has been devoted to establishing and exploring the intimate relationship between language and gesture in human communication. But in addition to its communicative side, gesture also has a no less interesting cognitive side (Kelly, Manning, and Rodak 2008 provide a more comprehensive overview of this aspect of gesture). One clue that gesture plays a role in cognition is the fact that people continue to gesture even when those gestures cannot possibly be communicative. People gesture when their interlocutor is not visible (Alibali, Heath, and Myers 2001) ?for instance, when on the telephone (Bavelas et al. 2008) or when completing tasks alone at a computer (Chu and Kita 2011) ?and blind people gesture, even when talking to others they know to be blind as well (Iverson and Goldin-Meadow 1998). This feature of gesture, too, is analogous to language. It has been independently proposed that language communicates, but may not fundamentally, nor solely, serve a communicative purpose (Chomsky 1966, 2010). Thus, both speech and gesture serve a dual purpose as both communicative and cognitive channels. Here, we turn our attention to the cognitive functions of gestures. Gesture provides a window onto the speaker’s thoughts and can reveal thoughts that are not conveyed in speech. Speakers will, at times, describe one explanation for their beliefs in speech, while conveying a different explanation in gesture (Goldin-Meadow 2003a). A child who has not yet mastered Piagetian conservation may, for example, believe that the amount1Homesigners are deaf individuals who are unable to learn spoken language and have not been exposed to sign language. These individuals invent gestures, called homesigns, to communicate with the hearing individuals who surround them (Goldin-Meadow 2003b). Lang Linguist Compass. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2016 November 01.Abner et al.Pageof water has changed when poured from a tall thin glass into a short wide dish. In justifying this belief, one child said, “It’s different because this one is high and this one is low,” while indicating with her hands the skinny diameter of the glass and then the wider diameter of the dish. Note that, while this is clearly not a redundant use of gesture, it is n.
Related Posts
T validity and acceptable reliability in older, palliative house care customers.T validity and acceptable reliability
T validity and acceptable reliability in older, palliative house care customers.T validity and acceptable reliability in older, palliative residence care customers.[35] The Cognitive Overall performance Scale (CPS),[36] captures challenges with memory, independence in eating and decisionmaking. Validity has been established against the MiniMental State Exam (MMSE).[37, 38] The Activities of Daily Living SelfPerformance Hierarchy scale […]
Ibution of data was normal, we employed Student's unpaired ttest (Pirimicarb custom synthesis twotailed) for
Ibution of data was normal, we employed Student’s unpaired ttest (Pirimicarb custom synthesis twotailed) for comparisons amongst two groups. If data was characterized by nonGaussian distribution, we performed Mann hitney test. Values of p 0.05 were considered statistically important (p 0.05 , p 0.01 , p 0.001 and p 0.0001 ). Twoway ANOVA with Sidak’s […]
Duplicated ssat1 genes, as is the case in medaka, stickleback, takifugu
Duplicated ssat1 genes, as is the case in medaka, stickleback, takifugu, and tetraodon. Thus there is only one ssat1 left in these species. However, zebrafish, which contains not one but three ssat1 homologues, is an exception. The phylogeneticanalysis indicates that all get JWH133 zebrafish ssat1 homologues are derived from a common ancestor (Fig. 1). The […]