5.1.
What is Gesture?
Gesture is seen accompanying speech. Man makes gestures without speech also. Gesture
is symbolic action by which a thought, a feeling or intention is voluntarily expressed
in a conventionalized (established by general agreement/acceptance, or accepted
usage) form. Gesture is different from the real act. For example, the real act
of drinking when performed for a drinking purpose is action per se, whereas when
the act of drinking is mimicked. or performed symbolically as in the case of Holy
Communion in the Christian church, it becomes a gesture. The real act of smoking
is action, whereas the movements that one makes as if one is smoking is gesture.
In the examples given, there is some similarity between real acts and the "
gestures" that indicate these real acts.. There are very many instances in
which gestures do not have any similarity between themselves and the acts or objects
they stand for. For instance, in the sign language used by the Red Indians (American
Indians), the sign for a laddle, which is made keeping the palm curved like a
laddle, comes to denote drinking and from this meaning it ultimately stands for
'water'. There is no similarity between 'water' and this gesture. Thus, the gestures
become not only conventionalized but could also be holding a relationship of arbitrariness
between themselves and the acts and objects they refer to.
Gestures ore formed by movement of the facial muscles, head, limbs or body. These
movements may express or emphasize a thought, feeling or mood. They may accompany
speech or may be used in the place of speech as found among deaf-mutes, among
people who do not know each other's language or among those who have taken a vow
of silence and so on. In addition to their use as an accompaniment to speech and
their use as an independent means of communication (in place of language) between
individuals and groups, gestures are also frequently used in the aesthetic acts,
in the theatre and dance, and in religious and/or secular ceremonies.
There are at least three major divisions - use of gesture
by itself as the language, as in the case of deaf-mutes; use of gesture as an
independent means of communication, an additions to the use of oral language,
as in the case of sign language used by American Indians. There is also yet another
category in which use of gesture either as an accompaniment to oral speech or
as an independent system of expression is elevated to the aesthetic level and
is exploited in aesthetic arts. Finally, use of gesture in all the above is resorted
to for both social purposes and purely individual goals. Under social purposes,
use of gesture for expression relates to establishment of interpersonal ranking,
good manners, communication/communion with gods, maintenance of social identity,
etc. The purely individual goals include maintenance and exhibition of the level
of intimacy between individuals, secret communication, etc. While these are exploited
at the aesthetic levels, use of gesture itself in the aesthetic arts not only
accentuates the effects but also creates and maintains the effects; in other words,
it conducts the episodes in several cases.
Gesture is, indeed,
present and exploited in every walk of human life. Poyotos' definitions of gesture
(Poyotos, 1975) brings out the salient features of gestures clearly: 'By gesture,
one understands a conscious or unconscious body movement made mainly with the
head, the face alone, or the limbs, learned or somatogenic, and serving as a primary
communicative tool, dependent or independent from verbal language; either simultaneous
or alternating with it, and modified by the conditioning background (smiles, eye
movements, a gesture of beckoning, a tic, etc.)'.
Gesture is
characterized in literature in very many different ways. Each one of these characterization
focuses one or the other aspect of gesture. Gesture is described as follows:
1) It is a silent language.
2) It is talk without talk.
3) It is mother utterance of nature.
4) It is natural.
5) It is universal
6) It is figurative
7) It is picturesque.
8) It has clarity.
9) It has picturesque novelty.
10) It is metaphorical.
11) It is poetic nature
12) It is iconic.
13) It is pantomimic.
14) It is cheiromimic.
15) It is affective.
16) It is a surrogate for spoken language.
17) It is a substitute for spoken language.
18) It is a lexical
ideograph.
19) It is speech by gesture (gesture speech of mankind).
20) It is visual language.
21) It consists of the visual attitudes
of the soul.
22) It is innate language.
23) it is an air picture.
24) It is an essential adjunct to
human language.
25) It is a great human accomplishment.
26) It is hand talk.
27) It is syntalk.
The body parts and other items of processes that are generally involved in the
production and communication of gestures are as follows:
1) Face, 15)
Moustache,
2) Head, 16)
Chest,
3) Eyes,
17) Breast,
4) Ears, 18)
Place of heart,
5) Skin, 19)
Arms,
6) Breath,
20) Elbows,
7) Mouth, 21)Hair,
8) Lips,
22) Fore head,
9) Palm, 23)
Throat,
10) Hands, 24)
Nose,
11) Fingers, 25)
Legs,
12) Tongue, 26)
Shoulder,
13) Chin, 27)
Back, and
14) Cheeks, 28)
Torso.
It
is the upper extremities of the body that are more frequently used for the production
and communication of gestures. Utilization of the back of the body is rare and
when the back is used, the gesturer would turn and present the back to the one
being addressed to make the gesture seen. There are at least three variables employed
in the production of gestures involving these body parts. The body parts may be
combined with one another or may be used singly. Some body parts are more frequently
used and/or combined. Thirdly, the gestures are more generally produced clearly
away from the body rather than on the body itself. Since gesturing
is a communication mode, we find that animals also have some sort of gesturing
mechanisms. From ants to highly developed vertebrates all exhibit the ability
to produce and functionally use gestures. They make signs for various purposes:
to mark their geographical territory, possessions, and even to communicate their
'mental' states. The wagging of tail by dogs of all kinds, signs by pointer dogs,
the begging for food by various kinds of dogs, the signs made by cats, horses
and other animals are all familiar to us. The dance of the bees for communication
is another well known phenomenon. However, there is a qualitative difference between
the gestures of humans. The gestural communication in the humans is a product
of and a stage in the development of expressive motions. It is a specifically
human product in several ways. The gestures in humans reveal a variety of complex
structures which is not found in the animals. In the humans there is the simple
indicative gesture with great many functions; there are both imitative and symbolic
gestures, some very close to the shape or function of the object and event they
denote and some very much removed from the object and event they connote. There
is symbolic meaning, there is the extension of meaning of one gesture to another,
there is also the internal extension of the meanings of a particular gesture;
there is arbitrariness in addition to conventionality; there is also a 'syntactic'
order governed by certain rules. All these are not found in the gestures of animals.
The gestures of the animals are very much linked with their biological and routine
needs, whereas the gestures in man, along with the biological and routine needs,
are also elevated into a system fulfilling certain poetic and social functions
in human life.
Gestures are as natural
as human speech. They precede human speech in the ontogeny of language, coexist
with human speech and continue to be in existence and use even when the human
speech is lot in the individual. In their phylogeny, one finds gestures in some
form or the other among all animals, performing the function of both individual
and social steering mechanisms, and also gestures appear to have precede vocal
language in the phylogeny of communication systems. A child starts employing gestures
much earlier than her use of language; the early stages of language acquisition
does in fact consist in the acquisition of a variety of communicative 'gestures'
that cannot be clearly distinguished as completely vocal. While vocabulary choice,
in later years, is and could be taught, instruction in the comprehension and use
of gestures is generally minimal, most societies taking these as more natural
than speech and leaving these to be mastered unaware. Their (the societies') function
is seen more in reshaping the 'natural' gestures, to keep these under some social
regulation rather than teaching the gestures, per se. Regulation and suppression
appear to be crucial processes in so far as the use of gestures is concerned.
The child is governed in her early attempts at communication more by the gestures
and facial expressions of the care givers than by the vocal language of the latter.
The gesture-like elements of oral speech, such as the tone of voice and intonation
patterns, come to aid the child in its comprehension slowly. This recovery of
information via gestures continues all through life, and where speech is proscribed,
or is not yet made when the interaction begins between two individuals, or when
the interactants are in difficulty to use speech, it is the gestural expressions
that reveal the state in which the interactants are placed. In the most intimate
moments, speech takes a back seat and gesture has the total control, Also when
an individual has not the particular word at his command at a particular moment
in his own language, he resorts to gesture. He may resort to gesture for effects
as well, even when he has the word. The foreign/second language learners and users,
and those who are placed in an environment whose language they do not know or
know only partly often resort to gestural communication, in a very natural manner.
When a gesture is made more often than not, we tend to reply to it in some appropriate
gesture, rather than in speech. We switch over to gestural communication, on our
own, when we start conversing with the deaf and dumb. We may have never done it
before; we may have never used gestures under such contexts, but, in spite of
the novelty of situation, we do choose signs that are in some way concrete and
picturesque. We try to interpret the sign language of the deaf-mutes also based
on the assumed similarity of the outlines they make with the object around and/or
objects known to us. People disordered from their normal status or those congenitally
disordered, and have disabilities of various sorts are also known to engage themselves
in some sort of gestural communication. When individuals remain in solitary confinement,
either voluntarily or by force, or by forces of circumstances, often start communication
via gestures when they come out of their solitary confinement. The individuals
who have lost their speech (the aphasics) are known to use gestures, however,
for communication. Thus, there is some gestural for communication. Thus, there
is some gestural communication potential in every one of us latent and ready to
be used as and when the occasion arises.
Gestures are found in all the cultures and in all the stages of growth of cultures.
Secondly, gestures are found used by the disordered people also. Thirdly, even
when the language is lost, as in aphasic conditions, people do use gestures for
communication. Fourthly, gesture is used by congenital deaf-mutes who are not
exposed to language at all. Thus, gesture may accompany speech or may be used
as a communication mode independently, and is found in all people. While gestural
communication, thus, is found among all the people, social conventions regulate
the quantum, quality, the frequency and contexts of occurrence of gestures. In
some societies, of occurrence of gestures. In some societies, gesturing is associated
with lower social status; in some societies, if gesturing is not made, communication
is not considered spirited and appropriate. Education and higher social status
require measured tones, clear utterances, soft voice and less gesturing in many
Indian societies. Imitation of another's idiosyncratic behaviour is allowed in
the absence of the other for ridicule, humour and identity purposes. In the presence
of the individual who is imitated, imitation is generally frowned upon especially
when such imitation provoke laughter in others. Demonstrative gestures (indication
objects and individuals, who are placed away from the interactants) are avoided.
Children are advised to avoid using gestures while talking. Man has assigned differential
functions for both oral language and gesture in his communication activities.
We shall see the details as we proceed. It is sufficient here to state that, in
the humans, gestures get very much involved in the conduct of social behaviour.
TOP
5.2
Processes of Gesturing
When gestures accompany
speech, they may or may not convey specific meanings. Many individuals have the
habit of exhibiting gestures which may have no meaning in themselves or bear any
meaningful relation to the utterances in speech. These generally have the function
of indication that a speech utterance is in progress. These individuals will use
some gestural movement or the other whenever they speak. A vast majority of us
do this without ourselves being aware of the gestural motions we make. In another
dimension, when gestures accompany speech, they may have the function of supporting
the meanings conveyed by an utterance in speech or may even express a meaning
which will be deliberately left out by the utterance in speech, to be expressed
only by the gestural expression. Thirdly, a gestural notion or a series of gestural
motions alone will form the 'utterance' in a communication, with speech playing
no part at all, that is, the speech is absent and the communication is carried
on only with and by the gestural motions.
In the xategories
where gestural motions do convey a meaning of their own, the processes of gesturing
take several forms. We give below some of the forms that are generally identified
in Indian contexts:
1) Indicatio by gesturing
at the object. We point at the object, we indicate the cardinal directions, regions,
body parts, colours, personal and demonstrative pronouns using this process. These
objects are generally present everywhere. Indication is a very basic gesture and
is a very useful and effective process for identification. This basic gesture
is not found in most animals, perhaps because the gesture requires some cognitive
identification skill, although the process of gesture in itself is made simple
by the physical presence of objects indicated. Note further that both at the religious
and social levels, gesturing at is very much regulated and kept under control.
We have already pointed out as to how the socialization processes in Indian contexts
insist on children producing their speech utterances without resort to gesture
at objects thy try to refer to in their speech utterance. Gesturing at is taboo
in certain ritual practices, whereas gesturing at is considered showing disrespect
to the individual gestured at, at the social level of interaction There is a parallel
also in the speech wherein the superior is expected to be 'addressed' not in second
person, but in third person, converting the pronoun of reference in the particular
context into a pronoun of address. The second person pronoun has the function
of gesturing at, indicating at the individual directly, whereas the third person
pronoun has only the function of reference. Since person pronoun has only the
function of reference. Since gesturing at/indicating at is showing disrespect,
even the speech utterances demand that a pronoun of reference (3rd person ) and
not a pronoun of address (2nd person) be used when the superiors are 'addressed'.
This is prevalent in most Indian communities.
2) Indication at or gesturing at the locality of occurrence. For thinking we indicate
to the head; for love, we gesture at the place where heart is located. In these
cases gesturing at the supposed place of occurrences of an act comes to indicate
the act itself.
3) Outlining an object.
We draw the outlines of an object, or a part of the object by our gesture in air
or on some surface. This gesture communicates successfully what is intended if
both the interactants are already familiar with the object. There are also outlines
drawn in a conventional and arbitrary manner which may not bear any similitude
to the object in reality. In aesthetic arts a mix of both the categories is used.
The same object may be outlined in different ways in different cultures; also
the choice of the feature or features that will be outlined differs from one culture
to another on the one hand. Also note completion of the outline may or may not
be required - at times even a few steps in the outlining process will be adequate
enough by which the other interactant would have fully comprehended the meaning
of the outline in process. As already pointed out, one may either draw a whole
outline of the object in the air, or draw an outline of the characteristic part
of the object. Even in the case of drawing the outline for the whole object, the
outline drawn in the air may focus only on the characteristic shape of the object
and not on all its details. The distinguishing marks will be focused even when
the object is fully drawn. There is yet another subcategory within the process
of outlining. A distinguishing part of the action is generally imitated and produced
and this distinguishing part of the action is generally imitated and produced
and this distinguishing imitation stands for the entire action.
4) Imitation of action. We may mimic or imitate the action,
motion, etc., of an object. Beckoning with hands/fingers is made. The fingers/hands
gesture to the individual addressed to come towards the individual making the
gesture.
5) Substitution. A body part,
for example, the fingers, forehand, etc., is used as substitute for the object.
The index fingers are so placed on both sides of the head to indicate the horns.
The forehand is so hung that it represents the trunk of an elephant. The left
hand in a closed fist fashion is kept by the hip and the right hand, again in
a closed fist fashion, is kept near the left hand to assume a posture of holding
a sword and its sheath.
6) Instrument imitation.
The imitation of the action performed with an instrument communicates the meaning
of the action intended. We can imitate the sawing action to convey the meaning
of sawing. Swinging the sword in a fighting posture, holding the flag aloft, plucking
fruits or flowers all can be mimicked.
7) Imitation of preparation process. We can also imitate the process of preparation.
Often the process of preparation of tea in a tea stall, in particular the manner
by which the tea maker mixes the brew with sugar and milk, is mimicked in plays.
Preparation processes of several other items such as bread, roti, pots, cloth
are all indicated by appropriate gestures which exhibit the processes at least
partly.
8) The imitation of taste. By an
appropriate facial expression, and exhibition of tongue, etc., the tasters are
gestured. For example, the hot taste is gestured by keeping the mouth open and
by letting the breath out through the mouth. While doing so the tongue is let
hanging with a tinge of water. For the expression of sour taste, the cheeks are
raised, wrinkles are made and the eyes are momentarily closed and opened. The
teeth are also shown.
9) Imitation of posture
and other conditions through substitution. We may indicate the height and the
erect posture of the objects also. Erect index finger indicates a tall and erect
object. An inclined index finger indicates leaning, falling, etc. We may imitate
the condition of the object or the being. The size of the object is also indicated.
All this may be done either by direct mimicry or by substitution. In the former
we act out the state/condition directly. For example, to indicate an old man we
may walk with a hunch, leaning posture, pretending to have a supporting stick
in our hand. In the latter, index finger comes to represent the old man by a process
of substitution.
10) Imitation of counting.
the processes of counting is imitated to gesture counting. The fingers in the
left hand are touched by the finger/fingers in the right hand one by one to indicate
the process. This gesturing is used to mean, on to the actual numbers involved,
but generally for the act of counting, and the overall numerous nature of/multiplicity
of the act/object referred to.
11) Comparison
by gestures. The relative position and movement of fingers are generally used
for the purpose. The gesture by the gaps created between the two hands or fingers
may indicate the size of the object. A tall finger by the side of the shorter
finger will bring not the comparison; the heights may be indicated by hands one
after the other giving a comparison. The rapidity and slowness of motion performed
by the gesturing part also brings out a contrast in the motions of actions.
12) Gesturing of repetitiveness. Repetition of the same gesture
several times indicates the action that may be performed more than once, in steps
and/or in jerks. Rapidity or slowness of the repetition as well as the pauses
in the repetition of the gesture also add to the demonstration of the repetitiveness
of the action performed. Note that a similar technique is adopted in the spoken
language in the production of utterances. In addition, the spoken language also
employs the process of reduplication in which the whole or part of the word is
repeated to demonstrate the repetitiveness of action. Repetition of the gesture
as well as the repetition of the word, is employed also for the collectivity of
objects. When the gesture for an object is repeated several times, the repetition
indicates that there are many objects of the same type; in other words, it indicates
the plural number of the same objects. This is usually achieved when the gesture
is repeated, not in the same space, but in closely adjacent space of demonstration
in the air. When the gesture is repeated in the same space with forward movements,
in indicates the objects of the same species follow one another in succession,
in a procession.
13) Imitation and addition
of distinguishing marks. Along with the presentation of an outline one may also
add certain distinguishing marks. marks that would certainly distinguish the present
object of gesture from several other objects which may have some similar outline.
14) Sounds. Sounds can be used both as gestures in their own
right and as an accompaniment of some other gestures, elucidation the meaning
of the gestures they accompany. Snapping of the fingers and the clapping of the
hands come under the first category whereas the sound that accompanies the gesture
expressing the hotness of an eatable just eaten comes under the second category.
The sounds of interjections also come under the second category.
15) Gesturing at place of occurrence. In order to indicate
the whiteness one may gesture at teeth.
16) In order to express complex ideas, the gesturer may combine one or more signs
with another. This process is governed by several patterns: (a) A generic sign
may be combined with a specific sign to bring out a combined meaning. Woman is
expressed through a generic sing in American sign language. This is combined with
the specific sing of begging to express the meaning for beggar woman. Likewise,
attributes of a condition may be combined with a generic sign to express another
meaning of the condition. The sign for woman is combined with sign for offspring
to mean daughter. The sign for man is combined with the sign for offspring to
indicate son. The designation of birds, flowers and plants also are expressed
through combination of sings. Note that this feature of combining a generic sign
with an attributive sign to derive new meanings is also found in oral language
for several words, and in the kinship terminology. (b) While specifying a complex
idea, the gesturer may use several signs indication the several characteristics
of the complex object/phenomenon. To mean the paddy field, the square of the field,
water, walking on a bund, shortness of the plant may all be signed. (c) Origin
or source, and the use of the object for the object itself. (d) Effects for causes.
(e) Drawing of the form of the object and indication of its use. A good example
in the American sign language is the sign for hospital, which consists of the
signs for house, sick and may. (f) Another method is to draw the outline of the
object and indicate the place where it is found. Horns drawn on the head gestures
an animal. The outline drawn in the air of the forest and the dancer making the
movements characteristic of the deer indicate the deer in the jungle. (g) Shape
and one or mare specific marks may also be used. (h) Way of using and specific
marks of the objects. (i) Another combination is shape, mode of using and specific
marks. (i) Another combination is shape, mode of using and specific marks. (j)
End for which an object is used, or its make, and the place where it is found.
(k) Place, manner of using, or mode of arrangement. For example, the pantomime
of putting on shoes or stockings indicates those articles. (m) Negation of the
reverse. Fool-no is wise; good-on is bad. (n) Opposition. A principle of opposition
as between right and the little finger; between loudness and softness; between
rapidity and slowness; between continuity and interruption/faltering and hesitation,
etc., operates in the signation of complex ideas as well as in depicting dynamic
(mobile) objects/events.
TOP
5.3. Oral Language and Gesture Language
We have already classified gestures into four major categories based on the contexts
of their occurrence: (1) Occurrence of gestures designating that speech is in
progress, (ii) Occurrence of gestures as a meaningful accompaniment to speech,
(iii) Occurrence of gestures as an independent means of communication whether
the individuals have speech or not, and (iv) Occurrence of gesture in the deliberately
elevated levels of performing arts. Note that, in all these categories of occurrence
of gesture, even where gestural communication is sought to be worked out as an
independent means of communication as found among the Red Indians or Australian
aboriginals or among the deaf-mutes, there is always some correspondence maintained
between speech and gesture language. While in the former the correspondence maintained
between speech and gesture language. While in the former the correspondence is
manifest very often, in the latter, the institutional languages of the deaf-mutes
are based on oral speech around them and are comprehended as such even by the
deaf-mutes in course of time.
Even where societies insist upon
less gesturing as decent manners, we find that the individuals, when excited,
make use of their hands in gesturing postures, whether such gesturing has any
meaning or effect for the addressed. We clap our hands for approbation, rub the
hands in delight, go on manipulating fingers while in a fidgety state, wring our
hands in distress, raise it in wonderment and astonishment, snap the fingers for
calling attention of the other, use the palm of the right hand for blessing, with
index finger erect and other fingers of the fight forming a fist, we warn others,
we shrug the shoulders for showing that we are not responsible, we wink at others
in collusion and glare at others and exchange meaningful, understanding and conspiratorial
looks and connivance. We raise our brow in frown and in wonder, use our fist to
threaten and raise the hand with the fist to convey solidarity; we bite the lips
to acknowledge our errors and in vexatious circumstances, fold the palms to greet
the others and pray to gods,fall flat on our stomach with hands stretched over
the head, and legs also stretched out to surrender ourselves to the one before
whom we fall flat; we bend our knees and worship. In this manner we speak also
through gestures - while the oral language has a sway over our communication efforts,
there are niches which are specifically meant for nonverbal communication, and
gesture is an integral part of this process. We use gestures for many purposes
- to promise, call, dismiss, threaten, supplicate, express abhorrence and terror,
question and deny; express joy and sorrow, doubt, confession, repentance, measure,
quantity, number and time; gestures are used by us to encourage, console, restrain,
convict, admire, respect and condemn. The list is, indeed, an open-ended one.
There are communities in which gesturing as an accompaniment of speech is demanded;
in most Indian communities, gestureless speech is "lifeless" speech,
dispirited; it may also mean insulting and showing disrespect to the addressed.
Also in all human societies where noise is to be avoided, oral language gives
place to whisper and/or gesture. Thus, the relationship between oral language
and gesture is one of complementary distribution of emphasising the content of
what is stated in oral language, of supplying what is left out in oral speech,
and of indicating and conduction the oral speech itself.
While the ordinary language can be used in its written medium even when the addressee
is absent, performance of gesture requires an audience. Even when the addressee's
attention is distracted, oral language does and could reach the addressee, whereas
for gesture language to be effective the attention of the addressee is essential.
Gestural communication cannot be resorted to in the dark, whereas oral communication
is possible in the dark. Gestural communication can be employed when voice cannot
be or is not desired to be employed. When secrecy is desired gesture communication
is resorted to. When silence is desired or required, gesture communication is
exploited. Where the ear cannot but the eyes can reach, gestural communication
is found effective. Human language, through its writing medium, can convey messages,
to distant places and future times. While the gestures themselves and the mechanics
of gesturing can be and are transmitted from one generation to another, transmission
of contents via gestural communication from one generation to another is generally
restricted to aesthetic acts only and not for other types of knowledge.
Oral speech and gestural communication differ in terms of
the parts engaged in their production. Whereas the oral speech is produced manually,
this manual production of speech is different from the manual production of gestural
signs. In the case of gestural signs, the medium is manual in the sense that manipulation
of hands, fingers, palms, elbows and other body parts is made. The choice would
differ from region to region, from society to society. In the case of oral speech,
uniformly the speech is produced by vocal organs and is mostly egressive (produced
with the help of breath of air sucked in through the mouth to the lungs). There
have been attempts, however, to compare and relate the speech production mechanisms
with the mechanics of gestural communication. For example, Ljung (1965) makes
the following comparison: "In sign language articulation, the analogue of
the movable articulator in speech (the tongue) is the hand or hands. These may
adopt several basic shapes: open, clenched, one or more fingers curved, etc. No
other part of the body is used as an articulator: even the rare full arm motions
are accompanied by a distinctive hand gesture, and signs for actions characteristic
of the feet, such as walking and dancing are made with the hand. The hands may
be used in a stationary position or moved up, down, forward, back, to the left,
to the right, in concert, parallel to each other, or crossing over each other.
Motion may be distinctively rapid and tense, slow and lax, or neither; proceeding,
again distinctively, in straight lines, through curves, in circles, trembling
or wagging fro the wrist. The analogue of the place of articulation in verbal
speech (for example, the palate, the upper teeth) is the point at which a gesture
is made or to which the hand moves during the gesture. In most cases, the place
of articulation is a place on the signer's own body; head, hair, forehead, ear,
eye, nose, upper lip, mouth, chin, chest (heart), lower arm, leg, etc. Utilization
of the back of the body as a place of articulation is rare, both because of its
general inaccessibility to the articulator and because of its invisibility to
the interlocutor. When this part of the body is used, as in the sing for tail,
the signer must turn so as to present his profile while signing. The place of
articulation is often not actually touched; instead the hand is only brought into
close proximity to the relevant body part. When the place of articulation is not
a part of the body, it is somewhere in the space nearby, as in indicating a height
in front of the body in the sign for child. Signs are generally formed in a continuous
flow, but sentences and longer segments of discourse may be set off by brief pauses,
when the hands and arms are dropped to the speaker's sides or lap or are used
for some other nonsignalling purpose'. Those who are familiar with the description
of the processes of speech production in humans will find in the above passage
a close parallel between the processes of sign production and speech production.
This parallel between the production of sings and production of speech has been
sought not only in the phonetic level as given above, but also in the other levels
of human language, such as phonemics, morphemics and syntax. Even when parallels
in the processes are not attempted to be established, it is assumed that the only
way to describe gestural communication is to use the concepts that are employed
in the description of human language. This point will be taken up further below.
However, it is pertinent here to point out, especially since we have above presented
a point of view which claims a parallel between the processes in the production
of speech and gestures, that the sign language communication does not really have
much of the characteristics of phonetic script (discreteness) as we find in human
vocal language. It is more or less similar to an extreme form of ideographic writing.
But even in the latter there is more discreteness than in the gestural communication.
The gestural communication has a large pantomimic element and has the directly
representational characteristic which is rather absent in vocal language. All
the same gestural communication is not also a language of pictography which we
find in Early Man's caves wherein pictures were reproduced for communication purposes.
There is also an element of arbitrariness in gestural communication which is qualitatively
lacking in Early Man's pictographic writing of various sorts. In the gesture language
there is a transfer form actual objects to symbolic objects such as an erect index
finger standing for man (Mallery, 1880). Conventionality of this nature is not
always found in picture writing. Moreover, picture writing could be both communicative
on the one hand and decorative ritual and ceremonial on the other hand, whereas
gestural act as normal human communication is communicative and is used as such
with the intent to communicate.
In oral speech there is hierarchical
and systemic organization of the elements that are used in speech. Such a hierarchical
and systemic organization is not found in the sing language, even though several
studies have attempted to demonstrate such a hierarchical and systemic organization
(for example, West, 1963). Gesturing is more like a telegraphic system of writing
(but without any conventionalized 'sentence' consciousness). The gestures are,
more or less, independent 'words' used either as words in a 'construction' consisting
of several gestures interlinked with one another in some sense, just as morphemes
in a sentence in vocal speech are interlinked with one another, or independent
'sentences' by themselves. The gesture communication system operates only on one
level, say the level of morphemes or words or content words rather than on a system
which incorporates within itself several systems. For example, the sounds in a
language can be viewed as constituting phonemes at another level. The phonemes
go into the making of morphemes (minimum meaningful units; the word dogs has tow
morphemes, dog and the morpheme -s meaning plurality of the object). Morphemes
go into the constitution of words and the words into sentences and sentences into
a text. While each level/state/unit is related to the other, each of these could
still maintain itself as some sort of a self-contained system. These combinatory
characteristics/systems, one built upon another, are not found in gestural language,
although there are several significant findings to the effect that gesture communication,
like human language, is also a system of systems (West, 1963). Note also that
the elaboration and categorization of linguistic units based on their co-occurrence
conditions are not found in gestural communication. That is, theoretically speaking,
one gesture is combinable with another gesture more freely than one word with
another. Thus, the gestures cannot be generally divided into categories based
on their co-occurrence behaviour, such as verb, adjectives, adverb, noun, etc.,
in and strict manner. Also a gesture which is viewed as a subject in the grammatical
sense in the human vocal speech could be both subject and predicate within the
same "gestural sentence". To split a series of gesture, or to do a parsing
of series of gestures produced is, indeed, a difficult process since what is a
'subject' in a gesture sentence could be the object simultaneously of the immediately
preceding gestures.
Like the words in the
oral language, one could attempt to decipher the meaning of a gesture based on
gestural and nongestural contexts. And yet the gestures are more transparent than
the words in the sense that in many cases the gestures directly represent objects/events
and these have in some sense less arbitrariness about them. We have, in the earlier
section, elaborated the close linkage between the objects and events in the external
world, and the gestures. The gestures become symbolic transfer of the objects
and events in the external world, but, even when some of the gestures are purely
arbitrary in some gestural symbols, there is some physical similarity in the shape,
size and motion of the gestures produced, thus revealing the lack of the characteristic
of arbitrariness in a vast majority of the gestures produced and used. We have
also referred to the pantomimic nature of majority of the gestures used in communication.
This fact also reveals the limited nature of arbitrariness found between te gestures
and the objects and events in the external world. There is a clear separation
in vocal speech, in most cases, between sound and sense, and this separation is
not found to the same extent between gesture and the object or event it represents.
Gestural communication makes greater use of iconicity and this enables individuals
who do not know each other's language to communicate with one another using gestures.
There are several words and constructions in the oral language also which are
figurative, outlining the objects, imitating the events and pantomiming the whole
episode of communication. There are also words which focus on only one aspect
of an object but lead to the comprehension of whole object or event. Onomatopoeic
words in vocal speech clearly indicate linkages between the external world and
the linguistic words. In this sense, onomatopoeia words are also built upon the
elements of both arbitrariness and conventionalization. These also exhibit cultural
variation. The link between the external world objects and events, the onomatopoeic
words in a human language exhibit more arbitrariness than we find between the
iconic gestures in gestural communication and objects and events in the external
world.
The scope and size of the gesture
lexicon is very much limited. The referents of gesture communication are much
less than the referents of spoken language in all human societies. It is unlikely
that all concepts found in speech could be expressed in manual gestures with ease,
precision and effectiveness. It is but natural that when conversion of information
from one medium to another medium is attempted, there is both loss and gain of
information, effectiveness, ease and precision. Hence, there cannot be complete
correspondence retaining all these features when speech is sought to be converted
into gestures, naturally there are changes made in the nature and quantum of information.
The gestures that accompany speech and the gestues that stand
for words in a stretch of oral utterance are generally more limited in their quantum
and breadth of semantic coverage than the gestures that are employed independent
of oral communication. Even in this latter category whether the gesture are used
in addition to oral language as in the case of the aboriginal sign languages used
by Red Indians or by the Australian aborigines, or the gestural communication
is resorted to as the means of communication as found among the deaf-mutes, only
a few thousand signs have been found to be in use. Washburn, as quoted in Taylor
(1978), finds 750 signs to be basic signs and others derived. Fant (1964), as
quoted in Taylor (1978), considers that out of the several thousand signs that
are used by the Red Indians, etc., only 500 signs are basic. In normal oral language
communication also, estimates fix the basic vocabulary anywhere from 850 words
to 1500 words. Thus, the basic words and basic signs in both oral language and
gestural communication appear to be not very much different in their quantum (West,
1963). However, the quality of human language lexicon, as a system, is much more
open-ended and incorporates the essence of entire language not only in terms of
vocabulary items but also in terms of the rules of grammar. Human language lexicon
is the microcosm of all that is found inhuman language - the rules of formation,
derivation, inflection and use. This microcosmic element is still elusive in gestural
communication.
While in the spoken language we could converse
more or less with equal ease upon all topics (the medium itself does not constrain
the expressions of any topic, but rules of social competence and performance do
constrain the facility), in the case of gestural communication, the medium in
several cases does no lend itself easily for the expression of certain contents.
For example, 'spatial relationships, physical activities, enumeration, specification
and comparison are easily expressed. animal names and descriptions of their characteristics
and movements are abundantly represented. Frequent also are personal and place
names. Plants and shrubs are little represented as named species, and other terms
for non-living nature are also relatively few in number. difficult to express
are cause-and-effect statements, and emotive and evaluative terms are scanty.
True synonymy seems to be rare' (Taylor, 1978).
Note that words
as well as gestures can and do change thire meanings (in terms of their implications,
if not their literal meanings) from context to context. However, there is no one
to one correspondence between a gesture and a word. A single word may express
an idea which is complex and which can be communicated only by a battery of gestures.
Likewise a single gesture may signify an idea which can be communicated only by
a battery of words. Also note that in a human language the use of words is often
marked by a syncretic understanding of what they stand for. Although a word is
uttered more or less alike and many have an overall meaning shared by all those
who use that word, the focus or the feature of a particular object or event meant
in a particular context by individuals may differ. Furthermore, one may even use
a word without fully understanding the meaning of that particular word. On the
other hand, one cannot use a gesture in communication without understanding what
the gestures stands for, when one wants to communicate through the use of that
gesture. Even the most familiar and appropriate of signs to the objects or events
being gestured cannot be understood by the others outside the context. 'Successful
signs must have a much closer analogy and establish a concord between the talkers
far beyond that produced by the mere sound of words. The merely emotional sounds
or interjections may be advantageously employed in connection with merely emotional
gestures, but whether with or without them, they would be useless for the explicit
communication of facts and opinions of which signs by themselves are capable'
(Mallery, 1882).
Gesture lexicon is spontaneous
and use of gestures in our Indian societies is not much conventionalized in interpersonal
communication , in the sense that one could easily identify more numerous idiosyncratically
performed gestures than conventionally agreed upon gestures and that avoidance
of gestures is generally desired. Gestures are elevated to aesthetic arts wherein
there is both conventionalization and arbitrariness. Both these features are kept
to the minimum in the gestures made in interpersonal communication contexts. In
other words, the interpersonal communication in most Indian communities does not
institutionalize gestural communication and leaves them to the idiosyncratic and
less consciously executed modes of expression. As such, the gesture lexicon is
not as elaborate as that we find among the Jews or among some European communities.
This does not, however, mean that we do not use gestures at all or that there
is no conventionalized and institutionalized gesture lexicon in most Indian communities.
It only means that the quantum is of a limited number and its use is also relatively
more limited and fixed.
Gestural communication is generally
conceived to be a substitute for speech. We have already referred to the facts
that gestural communicator if often resorted to in contexts wherein oral communication
is to be avoided for various reasons; that gestural communication often accompanies
performing a supplementary role to oral communication. In the case of the Red
Indians sign language takes on the role of a language for inter-tribal communication
and for communication with those who do not know their language. It takes on the
role of a ritual among the speakers of the same oral language. In all these cases
and in aesthetic arts level also, the power to interpret, and sharpen further
the gestural communication lies with the oral language. Even in the case of the
deaf-mutes, once institutionalization of their gestures takes place, their gestural
communication is placed upon the foundations of oral speech of others. The concepts
represented by gesture are already there in the human language in almost all the
cases, and these concepts (even if their origins are rooted in an overall ability
for communication and not simply on a propensity for language use) come to be
based on concepts developed and used in vocal language as soon as there begins
a contact between gesture communication and language use. Often, in the case of
normals who habitually use oral language for communication, gestural language
becomes a conversion from the spoken medium to a silent medium of gestural motions,
with several underlying processes and motivations. There is pure gestural language,
a manifestation of prelinguistic thought in early childhood; it is nurtured into
an art in several directions, sometimes for interpersonal and intergroup communication
as found among the Red Indians and Australian aborigines. It also matures into
an effective medium for performing arts. There is also non-language gestural communication
as found among deaf-mutes on the one hand and other congenitally disordered population
which could be made with some difficulty, to be in consonance with vocal speech;
it could also be regulated by vocal speech. There is also post-language gestural
communication in which gestures may accompany oral language in a supportive role.
There is yet another post-language gestural communication in which language is
totally, or in some severe fashion, lost and the affected is led to the use of
gestural communication.
Unlike the oral language, there is
less generalization and abstraction in the gestures used. While the oral language
is characterized by concatenation, gestural communication is characterized by
a use of more than one means. Concatenation is used, but rather in a loose fashion;
apart from concatenation of gestures, vocal signs may also be interspersed. Also
apart from hands, other body parts also may be used. Thus, there is a multidimensional
exhibition of signs in gestural communication, whereas in oral communication,
communication via the vocal organs occupies the centre stage. Also note that the
concatenation of the sign language is of a varying type. As already pointed out,
the order in which gestures occur in a communication (wherein only gestures are
used, for instance, in the Red Indians sign language or in the gestural communication
of the deaf-mutes) is not uniformly followed by the same individual using gestural
communication. Furthermore, each gesture can act as an independent sentence in
the sense that it communicates a complete sense, having subject and predicate
implied by the same sense. In a series of gestures, a gesture may be the subject
of a following gesture and it could also be the predicate of a preceding gesture.
There is also a different view which finds some order in the occurrence of elements
in gestural communication. For example, Taylor (1978) suggests for the Red Indian
sign language the following order of occurrence of elements the following order
of occurrence of elements in an utterance: 'topics precede qualifiers and complements
(nouns precede modifiers and verbs); logical objects precede or follow their governing
sign, the exact position in each case possibly being idiomatic; obligatorily the
sign for question beings and interrogative sentence, and the sign for negative
follows directly the sign for question begins an interrogative sentence, and the
sign for negative follows directly the sign it modifies'. Taylor also finds some
order in the formation of a word sign in the Red Indian sign language: 'Words
in sign language consist of from one to several sign morphemes. When tow or more
sign morphemes function together as a word, it is highly characteristic that the
first morpheme announces a topic, which is then followed by comments about the
topic that become progressively more specific and that eventually define it. Negro:
Whiteman + black; infantry: Whiteman + soldier + walk; sister-in-law: brother
+ possess + wife; bachelor: man + marry + no; cheat: lie + steal'. Taylor further
points out that the order of constituents in a 'word', that is, in a gesture word,
is generally fixed. The order of words in the sentence, on the other hand, is
fairly, though not totally, free'. There are variations in the order, 'but when
the variations were resubmitted to the informant at a later time, he often rejected
some as substandard or meaningless, thus indication that there are preferred word
orders'.
We have given, in the above lines,
some salient features of vocal and gestural communication and their inter-relationships.
We have presented a general overview of the features without distinguishing between
systems of sign communication that operate almost independently of oral language
and those systems of gestural communication that depend on oral backdrop and accompany
oral speech. There appears to be some differences between the two when we investigate
the matter in terms of their internal organization, the choice and combinatorial
possibilities of occurrence of gestures. For example, although the aboriginal
sign languages exhibit both natural and conventional sign relations, iconic and
indexical elements are found to be exploited more than the symbolic relations
by them, in comparison to the oral language which exploits symbolic relations
more than the iconic and indexical relations. Since one of the important reasons
for the emergence and retention of sign language as an independent system along
with oral languages is their usefulness in communicating among those who do not
know each other's language, the sign languages are more flexible in accommodating
new signs for the repertoire of the interactants. It has been reported that the
Red Indians were in the habit of imitating the gestures of whitemen even if the
latter were performing the signs wrongly and/or interpreting their (Red Indian's
gestures) incorrectly. Communication rather than correctness of gestures appears
to be an important motivating factor in the conduct of sign languages. On the
other hand, in performing arts, correctness, elegance and spectacle dominate the
use of gestures. We may conclude this section by giving two important features
of the inter-relationship between spoken language and sign language presented
by Umiker-Sebeok and Sebeok (1978). One is on the intersemiotic translation from
the spoken language to sign language and vice versa: 'There is transmutation or
intersemiotic translation, which is the interpretation of verbal signs by means
of signs of nonverbal sign systems'. Umiker-Sebeok and Sebeok (1978) suggest that
this inter-semiotic translation is to a certain extent a barrier to attainment
to fluency in the use of sign language. Note that this, indeed, is a factor in
attaining fluency in the second/foreign language. To the extent one is occupied
with the transmutation of the utterances of one language into another, the fluency
in the target language is always affected, and is often defective as well. 'The
greater the degree of conventionalization and standardization and the less the
individual signer has to rely upon translation from spoken language, the greater
the fluency of sign language performances'. Another point is that Umiker-Sebeok
and Sebeok (1978) suggest that we look at the use of sign language along with
spoken language as similar to the use of illustrations in written texts. In written
texts, illustrations have very many functions to perform. In a broad, general
sense, an illustrator is always dependent on the author; all aspects of the illustrations
should also be textually accurate. But in most cases we find this not to be so.
There is always a dialectic, antithetical relationship between the author's work
and the illustrator's work, so long as the illustrator also assumes some creative
role. Even, if he does not assume any creative role, and wants to be thoroughly
faithful, the level of his understanding of the author's work and the actual processes
of semiotic transmutation, transfer from one code to another, automatically brings
in variation (Thirumalai, 1984).
TOP
5.4. Schools of Gestural Communication
Gesture as a form of communication has been studied for a long time. Explanation
of the process of gesture is of great antiquity. Gestures were considered to be
an effective accompaniment of rhetoric by the Greeks and Romans. They form an
integral part of study and performances of performing arts all over the world.
In Indian Theatre, for over 2000 years, insightful analysis of use of gesture
has been made. There are theories that gesture preceded human language. There
are also attempts to codify gestures, prepare inventories and develop independent
communication modes using exclusively gestures.
If in the Western sciences there has been some sort of continuity of interest
in the study of gestures from the Greco-Roman times to Darwin and present day
sciences and its elevation to art, in Indian culture we find that gesture has
been elevated in ancient times to aesthetic levels on the one hand and has been
exploited for social identity, ranking and status purposes on the other hand.
Thus, gesture in Indian contexts finds a place in purposive communications in
a marked fashion, in the aesthetic arts, in religion, in sculpture and in interpersonal
and social group communication. Use of gesture is marked by a continuity ensured
by their use in arts. We shall see all these subsequently in this section. However,
the primary purpose of this section is to present a few modern Western approaches
to the study of gestural communication. The contributions covered are those of
Col. Mallery, Wundt, Efron, Poyotos, and Ekman and Friesen.
TOP
5.4.1.
Mallery and Sign Language
Of the several
studies on gestural communication in the past, the studies by Col. Garrick Mallery
stand out as the most important contributions to an understanding of gestural
communication in general and Red Indian sign language (Plains Sign Language of
the American Indians) in particular. Mallery's major contributions are reprinted
and available in Umiker-Sebeok and Sebeok (1978). Writing on Red Indian sign language
over 100 years ago, Mallery brought in several insights into the study of gestural
communication. His study, according to him, is intended to be an exposition of
the gesture speech of mankind, thorough enough to be of suggestive use to students
of philology and of anthropology in general (Mallery, 18880). He also compared
the sign language used by North American Indians with that used by other peoples
and deaf-mutes (Mallery, 1882). In the past, during Mallery's time, the major
emphasis was on the collection and description of signs used by various American
Indian communities. He found the 'many of the descriptions (of signs) given in
the lists of earlier date ... are, too curt and incomplete to assure the prefect
reproduction of the sign intended, while in others the very idea or object of
the sign is loosely expressed, so that for thorough and satisfactory exposition
they require to be both corrected and supplemented, and therefore, the cooperation
of competent observers, to whom this pamphlet (Mallery's 1880 work) is addressed,
and to whom it will be mailed, is urgently requested'. The publication is 'a collection;
in the form of a vocabulary, of all authentic signs, including signals made at
a distance, with their description, as also that of any specially associated facial
expression, set forth in language intended to be so clear, illustrations being
added when necessary, that they can be reproduced by the reader. The description
contributed, as also the explanation or conception occurring to or ascertained
by the contributors, will be given in their own words, with their own illustrations
when furnished or when they can be designed from written descriptions, and always
with individual credit as well as responsibility. The signs arranged in the vocabulary
will be compared in their order with the suggested radicals of languages, for
assistance in which comparisons travellers and scholars are solicited to contribute
in the same manner and with the same credit above mentioned ... intelligent criticisms
will be gratefully received, considered, and given honorable place'. The above
quote clearly indicates the scope and methodology Mallery adopted in his work.
Mallery's methodological soundness was not matched by any other contemporary scholar
of his; most of his contemporaries engaged themselves in the collection and description
of sings. Mallery went beyond everyone and offered several theoretical insights
as well as structural descriptions of the general processes of gestural communication,
most of which have been adopted as the basis of later research in the discipline
of gestural communication. Mallery's classification of signs, and the identification
of elements and movements that constitute signs in North American Indian sign
language have been generally repeated in almost all works with some changes in
order and terms, until the influence of modern structural linguistics was brought
to bear upon the study of sign language by scholars beginning with A. L. Kroeber.
Even with the influence of modern structural linguistics on the study of gestural
communication, the basic concepts of Mallery and his approach towards the study
of sign language continue to exhibit a modernity even today. For, in essence,
Mallery had a comprehensive view of what communication is.
Mallery recognizes the superior generalizing and abstracting
powers of oral language, while emphasizing, at the same time, that gestures could
excel in graphic and dramatic effect applied to narrative and to rhetorical exhibition.
Mallery presents an insightful analysis of the inter-relationship between oral
and sign languages, and points out the mutually exclusive and mutually complementary
areas of their use. Their relative merits as modes of communication occupy a great
deal of his work. Spoken language can be interpreted only by another spoken language,
whereas gestural language does not require such interpretation. Gesture speech
cannot be resorted to in the dark, nor can it be resorted to when the attention
of the person addressed has not been otherwise attracted. However, when the voice
would not be or shall not be used, gesture speech can be used. When highly cultivated,
the rapidity of gesture speech on familiar subjects exceeds that of speech and
'approaches to that of thought itself'. Oral speech is wholly conventional, whereas
gesture speech is both natural and conventional. Mallery, however, finds that
there is 'no need to determine upon the priority between communication of ideas
by bodily motion and by vocal articulation. It is enough to admit that the connection
between them was so early and intimate that the gestures, in the wide sense indicated
of presenting ideas under physical forms, had a direct formative effect upon many
words; that they exhibit the earliest condition of the human mind; are traced
from the farthest antiquity among all people possessing records; are universally
prevalent in the savage stage of social evolution; survive agreeably in the scenic
pantomime, and still adhere to the ordinary speech of civilized man by motions
of the face, hands, head and body, often involuntary, often purposely in illustration
or emphasis'.
Signs are originally air
pictures of the outline or chief features of the objects. In course of time this
similarity may be lost and the signs become abbreviated (become arbitrary) and
conventionalized. With the growth of conventionalization and arbitrariness and
with groups choosing different and varied features of the same object or event
to produce signs for the same object or event, variations between signs and sign
languages increase and difficulty in communication using the sign language as
a medium increases. However, the elements of the sing language are natural and
universal in the sense that there is a general system, instead of a uniform code.
This general system admits generic unit while denying the specific identity of
signs employed - 'the common use of sign and of sings based on the same principles,
but not of the same signs to express the same ideas, even substantially' marks
the universal characteristic of sign language. Mallery also divides the signs
into innate (generally emotional) and invented; into developed and abridged; into
radical and derivative, and into indicative (as directly as possible of the object
intended), imitative (representing the object by configurative drawing), operative
actions, and facial expressions. Mallery also brings in notions from grammar and
prosody, such as tropes of metaphor, synecdoche, metonymy, and catachresis. Another
classification is formal, into single and compound, which Mallery considers as
the most useful distinction.
Mallery also
distinguished between signs and signals, signs and symbols, and signs and emblems.
Signal is some action or manifestation intended to be seen at a distance. This
does not allow for minute details (and as such symbols may have a form and structural
complexity different from signs). Signals are executed exclusively by bodily action
and also using some object as implement. They may also be executed by various
devices, such as smoke or fire across. The symbols are mostly conventional. Mallery
suggest that symbols are less obvious and artificial than signs. Symbols need
convention, and are not only abstract but also metaphysical. They also need explanation
form history, religion and customs. On the contrary, signs, as viewed by Mallery,
do not possess these characteristics. Emblems do not require that there be any
analogy between them and the objects; these may be simply accidental.
Mallery finds that the sign language/gesture utterance presents no other part
of grammar besides syntax. Syntax of sign language is the grouping and sequence
of its ideographic pictures. While in the oral language meaning does not adhere
to the phonetic representation of thought, in the sign language it adheres to
signs. In the gesture language there is no organised sentence similar to ones
we find in oral language. There are no articles, grammatical particles, passive
voice, case, grammatical gender, not event he distinction between substantives
(nouns) and verbs. Nor is there a distinction between subject and predicate, qualifiers
and inflections. The sign radicals have the characteristic of being everything,
'without being specifically any of out parts of speech'. Mallery also suggests
that this state of conditions offers an interesting comparison with the syntax
of vocal language of early humans.
In the
analysis of sign language syntax, we must consider, according to Mallery, both
the order in which the signs succeed one another and the relative positions in
which they are made, 'the latter remaining longer in the memory than the former'.
The order of occurrence of signs show the natural order of ideas in the aboriginal
mind and 'the several modes o inversion by which they pass form the known to the
unknown, beginning with the dominant idea or that supposed to be best know'. The
sign language gives first the successively. the expression follow the order of
ideas, according to Mallery. He also suggests that signs do not represent words,
they do not even suggest words, for 'a simple word may express a complex idea,
to be fully rendered only by a group of signs, and vice versa, a single may suffice
for a number of words'.
One of Mallery's chief contributions
lies in his focus on the relationship between gesture and oral language in their
phylogeny. In his view there was a time in which Man had no oral language but
only gesture language. Oral language evolved, among other things, from the primordial
roots of gestural communication Although people can speak without pause in their
own language without a single gesture, speech has not eliminated the need for
gesture. 'The signs survive for convenience, used together with oral language,
and for special employment when language is unavailable'. Another characteristic
is that the signs may be understood even when they are produced for the first
time. While these facts reveal the inter-relationship between, as well as the
common phylogeny of gesture communication and oral speech, it is also true, Mallery
suggests, that there is a progression away form the use of gesture language in
societies materially more advanced. (This is not what Mallery exactly says but
one could safely arrive at his implication.) Thus, Mallery proposes that 'the
further a language has been developed from its primordial roots, which have been
twisted into forms no longer suggesting any reason for their original selection,
and the more the primitive significance of its words has disappeared, the fewer
points of contact can it retain with signs'. The subsequent grammatical studies
of American Indian languages have shown that these languages do have a very complex
grammar and as such Mallery's suggestion that in the American Indian languages
'the connection between the idea and the word is only less obvious that that still
unbroken between the idea and the sign', and that these languages are 'strongly
affected by the concepts of outline, form, place, position, and feature on which
gesture is founded, while they are similar in their fertile combination of radical',
is not supported by linguistic research. All the same the position of Mallery
as regards the ancestry of gesture communication as the progenitor of oral language
and his position that there may be a correspondence between advancement of material
culture and reduction in use of gestures are still wide open for further investigation.
TOP
5.4.2. Wundt and Gestural Communication
For Wundt, sign language is imply a primitive form of ordinary language and as
such if may reveal something of the essential nature of natural language. Also
gestural systems might uniquely reflect characteristics of the innate human language
capacity. Wundt also suggests that gestural communication is a kind of universal
language in spite of varied gestures and conditions. Because of this universal
nature people are able to understand one another when they make use of gestures
without great difficulty. There is a tendency among people to combine word sense
with affective expressions even when speaking the same language and also to resort
to gestures when they interact with other people who do not know their language.
The growth of the spoken word had its impact in the development and preservation
of gestures. Gestures are formed based on emotion, affective tendency, and temperament.
Although different conditions of culture may have some influence on the formation
and use of specific signs, these do not alter the character of certain concepts
such as I, you, he, here and there, large and small, sky, earth, clouds, rain,
walking, standing, sitting, hitting, death, sleep, etc. The universal nature of
gestural communication must be sought in these characteristics.
Wundt identifies two basic forms of gesture, namely, demonstrative
and imitative. The demonstrative gesture was the original way of expressing emotion.
The imitative gestures are descriptive gestures. They are divided into two subclasses,
mimed and connotative. The mimed gestures are pure imitation. Connotative gestures
posit a connection between themselves and the objects. This connection is to be
imagined and cultivated. There is also another class of gesture, symbolic gestures.
Demonstrative gestures are natural gestures and are unpremeditated. The imitative
gestures or the descriptive gestures are greater in size and more variegated than
the demonstrative gestures. Mimed gesture is the primary form of the imitative
gesture. In miming one may either draw the outline of the object in the air by
the index finger or imitate the image of the object three dimensionally with the
hands. Both can also occur together. In the production of connotative gestures,
one singles out arbitrarily a secondary characteristic of the object and uses
it to represent the object. The symbolic gesture is a sign of some sort that calls
to mind a mental concept 'whether the connection between them is concerned with
an ordinary external object or with a more subtle relationship'. The gesture itself
is not the idea as in the demonstrative gesture, or in the imitative mimed gesture.
The symbolic gesture is not also connected with the idea by any natural similarity
between it and the idea it represents. There are obscure links between the symbolic
gesture and the idea it represents. The symbolic gesture implies a completely
distinct idea whereas the connotative gesture maintains some link with the idea
through the former's reference to at least the secondary characteristics of the
object it represents. The demonstrative, mimed and connotative gestures all refer
directly to their meaning. In the composition of the symbolic gesture there is
always one intermediate idea between the gesture and the ultimate idea implied.
For example, and hand cupped like a laddle is directly associated with its meaning
'drinking gourd'. Originally the gesture suggests the laddle or gourd which later
comes to refer to water, the content held by the laddle or water. Thus, the concept
of laddle or gourd expresses an idea, water, different form itself. Note that
this technique is resorted to also in oral language. For example, the word pozhutu
in Tamil refers to time and portion of time which comes to mean Sun. Indian traditional
grammars have identified this phenomenon in the spoken word and deals with them
under akupeyar in Tamil and paryayapadam/laksa¸artha in Sanskrit. In any
case note also that the symbolic gestures can be replaced by or paraphrased into
direct indicative gestures (Either mimed or connotative) in gestural communication.
Thus, the symbolic gesture of a hand cupped like a laddle or gourd meaning water
can be easily replaced by a gesture pointing directly at nearby water, or through
other imitational gestures.
Wundt finds
that the natural gestural communication foucses mostly on the concretely perceptible.
It covers three basic logical categories: objects, qualities, and conditions.
Since the same gesture may be used for several meanings, the gestural process
provides for various nuances and movements for the same gesture to refer to different
meanings. For example, the deaf-mute touching a tooth can have four interpretations:
the first meaning is tooth; the the two qualities of whiteness and hadness might
have been implied; fourthly it may connote stone. Distincitons are made this way:
Touching the tooth alone indicates 'tooth'; touching the whole row of teeth indicates
'whiteness'; the eyes beam at the same time. A tap on the incisors expresses 'hardness';
and adding a throwing motion after tapping the teeth indicates 'stone'. In spite
of these qualifying devices, Wundt finds two instances which generally are marked
by unsolvable ambiguity. One and the same gesture may have a different logical
sense, depending on whether it is preceded by a principal gesture may have a different
logical sense, depending on whether it is preceded by a principal gesture or a
qualifying one. (Distinction between principal and qualifying gestures is also
difficult to make.) In another instance of ambiguity, gestures may be used in
limitless different ways to represent an object so long as the action represented
by these gestures have something to do with the objects. Wundt finds that in general
signs a re more ambiguous than words are.
One important contribution Wundt made was his insistence that gestural communication
does not merely consist of individual signs, but of sentences. Only by viewing
signs as sentences we will be able to make complete sense out of gestural communication.
There are no connectors in gesture sentences as we find in oral language sentences.
We have to infer these features from the complete context of the expression. Also
because the sign functions more or less as independent sentences, identifying
them as subject, object or predicate, or as passive or active, or as substantive,
verb, etc., also becomes a problem. The syntax of gestures may be reduced to the
principles of logic, temporal and spatial functionality. The temporal and the
spatial characteristics are the vivid part of gestural communication. They are
preponderantly in operation in gestural communication. The concrete reality and
direct comprehensibility of the individual signs derive their strength form their
operation. There is also successivity as in oral language. Logical operations
depend upon and derive their strength from the feature that each sign could be
considered a separate sentence. Gestural communication, according to Wundt, reports
events exactly in the order in which they occur. It describes objects in the order
in which they are perceived. Because of this reason, inversions of events, as
found in oral language through various transformations, are not found in gestural
communication. Cleft sentences and 'various other stylistic deviations from the
norm are not attested in sign language. Wundt also suggests two conditions - one,
we have already cited. That is, the individual gestures follow one another in
the order in which they are perceived; and the second is that because of the slow
succession of individual signs, a gesture may take its meaning through preceding
and not succeeding signs. Note that this need not be necessarily so in oral language
expressions, where a crisscross pattern is easily found often. Because of these
two reasons, Wundt finds that the gesturers are compelled to express first of
all those images which have a greater affective meaning than others.
Wundt was viewing gestural communication in the overall framework of communication
that is specifically human. Gestural communication is not a communication shared
by both animals and humans. It is a specifically human act, a human product, a
natural product of the development of expressive emotions. The forms of gestures,
their developmental growth, extension of meaning, semantic change and syntactic
order all distinguish it from the animal communication systems.
TOP
5.4.3.
Efron and Racial Origin of Gestures
David
Efron in his 1941 work (reissued in 1972) made a 'tentative study of some of the
spatio-temporal and "linguistic" aspects of the gestural behaviour of
Eastern Jews and Southern Italians in New York City living under similar as well
as different environmental conditions'. This study done under Franz Boas was 'part
of a somewhat extended investigation of the influence of race and environment
upon bodily development and upon behaviour'. That was the time in which, some
scholars, under the influence and milieu of developments in Germany, were inclined
to make studies aimed at establishing the supremacy of one race over the other.
Efron's study aimed at identifying whether there was any truth in such assumptions
and convincingly proved the hollowness of these scholars by providing evidence
from an area, performance in which was often sought and provided as proof for
the supremacy of the pure Aryan. Boas found that every so-called race contained
a great many individuals of distinct genetic characteristics and analogous genetic
characteristics occurred in various 'races'. Boas identified two approaches to
tackle this complex problem - on the one hand, the behaviour of genetically identical
individuals living under different conditions could be studied and on the other
hand one could 'study the development and behaviour of large groups of individuals
and of their descendants in markedly different environments'. Efron's study thus
marks a significant departure from the by and large observational studies of American
Indian sign language to a combination of both observation and experiment, in selected,
and significant contexts of communication. Efrons's study is, indeed, today comparable
to any systematic sociolinguistic investigation. His is a forerunner to the study
of gestural communication in social and psychological terms. Unfortunately, this
has not attracted the attention of scholars in any effective manner in the past.
Currently with interest in sociolinguistics, and in the inter-relationship between
verbal and nonverbal communication, both within the semiotic context and outside
it, Efrons's study is reissued in the last decade and is found completely in consonance
with the research methods and trends in sociolinguistics. To us it appears that
Efron's study is a perfect model for students of linguistics in India, whose training
in adjacent sciences, such as psychology, sociology and anthropology is practically
and wholly inadequate to undertake interdisciplinary experimental investigations
involving complex and difficult statistical tools, and who would, all the same,
like to pursue their research on nonverbal communication, and linguistic identities
and functions based on nonverbal communication.
Efron makes
an experimental investigation of the gestural behaviour of two so-called racial
groups, Eastern Jews and Southern Italians in New York City, living under similar
as well as different environmental conditions. The object of his investigation
was to discover whether there were any standardized group differences in the gestural
behaviour of these two different racial groups. If there were, indeed, differences,
he aimed at finding out what became of these gestural patterns in members and
descendants of these groups under the impact of social assimilation. In order
to pursue his studies, Efron resorted to two, what he called, legitimate ways
- the experimental and the historical. His material on the historical side came
from documents of the past, such as newspapers, novels, etc., which gave descriptions
of the use of gestures and which convincingly proved that even in the societies
(in Europe) which now abhor/avoid overt gestures in the interactions of their
members there were times in which gestures were considered natural, fashionable
and so on. The experimental approach revolved around obtaining materials in 'absolutely
spontaneous situations in the everyday environments of the people concerned who
never knew that they were subject of an investigation'. He carried out the investigation
by means of a four-fold method - direct observation of gestural behaviour in natural
situation, sketches drawn form life by a contemporary American painter under the
same conditions, rough counting, and motion pictures studied by observations and
judgements of naive observers and graphs and charts with measurements and tabulations
of data obtained. In other words, Efron had all the elements of present day empirical
methods of investigation employed. Moreover, Efron elevated the study of gestural
communication from its basic roots in inventory making to an understanding of
social communication processes.
Efron's study dealt with the
gestures with regard to their spatiotemporal aspects as well as with regard to
their referential aspects. In the former category he studied the "movements"
and in the latter category he studied the use of gesture as language. Efron focused
primarily upon hand movements and to a lesser extent on head movements, with occasional
consideration of trunk position. He did not consider facial expression, posture,
gait, or eye movements.
Just as Efron was innovative in using
data from gestural communication for social sciences research, he was innovative
also in providing a classificatory model for the description of gestures. Efron
offered a neat classification, which is as follows:
Spatio-temporal:
Gestures are considered simply as movement
in this place. These are treated as independent from interactive or referential
aspects. Under the spatio-temporal aspects, we have radius, form, plane, body
parts and tempo dealt with. radius of the gesture is the size of the radius of
movement. Maximum radius is the most distant point form the shoulder axis, reached
by the wrist in an outgoing movement; minimum radius is the nearest approach of
the wrist to the body in the course of the continuing gesture. Form refers to
the type of movement - sinuous, elliptical, angular or straight, whereas plane
refers to sideways posture or posture towards auditor (frontal), up or down, vertical,
away form speaker and auditor, etc. Under body parts, Efron includes the following
as involved in gesticulation - head gestures (area movement, rate and frequency,
and whether used as substitute for hands), digital gestures (variety of positions
and shapes of hands), unilaterality versus bilaterality in handmovement, ambulatory
gestures (sequential transfer of motion from one arm to the other), and tempo
(abrupt, dischronic to another). Note that dynamic parameters are used to capture
the spatio-temporal aspects of gestural communication. In categorizations offered
by Mallery and his contemporaries, the emphasis was on finding what constituted
a gesture, that is, the emphasis was on the identification of elements that constituted
a sign.
Interlocutional Aspects:
These aspects are concerned with the behavioural conduct of the individuals in
the interaction via gesture. Efron focuses on four items under this head. These
are familiarity with the physical person of the interlocutor (interruption; capture
of attention; physical contact), simultaneous gesturing of all interactants, conversational
grouping (use of space and distance between speakers and auditors and gesturing
with objects using an inanimate object as an arm extension.
Linguistic Aspects;
These deal with
aspects of gesture in relation to language - whether the gesture has meaning independent
of or only in conjunction with speech. Efron provides a very significant classification
of signs under this. There are two major divisions - logical-discursive and objective.
Under logical discursive, the aspect of sign that follows the course of the ideational
process and not the object or the thought itself is emphasized. Batons are gestures
that give the successive stage of referential activity. The ideographic gestures
trace or sketch out in the air the path and direction of thought. The objective
gestures are divided into tow major groups - deictic and physiographic. The deictic
gestures point out objects whereas the physiographic gestures show what they mean.
The physiographic pictures are again of two types - the iconographic gestures
depict the form of a visual object whereas the kinetographic gestures depict a
bodily action. The third major category of gestures, apart form those of logical-discursive
and objective gestures, are the emblematic or symbolic gestures. The emblematic
or symbolic gestures have a standardized meaning within a culture. These are culture-specific.
The emblematic or symbolic gestures represent a visual or a logical object by
means of pictorial or non-pictorial form which has non morphological relationship
to the thing represented.
Efron finds very
many interesting features of gestural communication that are motivated by processes
in other behavioural patterns of the community to which the gestures belong. For
example, he identifies a number of gestural acts which he terms as hybrid gestures.
This is the combination of elements peculiar to the gestures of traditional individuals
of Jewish or Italian communities with elements found in the gestures of Americans
of Anglo-Saxon descent. From these findings, Efron concludes that 'the same individual
may, if simultaneously exposed over a period of time to two or more gesturally
different groups, adopt and combine certain gestural traits of both groups'. Efron
compares a hybrid gesturer to a bilingual person who retains the characteristics
of their first language in their performance in the second language. He finds
that both the assimilated Eastern Jews and Southern Italians in New York City
differ from their respective traditional groups and resemble each other. The gestural
characteristics found in the traditional Jews and Italians disappear with the
social assimilation of the individual Jew or Italian into the Americanized community
to which they get assimilated. Efron concludes that 'gestural behaviour, or the
absence of it, is to some extent at least, conditioned by factors of socio-psychological
nature ... (the findings do not bear out the contention this form of behaviour
is determined by biological descent'.
Efron's
contribution, thus, is significant in several ways. Firstly, it presents a classification
of gestures under actual communicative contexts and describes the role and function
of gestures in modern society. While the earlier studies focused on the composition
of signs, their primordial roots and the universal nature or otherwise of the
gestures, mostly with an anthropological bias, Efron's study takes the focus on
gestural communication to a plane of sociological research. Gesture is now seen
as another important sociological index. It shows how sociological processes could
influence the repertory and use of gestures to meet various social ends. Secondly,
Efron's study focuses on the inter-relationship between language expressions and
gestures. Thirdly, Efron's study focuses on the dynamic nature of the gesture
institution and shows how culture influences the use, retention and modulation
of gestural communication. Fourthly, the methodology adopted is very significant
since it combines both observation and experimentation, collects and collates
data and arrives at conclusions based on empirical procedures and data. The method
also breaks a new ground in social science research involving both linguistic
and nonverbal variables. Finally, gestural communication is studied not for its
own sake but as an aid for sociological inquiry. From a mere descriptive, and
at times anthropology-oriented study, gestural communication now becomes a proper
tool to understand modern societies as well. Thus, Efron's study paved the way
for the social psychological studies of gestural communication.
TOP
5.4.4.
Recent Studies of Gestural Communication
In this section we propose to present two types of studies as sample of recent
studies of gestural communication. Both these studies operate around empirical
data and methods of experimentation within the overall framework of principles
of psychological experiments. In fact, one of the studies, that of Poyotos (1975),
discusses problems of gestural inventories, raising issues of theoretical importance.
Thus, this study is not directly based on any experiment, but is dealt with here
because of its interest in preparing the inventories, from a modern point of view.
Poyotos argues in favour of bridging a gap between the teaching of linguistic
structures and the association of these linguistic structures with the nonverbal
patterns of behaviour in order to arrive at a total communicative competence.
Poyotos asks for the inventories of gestures which almost exclusively accompany
verbal behaviour, those which replace it, those which perform both functions,
essential physical movement and are easily recognized by an untrained observer,
specialized group gesture systems, heavily iconic gestures, body configuration
and stance varying geographically as well as among communities, autistic gestures
and erotic gestures. Poyotos suggests that we should differentiate between gestures,
manners and postures, from the cultural point as well as considering the pedagogical
possibilities.
There are three elements
in the description of nonverbal communication, according to Poyotos - gesture,
manner and posture. By gesture Poyotos means 'a conscious or unconscious body
movement made mainly with the head, the face alone, or the limbs, learned or somatogenic,
and serving as a primary communicative tool, dependent or independent from verbal
language; either simultaneous or alternating with it, and modified by the conditioning
background (smiles, eye movements, a gesture of beckoning, a tic, etc.)'. Manner
is seen similar to gesture, but 'is more or less dynamic body attitude and socially
codified according to specific situations, either simultaneous or alternating
with verbal language (the way one eats at the table, greets others, coughs, stretches,
etc.)'. Posture is a conscious or unconscious general position of the body, more
static than gesture, learned or somatogenic, either simultaneous or alternating
with verbal language, modified by social norms and by the rest of the conditioning
background, and used less as a communicative tool, although it may reveal affective
states and social status (sitting, standing, joining both hands behind one's back
while walking, etc.).
Poyotos suggests
that gesture study should take into account not simply the gesture itself but
also linguistic, paralinguistic, kinesic (other than gestural), proxemic, and
chronemic features. That is, gestural study takes into account other linguistic
as well as non-linguistic (nonverbal) aspects of communication. Linguistic aspects
have been covered in all previous studies since ther have been always attempts
to establish correspondence between linguistic signs and gestural signs. Use of
other nonverbal features, in fact, a comprehensive coverage and use of all other
nonverbal aspects for an understanding of gestural communication and for the preparation
of gestural inventories appears to be a contribution of Poyotos. Likewise a gesture
may also determine both linguistic and other nonlinguistic signs. In this way,
all nonverbal aspects, five of them listed above, are dependent on one another.
Ekman and Friesen, two important contributors to the study of nonverbal communication
in the contemporary scene of ours, propose five classes of nonverbal behaviour
(Ekman and Friesen, 1969): facial expressions of emotion, regulators, adaptors,
illustrators and emblems. Note that emphasis of gestural communication is now
shifted from the study of constitution of signs to a study of the psychological
bases of gestural communication. There is a predominant role assigned to psychological
performance of gesture, although the classification offered does talk of constitutional
elements as well as of the social functions. For the former, emblems are a fine
example and for the latter the regulators are a good example. Of the five, emblems
are more or less gestures: 'Emblems are those nonverbal acts which have a direct
verbal translation, or dictionary definition, usually consisting of a word or
two, or perhaps a phrase ... An emblem may repeat, substitute, or contradict some
part of the concomitant verbal behaviour; a crucial question in detecting an emblem
is whether it could be replaced, with a word or two without changing the information
conveyed'. In additon the meaning of the emblem should be known to most of the
members of a group, class, subculture or culture. Also the emblems are used with
a conscious intent to send a particular message to other persons who in their
turn know that the message is deliberately conveyed. All these characteristics
make gestural display a deliberate display.
Although answers are not provided, Eknam and Friesen raise several questions which
link study of gestural communication directly with the concerns of theoretical
developments in linguistics, psychology and psycholinguistics. For example, they
raise the following questions which are currently debated within linguistics and
psychology in relation to human language: What is the ontogeny of emblems? At
what point do different emblems become established in the infant's repertoire?
How does the acquisition of verbal language? How are emblems utilized in conversation?
Are there regularities in which massages are transmitted emblematically, and do
these emblems substitute, repeat or qualify the spoken messages? Are there any
universal emblems? Can we explain instances in which the same message is performed
with a different motor action in two cultures? How are emblems related to American
Sign Language? What is the phylogeny of emblems? While these questions link Ekman
and Friesen's concerns with developments in linguistics and psychology, their
insistence on the identification of the emblem repertoire as 'the most sensible
first step which enables pursuit of all the questions' (Johnson, Ekman and Friesen,
1975) takes them back to the days of Col. Mallery in which preparation of the
glossary of gestural signs dominated study of gestural communication. Since gestural
signs in parts of the system are, indeed, open-ended, one wonders whether it will
be possible at all to have a comprehensive glossary of emblems, especially when
gestures could be spontaneously and idiosyncratically formed and understood.
In conclusion of this section we present below the various methods adopted so
far in the study of gestural communication. The list is not exhaustive but is
indicative of the general trends.
1) Most of the early studies
have been observational and descriptive.
2) Questionnaire
method and informant-elicitation method have been adopted.
3) Open-ended narration by gestural signs is also encouraged.
4) Spoken language is used as an old.
5) Use only of the sign
language is also done to study gesture.'
6) Comparison with
the gestures of deaf-mutes, and comparison with the characteristics of spoken
language are also made.
7) Anthropological tools are also used.
8) Experimental investigations are also made, wherein the functions of gestures
in relation to psychological states are investigated.
9) Investigations
of gesture for sociological analysis are also made.
10) Help
of artists is also sought and made use of.
11) Identification
of gestures presented is also sought.
12) Linguistic models
are also used: Phonological, syntactic and semantic analyses are simulated in
the analysis of gestural signs.
13) research based on developments
in linguistics as regards grammatical structure is undertaken with regard to gestural
signs.
14) Collection and analysis of gestures as found in
literary works and other texts is also done.
15) Formal learning
of gestures is yet another method of study of gestures.
5.4.5.
Gesture in Aesthetic Arts
We restrict our discussion of gestural
signs in aesthetic arts to the use of gestural signs in Indian elitist dances
in general and Bharata Natyam in particular.
Dances in literate
communities of India may be broadly classified into folk and elitist dances. The
occurrence of gesture is more frequent and varied in elitist dances than in folk
dances. Secondly, conventionality and arbitrariness mark the elitist dances more
than they mark the folk dances. Thirdly, most gestures in the folk dances are
an accompaniment to the rhythmic recurrence of sounds where as gestures in elitist
dances generally accompany the 'sense' and/or is an illustration of the sense
conveyed. Fourthly, the gestures in elitist dance require conscious learning,
in addition to unconscious imitation, whereas gestures in folk dances are acquired
more or less in an unconscious, natural manner. The learning of elitist dances
is thus more institutionalized than the learning of folk dances. Fifthly, although
the elitist dances are also spatially and temporally bound, in the sense that
there are specified dances for seasons and geographical conditions, and for specific
themes, these elitist dances can be and are performed in other times as well purely
as an aesthetic performance, whereas folk dances are generally performed in relation
to the spatio-temporal set up prescribed. Once they cross the set up and re performed,
they attain the value of pure entertainment just as elitist dances. In these latter
conditions, a transmutation of the functions take place. Gestural communication,
which spatio-temporally bound as in folk dances, is less conventional and arbitrary
and more iconic and indexical. When folk dances, bound to certain spatio-temporal
conditions, are performed outside of elitist dances. Elitist dances function more
as a code in the sense that they lend themselves for manipulation through addition,
deletion, change, etc., in deliberately contrived processes initiated by individuals,
whereas the folk dances generally focus more on preservation and their function
as a code is found in their deliberate constraints not to function as a code of
manipulation. Once folk dances are treated as a code, or only as a form that could
be manipulated in form as well as content, they begin to emerge as elitist dances,
individually designed. Some forms/stages of elitist dances also could acquire
this characteristic but will still be considered elitist because in the latter
their conduct will be textbased unlike in the case of folk dances in which oral
tradition regulates the conduct. Gestural communication in elitist dances is more
advanced in the sense that the gestures employed in them are more numerous than
the gestures employed in folk dances. Also, the gestures in elitist dances are
more closely connected with affect displays than one finds in folk dances. While
the upper limbs play a more crucial role in elitist dances to further accentuate
the gestural communication processes, it is the whole body and the movement of
the whole body that dominate performances in folk dances. Affect display via face
always is an essential part of gestural communication by other parts of the body,
in elitist dances. Gestures used in elitist dances are explained/explainable by
the performers, which cannot be said for the performance of folk dances. In other
words, those who perform elitist dances are almost always aware of their use of
gestures. Learning processes give the 'rationale'. These people know the 'meaning'
of the gesture, as conveyed to them by their teachers and the text and/or interpreted
by them. They can repeat the gestures when asked to do so. The use of gestures
in elitist dances is an intentional, deliberate effort to communicate, but the
focus in folk dances appears to be more of self-expression and participatory nature,
not only in enjoyment through sight but also in the act itself. In the elitist
dances audience participation through act in the dances is not generally provided
for, but in the folk dances there is always such an opening. Most Indian elitist
dances are religion-based in the sense that music and dance have been traditionally
seen as a medium to please gods. In other words, the ultimate goal of dances in
the elitist tradition is worship gods. This cannot be said of folk dances. The
Vedas and Puranas are full of instances which narrate the dances of gods, dances
of elitist nature. The 'dances' of the demons are described/portrayed as crude
dances.
The creator of the dance (that
is, Bharat Natyam) and the chief dancer is God Himself - Siva. He is worshipped,
among other forms, in His dancing posture as well. Vishnu, another supreme Godhead,
is also known for his dances. Krishna dances with girls around. He also danced
on the head of Serpent Kalinga in the Yamuna river and kept him under control.
In heaven, in all the celebrations of gods, beautiful dames dance and please the
gods. In short, Hindu mythology is full of dances, danseuses and gestures employed
in dances. Since there is, in traditional Indian view, a direct correspondence
between all aesthetic arts, notions as regards gesture, classifications of gesture,
and their function in aesthetics and general communication are governed in a manner
similar to notions in poetics, dramatics, sculpture, painting and so on. There
is a unity in arts and there is a unity of purpose for all the arts. We present
below, however, only the gestural communication in Bharata Natyam as a representative
sample of use of gesture in all arts.
In India, there is a
long and ancient tradition of study of gesture via dance and drama. The earliest
treatise available now on dance and drama (in fact on aesthetic arts including
enjoyment of literature) is the work in Sanskrit Nayasastra, there are several
other works in Sanskrit, such as Abhinaya Darpa¸am which discuss theories
of drama and present gesture employed in both dance and drama. We present here
an overall description of the use of gesture employed in both dance and drama.
We present here an overall description of the use of gestures as found mainly
in Nayasastra.
To begin with we should
point out that gestures used in dance and drama form more or less a closed system,
that both natural and conventional gestures are used in the Indian dance and that,
since these gestures form a more or less a closed system, most gestures are polysemous.
The gestures are mostly an accompaniment to either a poetic composition sung or
a pantomime of a well known story and thus the polysemous ambiguity is resolved.
Gesture are stylized and lend themselves to some variations in their exhibition
by individuals belonging to different schools/disciples of a teacher and geographic
regions. The dance uses both upper and lower limbs, but the gestures by parts
of upper limbs dominate. There is always an insistence on the use of appropriate
facial expressions for each gesture. Use of facial expressions further contributes
to a resolution of ambiguity inherent in the use of the same single gesture for
several meanings. Gestures are not stationary in the sense that every gesture
has a movement; without movement gesture cannot be seen. Also the concatenation
of sense and events is not possible without the movement. The Indian dance consists
mostly of hand gestures and (whole) bodily movements, although other parts may
also be used. Costume is important, but does not play a direct role in gestural
communication. Gestures are given frontally, although the back of the body may
be shown and used for gestural communication. Both the front and back of the hand
may be sued for gesturing. For the same physical gesture, various meanings can
be ascribed based on directions of the movement of the gesture. Some of the geometrical
movements used are front/back, left/right, straight line/curved line, straight
line/zig-zag line, facing one another/back to back, gestures with one hand/gestures
with both hands, one side of the body/both sides of the body, congruence body/congruence
between hand and leg of opposite sides of the body.
According to Nayasastra, abhinayas (use of gestures, etc.) are devised by experts
for drawing out the sense of songs and speeches in a play (IV : 265). [The reference
is made to Dr. Manmohan Ghosh's translation of Nayasastra, (Ghosh, 1967). The
Roman numeral refers to the chapter and the Arabic numerals to the verse.] While
this might or might not have been the original focus and functions of gestures
used, in actual current practice in Bharata Natyam the gestures do not have, in
the main, an expository function in relation to the texts sung; it is the texts
that are sung that perform the expository function for an understanding of the
gestures used . Since abhinaya is devised by individuals (experts), in its origin
abhinaya becomes artificial and thus it is conventionally produced. And yet the
conventionality is not based exclusively on artificially created gestures only,
but is given to gestures drawn from natural expressions as well, since Bharata
Natyam makes use of natural gestures for conventionally fixed meanings. To the
extent the language of the txt is not understood by the spectators one may say
that the gestures of dance come to illumine the content of the text and enable
the spectators to comprehend the text. If the language of the text is understood
through the language in which it is composed, the singing of the text then takes
on the role of illumining the gestures of the dance and the gestures themselves
bring to life the text in a dynamic spectacular form. Since gestures are an integral
part of dance we reach a point that without gestures there is no dance. Thus,
gestures become a mark of identification of dance as a distinct aesthetic form.
Note that performs the expository function in relation to gestures employed in
a dance is further supported by Bharata Muni's dictum (IV : 280; Ghosh, 1967)
that instrumental music should not be played when there is any song to be delineated
by gestures, perhaps because the instrumental music should not be played when
there is any song to be delineated by gestures, perhaps because the instrumental
music may drown the song and thus will deprive the gestures their explanation
by the oral text. Whatever be the interpretation and delineation of different
roles of oral texts and gestures, they have only a complementary role, an complemental
semiotic relationship. Note that the function of gesture is to make a transmutation
of the sense of the oral medium into vision medium and by doing so it forms an
aesthetic genre. For and by doing so it forms an aesthetic genre. For Bharath
Muni clearly states (IV : 285-287; Ghosh, 1967) that a song is to be sung and
the female dancer should delineate the meaning of the song by suitable gesture
and translate the subject matter into a dance. Again (IV : 298, Gosh, 1967), the
entire words of the song should be represented first by gestures and then same
should be shown by a dance. Thus, a codification process in the progression of
transmutation of sense from the oral medium of vision medium and from there to
the elevation of the same into an aesthetic form is suggested here. In addition,
these steps of progression indicate that there was some distinction made between
the composition of gesture and their integration in dance. Gestures, in addition
to their expository function as regards songs, are also used as an expository
and spectacular device for all other words. Current practice generally links the
gestural poses with dance, although in some parts of the dance, the dancer could
remain stationary and make gestures appropriate to the words of the oral text.
Bharata Muni (in IV : 303; Ghosh, 1967) gives a dictum that when in course of
a song some of its parts are repeated, the parts uttered first should be delineated
by gestures and the rest are to be translated into dance. This dictum, while bringing
out the complementary roles of gestures and oral text, also points out that in
the performance of a dance a progression from presentation of individual gestures
to a concatenation of the same is aimed at. When concatenation takes place, the
pantomime of oral text is accomplished and herein both gesture and oral text get
entwined to lose their separate existence and merge into a single aesthetic form
- in other words, the original transmutation from one to the other, from oral
text into gesture is no more significant and together they are transmuted into
another world of existence. Thus, the use of gesture in arts perhaps has a extra
stage of transmutation over and above the transmutation taking place between oral
and gestural semiotic systems of communication. The word abhinaya is generally
translated as histrionic representation and it means carrying the performance
of a play to the point of direct ascertainment of its meaning (VIII : 6; Ghosh,
1967). Note that in these two verses also the expository function of gesture is
emphasized. Abhinaya, histrionic representation via gesture, etc., was meant originally
to clarify the song.
Histrionic representation
is known to be four fold: Gestures (a´gika), Words (vacika), Dresses Make-up
(aharya) and the Sattva (manifestations of mental states). The gesture is of three
kinds, namely, that of the limbs (sar¢ra), that of the face (mukhaja) and
that related to different movements of the entire body (ceÀakr?ta). Dramatic
performance in its entirety relates to six major limbs and six minor limbs. The
six major limbs are called a´ca and these are head, hands, breast, sides,
waist and feet. The six major limbs are called upa´ca and these are eyes,
eyebrows, nose, lower lip and chin. Note that the body parts that are considered
to be involved in gestural communication in dance are chosen for their mobility/flexibility
for use in movement and that the chosen body parts have a greater visibility.
The gestures
are called the sakha and pantomiming through them is called a´kura. While
these technical terms are not immediately relevant to our discussion, assignation
of roles to these two types by some scholars is of some consequence in our work.
For some scholars sakha stands for gesture and posture in general and for some
others it stands for the flourish of the gesticulating hand (kara-vartana) preceding
one's speech. A´kura stands for the flourish of the gesticulating hand following
speech. In the former, one finds a greater emphasis on the supporting role of
the words for a interpretation of gesture and in the latter one finds a greater
emphasis on the supporting role of the gesture for an interpretation of words.
Nayasastra and subsequent works list gestures of various numbers and sorts for
each major and minor limb. The numbers vary form limb to limb and there does not
seem to be any particular reason for this variation except the functional use
to which each limb is put. Along with the gestures produced by the limbs, Nayasastra
lists sixtyseven gestures of hands. Of these, gestures of single hands are tewentyfour
in number, those of combined hands are thirteen in number, and 'dance-hands, '
as their name implies, are obviously to be used in dance; but in course of acting
too they are often to be used along with other gestures (single and combined)
to create an ornamental effect. Unlike the single and combined hands which must
represent one single idea or object, the hands in the dance-hand gestures are
to be individually moved, not for representing any idea or object, but for creating
an ornamental effect in acting as well as in dance' (Ghosh, 1967). Note further
that Nayasastra distinguishes between the realistic (natural) and conventional
gestures: 'If a play depends upon natural behaviour (in its characters) and is
simple and not artificial, and has in its (plot) profession and activities of
the people and has (simple acting and) no playful flourish of limbs and depends
on men and women of different types, it is called Realistic (lokadharmi). If a
play modifies a traditional story, introduces super-natural powers, disregards
the usual practice about the use of languages, and requires acting with graceful
A´gaharas, and possesses characteristics of dance, and requires conventional
enunciation and is dependent on a heavenly scene and heavenbron males, it is to
be known as nayadharmi'. (XIV : 62-65; Ghosh, 1967). The distinction between the
natural and conventional gestures is recognized by Bharata Muni in several contexts.
For example, while discussing the different kinds of head gestures (which are
considered conventional), Nayasastra also reports that there are many other gestures
of the head which are based on popular/natural practice. This distinction between
the natural and conventional gestures and the provision made to make use of the
same in drama and dance, change the closed system characteristics of gestural
communication in this aesthetic form to some sort of an open system. As an example
of lokadharmi gesture we may cite the use of Padmakosa hand used to represent
lotus and similar flowers, and for naya dharmi gesture most of the gestures employed
in Bharata Natyam can be cited. Naya dharmi gestures are often aimed at creating
an ornamental effect. In the actual use of gestures and their concatenation, the
open-ended elements of the gestural communication system come to the fore. Also
exigencies of the aesthetic art form facilitate this use. Bharata Muni recognizes
the condition, while giving guidelines for the choice of hand gestures: 'In acting,
hand gestures should be selected for their form, movement, significance, and class
according to the personal judgement of the actor. There is no hand gesture that
cannot be used in indicating some idea. There are besides other popular gestures
connected with other ideas, and they are also to be used along with the movements
inspired by the Sentiments and the States. These gestures should be used by males
as well as females with proper regard to place, occasion, the play undertaken
and a suitability of their meaning' (IX : 153-157: Ghosh, 1967). (Note that the
assertion 'there is no hand gesture that cannot be used in indicating some idea'
is counter to assessment of some present day scholars, for example, Taylor, 1978.)
From the reference to popular gestures it it clear that although gestures form
a closed system in dance, the provision to include gestures from lokadharmi makes
the dance an open system to a certain extent.
Gestures come to be alive because of their movements. Their representation and
concatenation depend on the movements, and the movements have a connection with
different Sentiments and States on the one hand, and on the other, are manifested
physically in three ways: Upwards, sideways and downwards. The movements of hands
should be used with embellishments by means of appropriate expressions in the
eyes, the eyebrows and the face. The gestures may have both conventional and natural
movements. One should use the hand gestures according to the popular practice
(IX : 161-163; Ghosh, 1967). The movements of gestures are governed also by the
social status of individuals. In histrionic representation of gestures, the social
status of individuals, according to Nayasastra, determines the quantum as well
as the placement of gestures. (This notion, it may be noted, is found in real
world also, even today in some form or the other. We shall see this in the next
section.) The hand gestures of individuals of the superior category/status move
near their forehead, whereas the gestures of individuals occupying a middle social
status (rank) move around/at about their breasts. The individuals of inferior
social rank move their hand gestures in regions below the breasts. Also note that
Nayasastra prescribes that persons of superior rank will have very little movement
in their hand gestures, whereas the individuals of inferior rank should be portrayed
as having profuse movements of hand gestures. In the case of individuals occupying
a middle social rank, the movement of hand gestures should be of a medium frequency.
In addition, Nayasastra prescribes that the hand gestures of persons of superior
and middle levels of social rank should conform to the characterization of gesture
as given in the Sastra (thus ascribing to these gestures learned, institutionalized
and elitist status along with a dose of conventionality) in contrast to the hand
gestures of persons of inferior rank which follow popular practice and the 'individuals'
own natural habit (IX : 167, Ghosh, 1967). However when occasions demand, wise
people would make contrary uses of hand gestures to suit the occasions (IX : 167,
Ghosh, 1967). There are also certain restrictions as to the use of hand gestures
for the expression of certain emotions. That is, for representation of certain
emotions hand gestures are not seen proper and thus other means are to be used
(IX : 168-171; Ghosh, 1967). (Compare this with the dictum in IX : 153-157 cited
above.) This, indeed, is a very interesting and significant allocation of functions.
In it we find an implicit recognition that the parts of the body are generally
allotted differential functions in the conduct of nonverbal communication involving
the use of gestures. This provision makes the use of gesture in aesthetic arts
as well as in natural, realistic world different from the use of gesture as an
independent mode as found in American sign language or in the language of deaf-mutes.
Finally, hand gestures in the acting are dependent on the expression of the face,
the eyebrows and the eyes. There should be a proper coordination between hand
gestures and look of the gesturer in the sense the gesturer's eyes and the look
should be directed towards the points at which the hand gestures are moving, and
there should be proper stops so that the meaning may be clearly expressed (seen)
(IX : 207, 172; Ghosh, 1967).
The gestures of other major limbs are as follows, according to Nayasastra. The
breast is of five kinds (slightly bent, unbent shaking, raised and natural) and
thus has five kinds of uses. The sides are of five kinds (bent, raised, extended,
turned round and drawn away). The uses are also of five kinds. The belly is of
three kinds (tin, depressed and full) and its uses are also classified into three
kinds. The waist is of five kinds (turned aside, turned round, moved about, shaken
and raised). Their significance is also classified into five types. The thighs
have five kinds (shaking, turning, motionless, springing up and turning round).
The shank has five kinds (turned, bent, thrown out, raised and turned back). The
feet are of five kinds (touching the ground with heels, placed on an even ground,
heels thrown up, heels on the ground, middle of the feet bent). The thighs, shanks
and feet form a single category with each having five different kinds and five
different uses.
Among the gestures of minor limbs, the gesture of the head is of thirteen kinds.
There are thirtysix kinds of glances identified. Note that the most numerous gestures
are formed by hands (sixtyseven as already repeated) followed by eyes (thirtysix).
Eyeballs have gestures of nine kinds and eyelids have nine kinds of gestures and
follow the movements of eyeballs. The gestures of eyebrows, another minor limb,
are in accordance with those of the eyeballs and eyelids. They are seven in number.
The gestures of the nose are of six kinds. There are six kinds of gestures of
cheeks, six of lower lips and seven of chin. The gestures of the mouth are six
in number. Colour of the face is also treated as gesture and there are four kinds
of gestures concerning the colour of the face. That gestural communication in
dance (of the elitist type) is dependent on facial expression is made clear by
the dictum in Nayasastra that the colour of the face should be used to represent
the States and Sentiments; and although the acting is done with gestures and postures
(sakha), and the major and minor limbs, without proper colour of the face it will
not be charming (VIII : 161, 162; Ghosh, 1967). The colour of the face is the
basis of the States and the Sentiments (VIII : 164, 165; Ghosh, 1967). The gestures
of the neck are of nine kinds. Gestures of the neck are all to follow the gestures
of the head and the head gestures also are reflected in those of the neck. Note
the Nayasastra clearly stipulates the dependence of gestures based on their proximity
of origin on the one hand and their relevance for interpretation, rather mutual
interpretation, on the other, while head and neck gestures are of the former type,
the contribution of facial expressions for an interpretation of gestures of other
limbs is of the latter category
TOP
5.5.
Social Relevance of Gesture in Indian Societies
Throughout this chapter, and indeed throughout this book, for the description
of every nonverbal communicative mode we had an eye on its implications for social
and interpersonal conduct. We have demonstrated the social bases and social functions
of nonverbal communicative acts. Just as human languages become an integral part
and indices of social rank and behaviour, gestural communication, apart from its
use as a mere communication channel and an art form in itself, is also used to
exhibit implicitly the underlying to use the gestural communication. Use of gestural
communication itself by the persons of inferior category appears to be of a much
less quantum.
There also appears to be difference in the quantum of gestures employed by men
and women. In the rural context presence of individuals of certain status of the
male sex encourages use of nonverbal means for communication by the females. In
the most urbanized context, while such compulsions do not generally exist, resort
to gestures is made as a mark of one's education and westernization by females.
In general, use of gestures as an adjunct to oral communication is found more
among the females of urbanized contexts with an inclination towards 'westernization'
than among others.
This takes us to the question of conscious incorporation of gestures in the oral
communication processes, that is, borrowing of gestures form contexts not one's
own. Borrowing of gestures from folk traditions, rural traditions and from people
of lower socioeconomic strata is rare and this corresponds to behavioural to behavioural
patterns on other planes, including oral communication. However, unlike the borrowing
of words from English and use of the same very frequently and continuously all
through one's life, borrowing of gestures is not a continuing and cumulative process.
Gestures are borrowed; they become a mark of identity. They may even be a permanent
fixture in one's communication activity. And yet they are more transitory in some
sense than the words borrowed in the sense that the borrowed words reach even
the deepest rural centres and the people of the lowest social and economic strata,
whereas the borrowed gestures, form some reason of the other, do not go that far.
TOP