Gesture meaning needs speech meaning to denote – A case of speech-gesture meaning interaction

We deal with a yet untreated issue in debates about linguistic interaction, namely a particular multi-modal dimension of meaning-dependence. We argue that the shape interpretation of speech-accompanying iconic gestures is dependent on its co-occurrent speech. Since there is no prototypical solution for modeling such a dependence, we offer an approach to compute a gesture’s meaning as a function of its speech context

Directional adposition use in English, Swedish and Finnish

Directional adpositions such as to the left of describe where a Figure is in relation to a Ground. English and Swedish directional adpositions refer to the location of a Figure in relation to a Ground, whether both are static or in motion. In contrast, the Finnish directional adpositions edellä (in front of) and jäljessä (behind) solely describe the location of a moving Figure in relation to a moving Ground (Nikanne, 2003). When using directional adpositions, a frame of reference must be assumed for interpreting the meaning of directional adpositions. For example, the meaning of to the left of in English can be based on a relative (speaker or listener based) reference frame or an intrinsic (object based) reference frame (Levinson, 1996). When a Figure and a Ground are both in motion, it is possible for a Figure to be described as being behind or in front of the Ground, even if neither have intrinsic features. As shown by Walker (in preparation), there are good reasons to assume that in the latter case a motion based reference frame is involved. This means that if Finnish speakers would use edellä (in front of) and jäljessä (behind) more frequently in situations where both the Figure and Ground are in motion, a difference in reference frame use between Finnish on one hand and English and Swedish on the other could be expected. We asked native English, Swedish and Finnish speakers’ to select adpositions from a language specific list to describe the location of a Figure relative to a Ground when both were shown to be moving on a computer screen. We were interested in any differences between Finnish, English and Swedish speakers. All languages showed a predominant use of directional spatial adpositions referring to the lexical concepts TO THE LEFT OF, TO THE RIGHT OF, ABOVE and BELOW. There were no differences between the languages in directional adpositions use or reference frame use, including reference frame use based on motion. We conclude that despite differences in the grammars of the languages involved, and potential differences in reference frame system use, the three languages investigated encode Figure location in relation to Ground location in a similar way when both are in motion. Levinson, S. C. (1996). Frames of reference and Molyneux’s question: Crosslingiuistic evidence. In P. Bloom, M.A. Peterson, L. Nadel & M.F. Garrett (Eds.) Language and Space (pp.109-170). Massachusetts: MIT Press. Nikanne, U. (2003). How Finnish postpositions see the axis system. In E. van der Zee & J. Slack (Eds.), Representing direction in language and space. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Walker, C. (in preparation). Motion encoding in language, the use of spatial locatives in a motion context. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Lincoln, Lincoln. United Kingdo

P-model Alternative to the T-model

Standard linguistic analysis of syntax uses the T-model. This model requires the ordering: D-structure $>$ S-structure $>$ LF, where D-structure is the deep structure, S-structure is the surface structure, and LF is logical form. Between each of these representations there is movement which alters the order of the constituent words; movement is achieved using the principles and parameters of syntactic theory. Psychological analysis of sentence production is usually either serial or connectionist. Psychological serial models do not accommodate the T-model immediately so that here a new model called the P-model is introduced. The P-model is different from previous linguistic and psychological models. Here it is argued that the LF representation should be replaced by a variant of Frege's three qualities (sense, reference, and force), called the Frege representation or F-representation. In the F-representation the order of elements is not necessarily the same as that in LF and it is suggested that the correct ordering is: F-representation $>$ D-structure $>$ S-structure. This ordering appears to lead to a more natural view of sentence production and processing. Within this framework movement originates as the outcome of emphasis applied to the sentence. The requirement that the F-representation precedes the D-structure needs a picture of the particular principles and parameters which pertain to movement of words between representations. In general this would imply that there is a preferred or optimal ordering of the symbolic string in the F-representation. The standard ordering is retained because the general way of producing such an optimal ordering is unclear. In this case it is possible to produce an analysis of movement between LF and D-structure similar to the usual analysis of movement between S-structure and LF. It is suggested that a maximal amount of information about a language's grammar and lexicon is stored, because of the necessity of analyzing corrupted data

Multi-modal meaning – An empirically-founded process algebra approach

Humans communicate with different modalities. We offer an account of multi-modal meaning coordination, taking speech-gesture meaning coordination as a prototypical case. We argue that temporal synchrony (plus prosody) does not determine how to coordinate speech meaning and gesture meaning. Challenging cases are asynchrony and broadcasting cases, which are illustrated with empirical data. We propose that a process algebra account satisfies the desiderata. It models gesture and speech as independent but concurrent processes that can communicate flexibly with each other and exchange the same information more than once. The account utilizes the psi-calculus, allowing for agents, input-output-channels, concurrent processes, and data transport of typed lambda-terms. A multi-modal meaning is produced integrating speech meaning and gesture meaning into one semantic package. Two cases of meaning coordination are handled in some detail: the asynchrony between gesture and speech, and the broadcasting of gesture meaning across several dialogue contributions. This account can be generalized to other cases of multi-modal meaning

Communicating and accentuating the aesthetic and expressive dimension in choral conducting

This article considers the issues that are involved in effective choral conducting from an aesthetic dimension. Drawing upon research, theories and practice, it provides some insight into the nature of communication and the significance of gesture on vocal outcome as well as qualities of leadership concomitant with such musical activity. The article also reports on a research study that investigated the professional development of students and teachers in the area of choral conducting, focusing on their attitudes, skill acquisition and the importance attached to reflection on practice. The findings reveal that consideration of what counts as effective conducting gesture and communication skill can promote better conducting and, consequently, better, more expressive singing. In addition, the positive impact of self and peer reflection on progress (both face-to-face and within a virtual learning environment) was also acknowledged. Certain suggestions for promoting effective musical leadership in the area of choral conducting are provided, in order to ground theoretical perspectives in practice

Toward a new conception of conceptions: Interplay of talk, gestures, and structures in the setting

International audienceA major part of studies about students' conceptions and conceptual change exclusively is based on the analysis language, which is treated as a tool to make private contents of mind public to researchers. Following recent studies that focus (a) on language and discursive practice and (b) on the pragmatics of communication that draws on talk, gestures, and semiotic resources in the setting, we propose a redefinition of the nature of conception. Conceptions are understood as the simultaneously available speech, gestures, and contextual structures that cannot be reduced to verbal rendering because gestures and contextual structures constitute different modalities in the communication. Drawing on data collected during a physics unit about gas taught in French tenth-grade classrooms, we show why an appropriate account of conceptions requires (a) gestures simultaneously produced with talk and (b) identification of the relevant structures in the setting used by the participants as meaning-making (semiotic) resources. We propose to (a) reconceptualize the notion of conception by defining an "idea" as consisting of all relevant semiotic (meaning-making) resources publicly made available by a speaker (talk, gesture, context) and (b) consider conceptual change through the temporal evolution of ideas defined in this manner