All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

How Given and New Information Shape the Form of Conversational Hand Gestures
Unformatted Document Text:  25 fingers forming larger and larger angles. Also, the speaker’s fingers in A5 and A6 were not as close together and straight as they had been in A3. The blurring of straight, parallel and touching fingers served to put these aspects of the gestures into the background: they were analogous to speakers articulating given information less precisely. In A3, the gesture was serving to illustrate the required action. In A5 and A6, the gestures did not have exactly the same purpose, although some features of the original action had to be preserved. To highlight the aspects that were most important, the aspects which were not important were blurred (or sloppy). In the second half of A6, the feature characteristics of “letting go” now sat more in the foreground and the original rubbing action sat more in the background. The “letting go” features of the gesture were a stylized version of the participant’s original movements when she had played with the toy. In the gesture, she relaxed her hands, pulling them slightly towards her body, then pushed them out, extending her fingers as though encouraging the toy to fly away. This gesture was important as it finally illustrated the whole purpose of the whirlygig: the toy was supposed to fly up in the air as a consequence of the correct rubbing of the palms and releasing. Gesture A7 further illustrated the point of the toy flying. In it, the speaker showed the spinning toy flying up in the air by using her index finger to trace the spiraled path of the toy after being released. All the previous gestures, from the physical descriptions to the various versions of the correct whirlygig action, were necessary for the addressee to understand the upwards spinning path gesture. Gestures seemed to cumulate both between and across participants: the dynamic process of marking given and new information was not necessarily limited to one person’s depictions. Participants regularly built on there own as well as each other’s depictions.

Authors: Gerwing, Jennifer.
first   previous   Page 25 of 29   next   last



background image
25
fingers forming larger and larger angles. Also, the speaker’s fingers in A5 and A6 were not as
close together and straight as they had been in A3. The blurring of straight, parallel and touching
fingers served to put these aspects of the gestures into the background: they were analogous to
speakers articulating given information less precisely. In A3, the gesture was serving to illustrate
the required action. In A5 and A6, the gestures did not have exactly the same purpose, although
some features of the original action had to be preserved. To highlight the aspects that were most
important, the aspects which were not important were blurred (or sloppy).
In the second half of A6, the feature characteristics of “letting go” now sat more in the
foreground and the original rubbing action sat more in the background. The “letting go” features
of the gesture were a stylized version of the participant’s original movements when she had
played with the toy. In the gesture, she relaxed her hands, pulling them slightly towards her
body, then pushed them out, extending her fingers as though encouraging the toy to fly away.
This gesture was important as it finally illustrated the whole purpose of the whirlygig: the toy
was supposed to fly up in the air as a consequence of the correct rubbing of the palms and
releasing.
Gesture A7 further illustrated the point of the toy flying. In it, the speaker showed the
spinning toy flying up in the air by using her index finger to trace the spiraled path of the toy
after being released. All the previous gestures, from the physical descriptions to the various
versions of the correct whirlygig action, were necessary for the addressee to understand the
upwards spinning path gesture.
Gestures seemed to cumulate both between and across participants: the dynamic process
of marking given and new information was not necessarily limited to one person’s depictions.
Participants regularly built on there own as well as each other’s depictions.


Convention
Need a solution for abstract management? All Academic can help! Contact us today to find out how our system can help your annual meeting.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 25 of 29   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.