HAND AND MIND What Gestures Reveal about Thought David McNeill The University of Chicago Press Chicago and London 6 Gestures of the Abstract So far wehave scen how gestures exhibitimages of events and objects ina concrete world (real or fictive). Gesture imagery isnot limited to the con- crete. Other gestures exhibit images of the abstract—abstract concepts and relationships that are displayed in gesture form. One important class of such gestures I call meraphoric. Metaphoric gestures create images of abstractions. In such gestures, abstract content is given form in the imag- ery of objects, space, movement, and the like. Other kinds of abstract ges- ‘tures are beats and (abstract) pointing. Each type of gesture is described in this chapter. But first we should consider the issue of how something as, concrete asa gesture can display abstract concepts at all. Images of the Abstract “There is no lack of means for describing the relationship of imagery to the abstract. I will mention three approaches. KANT'S SCHEMATA, Kant introduced the term schema to refer to a pro- cedure for generating an image of a concept (Kant [1787]1973). A schema for the concept of fiveness, for example, enables us to generate a “sensuous image,” such as “I | | | I Gestures also can be regarded as the products of schemata; this is true of both iconic and metaphoric ges- tures: Kant’s analysis applies to both. Glucksberg, and Keysar (1990) have argued that the so-called literal and metaphoric comprehension of ‘words are fundamentally the same. Their argument implies a continuum between the literal and the metaphoric. Invoking Kant’s schemata also implies a continuum between iconic and metaphoric gestures. Between the gestures, the homology of an iconic gesture is imposed by external reality, by nature: a blob is homologous to a bounded physical entity and ‘upward movement is homologous to moving up, and we have no power to alter them. In a metaphoric gesture, the homology is one of our own creation. Ifwe think ofa story asa bounded entity, we can cteatean image of this kind of thing. The difference between the iconic and metaphoric, from this schema viewpoint, comes down to whether the homology is copied from the world (iconic) or created by the mind (metaphoric) “This points up, indeed, one of the major sources of scientific interest in metaphors, which is to identify the constraints on the creation of homol- gies (see Lakoff and Johnson 1980), Such created homologies could be 4s146 Varieties of Gesture called “schematic” (in the Kantian sense), but I am calling them “meta- phoric” to emphasize the distinction between metaphoric and iconic gestures, and also for historical reasons (a major type of metaphoric ges- ture, the conduit, was first identified as a metaphor of language; Reddy 1979). VEHICLE, TOPIC, AND GROUND. A second approach emphasizes the analytic categories introduced by T. A. Richards (Richards 1936) and ex- tended and renamed by Max Black (Black 1962). Inthe familiar Richards terminology, these categories are the Vehicle, Topic, and Ground, An ex- ample is the expression, ‘life is a flowing river.” Here the Vehicle is “a flowing river.” In a gesture, the Vehicle is the gesture image itself. The Topic of the metaphor is the abstract concept that the metaphor is presenting—life or the story genre. The Ground, finally, is the common ground of meaning on which the Vehicle and Topic are linked. In “‘lfeis 2 flowing river,” the Ground is something akin to an uninterrupted flow or continuity, and/or confinement to path. According to Richards, the Ve- hicle alters our understanding ofthe Topic, the concept of flowing river altering the concept of life, a process he called “interanimation.” Black corrected this to “interaction,” since in his view both the Vehicle and the ‘Topicare altered by the metaphor. The concept of ariver andthe concept of life are changed. This interaction is indeed a crucial test ofa metaphor and applies to metaphoric gestures as wel. The very concept of a story is altered through interaction with the image of bounded container: a story becomes some kind of container, At the same time, our idea of a bounded container is necessarily changed—it becomes some kind of story genre. A reflection of this interaction is our conviction that a story and a container are similar. We sa, in a Kantian vein, that the homology in a metaphoric gesture has been created. Equivalently, we say that the ‘Topicis altered by the Vehicle and the Vehicle is altered by the Topic. SIGN, BASE, AND REFERENT, Finally, we can describe metaphoric ges- tures in behavioral terms that lend themselves to empirical analysis, In this approach, we distinguish between Sign, Base, and Referent (Mande! 1977; Cohen, Namir, and Schlesinger 1977), The Sign is the gesture it- self, the handshape, movement, space, etc., that constitutes the gesture, ‘The Base is the objective object or action to which the Sign is homolo- gous. In the case of the bounded object gesture, the Base is, in fact, some bounded object. The Referent is the abstract concept to which the ges- ‘tre refers; a gente, for example, The term Sign reflects the origin of this Gestures ofthe Abstract “7 approach in the study of sign languages of the deaf (sce also Kendon 19885), We employed the Sign-Base-Referent approach in the coding method described in chapter 3. To code a metaphoric gesture we specify all components—the Sign, the Base, and the Referent separately. ‘Types of Metaphoric Gestures in Narrative Conduits “Metaphors whereby language, meaning, knowledge, art, gente, ete. are presented as bounded containers have been identified in linguistics under the name of the “conduit metaphor” (Reddy 1979; Lakoff and Johnson 1980). The conduit is actually a family of related metaphors which runs like this: (a) meaning is a substance, (b) the substance is packed into a container, and (c) the container is passed on to a recipient over a conduit For example, “there wasn’t much init,” where the “it” refers to a lecture, implies an image of a lecture asa container and the contents of the lecture as a substance (in short supply, unfortunately), “Ies hard getting these {ddeas across” implies a conduit over which ideas ought to pass. These im- ages of containers, substances, and conduits are only implicit in the words. Conduit metaphoric gestures, however, can depict the imagery directly. Holding up a bounded container creates an image of the con tainer (potentially filled with meaning). Showing this apparition to the listener demonstrates the reality ofthe conduit. “Most of the uses of conduit metaphoric gestures in narratives are for performing pragmatic references to the text itself orto the interpersonal context of the narrative situation; I will describe these uses in chapter 7. Such pragmatic references mean that the appropriate synchronization rule is pragmatic synchrony. On rare occasions there may also be seman- tic synchrony, as when someone giving a lecture on linguistics refers to “a linguistic object” and performs conduit gesture atthe same time. But ‘much mote frequent are examples where speech and gesture are quite dif ferent semantically, while pragmatically they have the same reference. ‘The first of the examples below illustrates this divergence of levels: se- ‘manticall there is nothing in common between speech and gesture, but pragmatially both channels refer to the cartoon story asa gente. ‘Not only will we sce a large number of conduit metaphoric gestures in this chapter, we will aso see languages where conduit metaphoric ges- ‘tres are systematically absent. This fact suggests that although the cor duit metaphor lets us create our own homologies of Topic and Vehicle, it js the product of certain cultural and linguistic tradition.Varieties of Gesture i aNcrent Times, The conduit metaphoric gesture indeed appears tO. have been a part of Western culture for along time. The earliest historical reference to it have encountered isthe following by Montaigne (himself fifteenth century), who attributed it to Zeno (sixth century 8.c.) in this description ofthe degrees of knowledge:! Zeno pictured ina gestare his conception ofthis division of the faculties of the. soul: the hand spread and open was appearance; the hand half shut and the fin= ‘gers alte hooked, consent; the closed fist, comprehension; when with his lefE hand he closed his fst still tighter, knowledge. (Montaigne 1958, 272) BASIC CoNDUTTS. An example of a conduit gesture is the followings, ‘which I have aleady cited, where the speaker is announcing the genre OF his upcoming narrative (illustrated in figure 1.3, repeated here in figure. 6.1 with an additional pane! Figue 6.1. Conduit metaphoric gesture with ive Syne tera Tet cartoonn”™ (same os ig. 1., wih one aed pane). Thee of gente i presented abounded supportable objet. Inthe second pane! the peer appears to open the obecrup (6.1) it [wasa Syives][ter and Tweet}y cartoon 1) (2) (2) Bosh hands rise up a if bolding up an object. (2) Both hands appear to pull the object open. __ The speaker created an object at (1) and presented it to the listener, indicating the conduit. This “object” was the concept of the eartoon, 1, Tam gratefl eo Jose? Ser for bringing thie viking passage to my attention, Gestures ofthe Abstract us and/or the idea of the upcoming narration; either way, an abstract con- cept. The “conduit” was the channel of communication between the speaker and his listener. To conceive of a Sylvester and Tweety cartoon as an object and hold it up to the listener is thinking in terms of the con- duit metaphor. There is a created homology between the two orders of things, the Topic (cartoon genre) and the Vehicle (@ bounded, sup- ported, and presented object). Indeed, afer creating the object and hold- ing it up, the speaker continued with the conduit imagery and proceeded to break it open, at (2); thus he revealed the container’s “contents” (the identity of the cartoon), ‘A very similar type of conduit gesture is the following: (6.2) have [a question] “Mesaphorie: band forms a cup for the image of» question (a container) or the dband ows to receive an answer (a substance). “The cup is either the question (a bounded supportable object) or the speaker's hand ready to receive the answer (the answer implicitly a sub- stance that can be placed there); either way, the gesture depicts an ab- stract idea. “These examples illustrate the basic features of conduit metaphoric ges tures: the hands create an image of a bounded, supportable object that represents an abstract concept. virtuosic CONDUITS, The cartoon-as-an-object gesture led to a natu: ral extension when the speaker appeared to break open the container to show the “substance” inside, The conduit lends itself to this kind of lab- oration and the more extreme variations can be called virtuosic. The most spectacular examples often appear during academic lectures; linguists, in particular, create vast structures of conduit metaphoric gestures, and Often have I regretted not having video equipment with me athe talks of colleagues who so firmly believe that words, phrases, and sentences are the only substantive parts of language. I have here three other variations oon the basic conduit image that can be regerded as virtuosic. The first ‘example occurred duting a film narration and is a gesture that presents the meaning of the past subjunctive mood of English; the others come from academic discussions. The past subjunctive—such as “f you had gone to Rome, you would have seen the Colosseum” —carries the mean- ing of “a potentiality that is not an actuality” (Curme 1931). A poten- tiality not realized as an actuality is what the gesture in the first example depicts. Tt was made with two basic conduit cup-of meaning hands moving outward; then, suddenly, the cups vanished (sce fg. 6.2.):150 Vaieties of Gesture Figure 6.2, Virtosic conduit with “even [though one might) [have] supposed." The hands spread outward (an image of potentiality) an simultaneously open to form eas of ‘meaning, then they abruptly close. This closures ied to coincide withthe grammatical {ncoding ofthe past subjunctive, “have.” The image is ofan expanding potentiality that, ‘vanishes: fly good plete ofthe past subjunctive (Curme 1931). (6.3) even [though one might]{have] supposed 2) (1) Cup-shape bands move out from center to side: the iden of potentiality. (2) Hlands snap shut the iden of nonexistence ‘The cup-of-meaning hands conveyed the existence of some meaning; theoutspreading isa common image fora potentiality (cf. the gesture for ‘who knows?”); and the fina closure, timed to take place exactly with the linguistic coding of the subjunctive, made the cup-of meaning vanish. ‘Thus the total effec was that a potential meaning had vanished. ‘My second illustration was observed during an academic conference and was not videotaped thus the timing is inexact. The speaker was em- phasizing the importance of organization in a certain domain. While he ‘was saying the word “organization,” there was a conduit in which the classic cup-of meaning handshape was modified by rigidly extending and separating the fingers. The image was of the desired rigidity of structure. ‘This was experienced by viewers visually, but would have been feltby the speaker kinesthetically. The concept of organization thus appeared to ac- quite homology with forceful physical containment and the basic con- duit metaphoric gesture was elaborated into an image of rigidity—the quality, the speaker was arguing, needed for bringing order into this do- main. Goss ofthe Abstract 1s My third example appeared during a NOVA telecast dealing with chil- ren’s language. The virtuosic touch is thatthe speaker turns himself into an abstract idea, in this case into the theoretical Language Acquisition Device: (64) he proposed that the Language Acquistion Device thouldsenpyakela) aves takes fair Metaphoric: both bands scoop up “input” and appear to shove it into the speaker's own mouth ‘A metaphoric use of the body is highly unusual. Most speakers create a bounded entity and offer it to the listener, but rarely do they turn it on themselves and make their own body into a part ofthe gesture. The ges- ture, however, was quite effective. The listener, to9, is drawn in and finds himself face-to-face with the Language Acquisition Device, swallowing its meal of language data Metaphores in Georgian, Chinese, and Turkana "The conduit metaphoric gesture is not universal. In iconic gestures the direct homology of Base and Referent leads to a high degree of inter~ cultural overlap when the content is the same, In contrast, metaphoric gestures seem to be culeurally specific. The schema for producing conduit rmetaphoricimages appearsin the gestures ofsome cultures burnot others. We have found excellent conduit examples in English, German, Italian, and Georgian narratives (the latter a non-Indo-European language), but noconvincing examples in Chinese or Turkana narratives (alsonon-Indo- European, but outside of the Western cultural tradition). These latter nar ratives contain metaphoric gestures of other kinds, but not gestures in which abstractideas are presented as bounded and supported containers. ‘An odd languagein this picture is Japanese. Our Japanese language narra tors have performed many conduit metaphoric gestures. I donothavean explanation for the conduit image in these narratives, but all the speakers, wwe have observed have been residents ofthe United States foranumber of years. oe The Georgian language narrator commented her narrative by point- ing out that she works professionally in the area of film. These remarks ‘were accompanied by numerous conduit metaphories, of which the fol- lowing was one (see fg. 6.3 at the top of page 152). (6.5) ifmas rom me p'ropesionali var kinos dargshit tfhis that I professional be film’s branch-in «the face chat Iam a professional] in the area of film’Varieties of Gesture Figure 6.3. Metaphor gesture (conc) by he Geoegianln- guage aratoras she introduces ‘the fr story and says hatshe isa profssional inthe field This very clear conduit appears with anon: Indo-European language. The im ageoF bounded cup of meaning it not language specie but calare specie Metaphor: band forms cup, loops to self and shen loops ous, presenting the ssmagge of ber profession as fl historian tothe listener, ‘This gesture also included a looping movement from the self to the interlocutor, evidently to refer to the conduit itself between the speaker and listener. The English conduit example, it was a Tweety and Sylvester cartoon,” also presented a cartoon-object to the listener, and gestures that highlight this interpersonal aspect of the image seem particularly prevalent at the beginnings of narratives, This not surprising since itis exactly at this stage that the narrator is setting up the channel of com- ‘munication and thus emphasizes the interpersonal context of the narra- tive situation. Ina context where an English or Georgian narrator would perform a conduit, the Chinese speaker created a boundias substance that she then patted down (this isa metaphoric gesture also used by English narrators, but it is not the conduit), The gesture creates an image of a substance ‘without form, Themetaphor is that an abstractidea samassofsome kind, concrete substance, butit is not supported in the speaker’shands, In the course of introducing her narrative, the Chinese speaker said (sec fig. 6.4; transcription and translation by K.-E. McCullough and C. Wang): Figure 64, Non-condui meta- ‘phoric gesture by the Chinese Fanguage naeator a she intzoduces tefl tory, The metaphor ap ‘ears tobe that he sory isa Bitoni eh rarer jh tual ecient soap et English speakers also produce this ( mezaphor Gestures ofthe Absiract 153 (6.6) {gianmian yidiar] butai__gingchu [front-side litle] NEG-too clear she first partis lite] unclear” “Metaphovc: lft band pas up and down in lower center space, beating on “the first part" asubstance danshi [houmian de hai ting _gingchu) bur [backside MOD still quite clear] “biut [the latter part was still quite clear) Metaphort: let hand presses down on “the later part” contrasting with the (pressure mation ofthe first gesture). In an anthropological film of the Turkana people in northwestern Kenya haere ‘MacDougall 1977) there are examples of meta~ phoric gestures ofa completely ifferenttype. The Turkana arc traditional ‘warrior herdsmen who had been litte influenced by Western culture atthe time of the film (carly 1970s). (Fora modern grammar of Turkana, see Dimmendaal 1983.) The following occurred while the speaker was ex: plaining the difference between “Europeans” (vz. the flm makers) and the Turkana. He said that the Europeans want to extract every drop ‘of Turkana knowledge (sce fig. 6.5; transcription and translation by R.. Dyson-Hudson): Figue 65, Nowcondit met plow gotae rom Tork Tangoag speaker ae id hese Euopeansannctoextacell oot nowige very drop ™ The trecaphor, bil ard mere, Sle fees rom he cont Inge Knowledge may be ving thingorsmoks or spe ing up (6.7) coditarite _ngitungs [lu _na_Kilna__yokt they-extract people —_[this-here knowledge our-inclusive nich!) pel] . ‘these Europeans want to extract all our knowledge... pit “Metaphoric: band pluck Senosledge” from brow and release it into she air154 Varictcs of Gesture An abstract concept is “entified” but there is no boundary or con- tainer. The image seems to be that something is plucked from the fore- hnead and then released —"knowledge” rises up on its own and disappears (perhaps itis a puff of smoke or a bird), The image is not the Chinese speaker's picture of an inert substance licing flat on a surface or the con- duit image of a bounded container, and definitely not the conduit but an image of something capable of motion on is own. Similar images of things moving up and dispersing appear in the gestures of other Turkana speakers. Figure 6.6 illustrates a different speaker performing a gesture for the concept of having nothing—oniy your body, a she says: Figure 66, A non-conduit meta: hore gesture by a second Turkana Speaker forthe idea of having noth ing ("he had only his body". ‘Again, there i the image of some- ‘hing ising up, The final handshape resembles a conduit but the movements quite diferent. “This opening up of space to exhibit, nothingness may be univers (6.8) la lowangkayeabuni_aye [akwan] from side over he-brought over [his-body] “from over there he brought only his body" Mesaphoric: something rises up and disappears—ber image of nothingness. ‘To understand these metaphoric gestures fally we would need much ‘more insight into the cultural belies of the Turkana people. But we can at least say that Turkana metaphoric gestures suggest an image of abstract concepts very different from our own. In this image abstract concepts are not manipulated, as they are in the conduit, and may not be con- trolled by the individual personality, but are entities capable of moving on their own. Metaphors Utilizing Space ‘There are cohesive uses of space where characters are assigned their own. spatial regions and subsequent references to the characters are accom panied by gescutes in “their” specific space (see chap. 7). Space also can be Gesrures of the Abstract 158 given semantic content; inthis it is used metaphorically. The speaker can conceive of the plot line, its dramatic content, and the characters as ob- jects with a layout in space. Thus one part of the story can be set aside in space A and a contrasting part in space B. The following is an example ‘where space is dichotomized to represent the relative moral statuses of three characters. The speaker places the actors according to his moral evaluations (see fig. 6.7). There is an opposition between the left space for the actual moral status ofthe characters, and two non-left spaces for their ascribed moral status. The speaker Further subdivided the non-left space (ascribed, not real, morality) into the “bad guy” to the front and the “good guys” to the right. As Kevin Tuite writes about this example, “The speaker has in effect represented the plot of the discourse as a spatially-extended object, with distinct loci corresponding to distinct plot components” (Tuite, to appear): @) (b) Figur 67. Spt meahor sting vp contin spats for mora saute. Due (8) ‘Bows ihe puso stro pod gral (aie fora Sls ofeily i kl” Pel (©) oir oh cece for sed tsa fa” Pue (2) goes ck thet or sel an fel il im” The or eee cag te moral postin of ood and ian te and ein aspen oped wih shane meaning (69) eveeyone’s morals are very ambiguous (6.10) “cause [they're sup]posed to be the good guys Metaphor space 1: lft hana points righ fr Sood guys.” (6.11) [but she} really did kil him Metaphoric space 2: right hand maves lft into center and lead tern lef for actual ac, (6.12) and {he’s a] bad guy Metaphor space 1: hands move to frons fr Sbad.gry.” (6.13) (but he really didn’t kil him Metaphor space 2: bands and head mave to left again for actual act.156 Varieties of Gesture ‘The moral ambiguity the speaker found in the film was visualized as space, then, and laid out like a map with spatial regions for the moral conflict. The absolute spatial assignments (left versus nonleft or front versus right) had no significance in themselves: what mattered was the oppositions. ‘A metaphoric use of space appears in narratives regardless of the lan- guage being spoken. I can’t say ifthe spatial metaphors are the same in every language, but there are no obvious interinguistic differences in the ‘use of space metaphorically Metaphors Based on Beams and Auras In addition to the conduit image of language, knowledge, genre, ec, as substance in a container, a number of gestural metaphors present con cepts of translucence, shadows, and mental states. A system of schemas provides images of these concepts by playing on the idea of a beam or Figure 6.8, Edo ina poster that ppeared around he University of | “Toronto in the sume of 1980, Gestures ofthe Abstract 187 aura, Some ofthe gestures embody ancient physical theories, which con- timue to live on secretly in gesture form. METAPHORS OF TRANSLUCENCE. The ancients were puzzled by how ‘we are able to sce objects that le at a distance. Various theories were of- fered, onc that the eye sent out beams that contacted the objects; seeing, was thus likened to the familiar process of touching, The beams were called “eidola.” Figure 68 illustrates recent example froma poster that appeared around the University of Toronto in the summer of 1990.) A common metaphoric gesture for vision has the hands depict beams leav- ing the cyes in the direction of the thing being seen. The ancient eidola theory lives on, in gesture form. A variation of this eidola gesture is the following where a speaker describes a scene from a Hitchcock film in \which there are superimposed images. This situation is depicted with cidola leaving the viewer and passing through translucent people. Thus, beams passing through an object also present the concept of translucence (see fig. 6.9): Figure 69. Ekols ina gesture for transparency. This accompanied "you can see through the people {into ber.” The right hand moves past che plane of the lft and rotates Ssiemoves, Themeapbor or ‘mansparencyieidola passing through he target (6.14) people are walking by her and you can_ see indugh the people Emo (One hand held up for “the people” while the other hand for “seeing” moves past she frst hand, ‘One hand thus represents the translucent people and the other the cidola passing through them. The question is not whether the speaker believes in the ancient theory of eidola; he certainly does not. But, unwit- tingly, he reinvoked it and in some sense the old theory was present, giv-158 Varieties of Gesture ing the visual process an active role of penetrating objects to reach the target of sight behind them. METAPHORS OF MENTAL STATES. Beams or auras also are uscd to refer to mental states and mental operations. In the following, the gesture de- picts wonderment emanating from the head (see fig. 6.10) Figure 6.10, Beams emanating From the het fora psychological state. This gesture accompanied “ying int ee are [wondering] why all the animals are running ava." The state makes itself known bbyan aura around the hea. (6.15) souh she’s fying into the area [wondering] why all the ani- mals are running away Metaphorie: bands radiate aay from head for beams of wondering why.” This movement of the hands away from the face or head is a quite fre- {quent gesture for manifestations ofall kinds. In films of Japanese speakers, Thave seen gestures depicting beams that radiate out from the stomach. ‘This corresponds to che traditional Japanese metaphoric locus inthe gut for feelings, thoughts, and mental activities in general. Thus, the source of the beams may differ as a specific cultural property but beams them selves seem to be a widespread image of mental states. METAPHORS OF SHADOWS. A gesture depicting a shadow makes use of the same theory of outward radiating eidola, but now it is the shadow that departs the body and moves off through space (the expression, “to cast a shadow,” embodies the same metaphor). In the following, again from the Georgian narrative, a shadow is depicted as detaching from a petson and moving through space and finally hitting a wall (se fig 6.11; only the English translation is provided) (6.16) [you see a shadow . .. the shaclow of aman in a top hat} Right hand is at arm’s length, with the palm to self for the wall. Left band Gestures of the Abstract 1) Figate 6.11, A shadow being “cast (of to contact surface. This ac- companied (in Georgian) [you see shadow ... theshadow ofa man inatophat]" Theft hand—the shadott—moves slowly upto the plane of the right hand which ces the peaker (tis the wal) This ges ture was immediately followed by another wire the left hand—the shadow hand drew an outine at the plane locus of che top-hated figure slay moves forward to line of right hand, with the palma so from for the mioy- ing shadow. Left hand then outlines shape of man in top hat. “The right hand faces the speaker to show the location of the wall; the left hhand faces away from the speaker and is the shadow. The moving hand {Bocs our to the plane of the other hand but is aimed to the side of it, Which shows that the wall was the plane, not just the hand. The two palms are oriented toward each other, the palm in general being the busi- ness side of the hand, and this is the image of the shadow as an entity gliding through space to the wall. The slow pace of the hand is a farther significant feature. In the film the shadow is shown ominously creeping, forward and upward onto the door as the shadow-caster slowly ap- proaches. The gesture presents the low speed of this approach as a slow moving shadow itself. All of these images play with the basic eidola image. Metaphors of Change Finally, we reach gestural metaphors of dynamic processes. Gestures are particulatly expressive in this domain since the gestures themselves are ‘dynamic. Gestures of change are among the most elaborate that one finds. In the second example below, the metaphor turns into a whole sys- tem of gestures. ‘TRANSITION. Metaphors for transitions or processes in general always scem to include some clement of rotation: the gesture conveys the transi- tion as repetitive and/or cyclic, an image that appears to be based on ro- tating wheels or gears, although there are no wheels or gears. In the following, the speaker refers to a transition in the film (sce fig. 6.12)Varieties of Gesture Figure 6.12. A metaphoric gerture fo rasition or proces, Thiac: ‘companied “and now [we ge ino the story proper.” The metaphor fo a proces is something rotating. cyclically repetitively. (6.17) and now [we get] into the story proper Mesaphoric: bands supporting an object (conduit image) rotate (3X) and move forward (spatial image). ‘This was in fact a multi-metaphor gesture, There is a conduit object, for the concept of the film as an entity; forward motion in space, for the con: ‘eptofentering; and rotation for the process—the whole is the speaker's image of transition into the main part of the movie. ‘TRANSFORMATION. The next example employs space metaphorically to present a highly complex transformation, The Georgian speaker was de- seribing.a scene from the film in which Hitchcock had cleverly joined two scenes through the use of form, space, action, and time. One character (Alice) has killed another (che artist. In teror after het act she wanders the streets of London, reexperiencing scenes of the murder. She comes across a drunk lying on the street with his hand extended, in the same posture as the dead man. Then Hitchcock transforms the image of Alice in the strect into a second image of the artist’s landlady when she dis- covers the dead man, This was described by the narrator as follows (giv- ing only the English translation): “At this point a scream is heard from her, but this seream changes suddenly. The scream continues but the face changes and you see that landlady, who is standing exactly the same way as this woman stood in the street, and she is looking ata hand, but this is really the dead person's han.” Repeatedly gestures leave the left space, which isthe scene with Alice, and enter the tight space, which is the scene with the landlady (sec fig. 6.13), The gesture space was divided into old scene/new scene from the first, and the transformation of the frst scene into the second was visu- Gesture of the Abstract 161 Figure 6.13, The Georgian speakers transformation of one ‘ene into another. This movement ‘wat repented several times, once FOr tach paral changeover. The meta phor is complex: the lef side isthe rs sene; the right side i the new scene; and the movements the teansformation of the fst sene ino the second. alized as a piece-by-piece shifting of the left gesture space over to the right gesture space. The space was thus divided, and the visual and acous- tic lines with which Hitchcock linked the scenes became successive ges- tural shifts from one space into the other. The speaker first shifted the scream, next the face, then the posture, and finally the hand itself, (Com- ‘ments are in boldface; brackets omitted.) (6.18) atthis point a scream is heard coming from her Left hand points = scream. She sets up the scream on the left. (6.19) buttthis scream changes suddenly Left bard bls in midi. vn She continues the Right hand swings forward and 10 the right. She contimues the scream on the left, and contrasts it to the space on the right, which is the trans- formation of the scream. (6.20) the scream continues Right band boldsin midair | ‘Left ban beats This reactivates the scream on the left while presery- ing the transformation on the right. (6.21) butthe face changes Left hand holds in midair. aes formation i Right band swings forward and right again. Again, a transformation is accompanied by a gesture toward the right space, while the scream is held at the left.162 Varieties of Geseure (6.22) and you ¢: Left band bls Right hand moves down and forward. This introduces one of the results ofthe transformation—the landlady—into the right space for trans- formations. (6.23) who is standing exactly the same way Left band bol in midase Right hand moves up and back. This is a spatial gesture depicting the landlady standing in the transformation space. Meanwhile, the scream hand is continuing on the left. (6.24) as this woman stood in the street Right band beld in upright position Left band loops down ana to the right. The right hand is held in its posi- tion to be the landlady standing and the left hand, which had been the scream in the first scene, is now transferred to the right space, the space of transformations, and this space now has become the trans- formed scene ints entirety. see that landlady This first scene has now been totally transformed into the second scene. From now on, in perfect accord with the basic left-right division of the space, all gestures with either hand are performed in the tight space, the space of the new scene, back at the artst’s fat. (6.28) and she’s looking at a hand Right band bel in upright postion Left hand points down to right. ‘The landlady is standing (right hand) and looking down (pointin; bylefehand); allofthis sin the right space. poms (6.26) but this is really the dead person's hand Right band held in upright position Left hand again points down io right. The right space is still used since the transformation is complete. ‘This gestural solution to the problem of describing an extremely com plex cinematic transformation was completely spontancous. The succes- sive shifts took place fluently as the links between scenes came up in speech, Conclusion of Metaphors in Narrative ‘An implication ofthe phenomenon of metaphoric gestures (of any kind) is that the abstraciness of an idea is no barr to its receiving» concrete Gestures ofthe Abstract 163 reality in gesture form, Movements of the hands are perfectly capable of expressing abstractions. Conduit and spatial metaphors are instantly available, Metaphoric gestures are outnumbered by iconics in narratives, but this is because of the content of the narrative, not any inaccessibility of the gesture itself. On the contrary, metaphorics are among the most frequent of all gestures in other genres, especially conversations and lec- tures. Concepts That Take Shape ‘Metaphoric gestures differ not only culturally, but aso individually. Each speaker may come up with his or her own images of the abstract. This follows from the nature of metaphoric gestures. They create homologics between concepts and image schemata, and this creativity leaves room for individuality. The images are idiosyncratic but share a core of mean- ing, The same core schema, such as the conduit or investing space with abstract meaning, can give rise to quite different looking gestures. None- theless, the gestures that present these images could arise from the same schema. The title ofthis section is taken from Rudolph Amheim’s book, Viswal Thinking (1969). In one chapter, Arnheim presented drawings by col- Jege students who had been asked to depict in graphic form such abstract concepts as past, present, and future, or a good marriage and a bad mar- riage. Figure 6.14 shows drawings of past, present, and furure done by students of my own, who were assigned some of Amnheim’s concepts. The drawings are in effect, metaphoric gestures on paper. Amheim in- deed referred to such drawings as metaphors: “This spontaneous use of metaphor demonstrates not only that human beings are naturally aware (b) Figure 614. Drawings by two students for dhe concepts of pst, present, and ture (co leeted folowing Armheim 1969). The drawings depict iferencimages either of which ‘oul be exhibited in gesture Frm, Panel (a) shows the fuses chante, (D)asempey-164 Varieties of Gesture of the structural resemblance uniting physical and non-physical objects and events; one must go further and assert that the perceptual qualities of shape and motion are present in the very acts of thinking depicted by the gestures and are in fact the medium in which the thinking itself is taking place” (118). Drawing (a), for example, was described by the student who created it in these words: “Past: solid, yet fading in memory; pre- sent: concrete and vivid; future: unknown, chaotic,” We would expect a metaphoric gesture for the past by this student would also highlight solidity—for instance, a solid object moving out of sight over the shoulder. Conversely, his idea of the farure would suggest a gesture in which the depiction is of chaos—the hands wiggling or Hopping, for in- stance. Drawing (b), from another student, was described as follows: “Past is filled; present is occupied with one thought, action; future empty because it is not known,” Her gesture for the past might also high- light solidity, but her gesture for the future should look quite different— a quiet openness presented, perhaps, in the hands parting to create an empty space. Such drawings, like metaphoric gestures themselves, are idiosyncratic images of past and future. Yer the rwo students’ very dilfer- ent images of the future share a common opposition to the past which they portray as something solid and locked up. Though superficially dif- ferent, both are component images of a system with a common thread, Such images ate comprehensible to others since they capture “structural resemblances” or homologies. The “very acts of thinking” ofthe subjects are sharable and communicable in this way even though idiosyncratic. Gesture of Mathematicians next describe a specialized type of conduit gesturing that accompanies the technical discourse of mathematicians. In certain respects these ges- tures are unlike the narrative gestures that we have examined so far. The ‘same gestures appear with different speakers and appear in much the same form in a range of different contexts; a gesture with a certain mean- ing has a more or less constant form; and the gestures cover single con- cepts. In all these respects mathematicians’ gestures depart from the global-synthetic plan of narrative gestures. Yet, mathematicians’ gestures resemble ordinary gestures in co-occurring with speech, being appar- ently unconscious, not combining with other gestures, and being them selves not composed out of parts. The gestures ate thus somewhere on the road to a gesture language, but are not all the way there. Jacques Hadamard, himselfa mathematician, published in 1945 a slim Gestures of the Abstracs 165 volume entitled, The Pycholagy of Invention in the Mathematical Field, in which he claimed that mathematicians think primarily in terms of im- ages, both visual and kinesthetic, and only secondarily in terms of sym- bols (including mathematical symbols). This was his own experience and was also the experience of many other mathematicians who responded to a worldwide survey that Hadamard conducted, Hadamard gave an ex- ample (76~77) from his own reasoning to show how images carry math- ‘ematical meaning, which is repeated below. He is proving that there is a pprime number greater than 11 (I cannot say if this is at all interesting from a mathematical point of view, but the psychology of itis interesting; the “Pin the following is Hadamard): Steprin the Proof Hiadamaé’s Imagery ‘A, Teonsider alle primes from 2t0 11, Tse confised mas. sy 2,3,5,7,11 1B. Tformtheirpeoduct: 2x 3x 8X7 ——Nbeing arsther large number, I imagine XIAN. a poine rather remote from the cone Fed mat. . Cincease chat product by 1, say N see a second point litle beyond the pls fist. D. That number, ifnota prime, most Tee a place somewhere benseen the admit of prime divisor, which iste conse mase and the first poi Fequired number, Itis not surprising that there should be gestural manifestations of these kinds of images. The images are mathematical in their references, but visual-kinesthetic in their presentation. In the Kantian framework, we ‘can suppose that the images are products of schematas for mathematical, ideas, ust as “I | | | was the product of the schema for the concept of fiveness. We could call Hadamard’s imagery metaphors of mathematical concepts of sts, products, divisors, and the like, Thus thinking in terms of images imbued in this way with mathematical significance, mathe ‘maticians could generate gestures that also are metaphors of mathemati- cal ideas. Some years ago I made a videotape of a technical discussion between two mathematicians (Robert A. Morris and Michael P. Anderson)? ‘These speakers did indeed perform gestures in which mathematical con- cepts were realized as visual-kinesic forms, as will be described below. 2. This ecording was made in 1975. Atehe ime we all were members of the Institute foc Advanced Study a Princeton,166 Varieties of Gesture DUALS. For example, the concept of a mathematical dual was accom- panied by gestures in which the hand rotates berween two positions (in a dual, a relation is replaced by its converse). The following is an illustra- tion (from McNeill 1987; see fig. 6.15): Figure 6.15. A mathematicians gesture forthe concept oF 3 dual ‘with this gives [completed sly.” Typically, duality gestures Involvea rotation, (6.27) this gives a [complete duality] Metaphor: right band presents the iden ofa sal by looping upward. ‘The key feature in this gesture was the alternation. Other references to duality were accompanied by the same key feature although details might be different (rather than looping up, the hand might flop sideways, for example). Uanars. Other gestures also focused on particular key features that were appropriate for their particular mathematical concepts. The idea of a rect limit was accompanied by straight-line trajectories followed by “end- marking” (a tensed stop). A straight line with an endpoint appears to be ‘an appropriate picture of a direct limit. An inverse limit, in contrast, was ‘made by looping the hand downward and then upward. Itis hard to say ‘whether this i an appropriate image of inverseness, although such is pos- sible Tam told. Itis also possible that the inverse limit gesture was con- structed to contrast with the direct limit gesture, Here are wo examples, first a direct limit and then an inverse limit: A direct limit (see fig. 6.16 at the top of page 167) (6.28) so the continuous linear dual is gonna be a [direct] limit Metaphor: band depicts a straight line with an endpoint An inverse limit (see fig, 6.17): Gestures ofthe Abstract 167 =a — igure 6.16, The mathematicians gesture forthe concept of dec limit with“ the cottinaoss linear dual is gonna be 3 (dice) imi” Direct limits involve straight line ‘mavements with end marking (sich an abrape hale Figure 6.17. The mathematician’s gesture forthe concept ofan in ‘verse foie with is an [inverse limit} of pro-Arcinian rings.” The downward loop is typical ofthis concept (6.29) it’s an [inverse limit] of pro-Artinian rings Metaphor: hand shows convoluted downward and then upwaval line wish an endpoint. sPeEcH ERROR. Another example of a limit gesture appeared during a speech error in which one of the speakers said, “this gives an inverse limit,” but performed a direct limit gesture, The other speaker corrected the mistake and replied, “a direct limit,” and also made a direct limit ges- ture. The first speaker then accepted the correction, made a third direct limit gesture, and repaired the words, “I mean a direct limit.” The error vwas therefore confined to the speech channel, and was a purely verbal er- ror, while the gesture proceeded in terms ofthe appropriate metaphoric image. What took place in this error demonstrates Hadamard’s claim that thought in mathematics is more closely connected to imagery than to language. The error also points to the theory that the gesture (and thea Varieties of Gestuce imagery behind it) isthe initial form of the uterance and that lexical pro- cesses come later. (6.30) isan finverse limit] .. of “Mesaphoric: hand shows a straight line with an endpoint. (6.31) (Listener) it’s. direct] limit ‘Metaphor: hand also shows straight line with endpoint. (6.32) Imean a [direct] limit Metapboric: hand again shows straight line wich endpoint, OTHER CONCEPTS. The mathematicians had distinctive gestures for cother mathematical concepts, such as quotients, factoring, maps, flat= ness, and compactness finiteness; each was distinct from the others, con- stant in terms of the key features preserved over different occurrences, and similar between the two speakers. Finiteness and compactness, for ‘example, were a tightly bounded space, flatness a flat plan, factoring and ‘quotients a vertical separation of space, ete. MATHEMATICIANS? GESTURES AS “WORDS,” An observation that sug- gests 2 somewhat specialized gesture mode is the linguistic segments with which the gestures coincided. As the examples suggest, the spoken text included: “complete duality.” “direct,” “inverse limit,” and so forth; there were no gestures coinciding with plrases or clauses, let alone with complex sentences. Moreover, the gestures tended to coincide with nom- inal referring terms rather than with verbs, The narrowed temporal locus plus the tendency to associate with nouns suggests gestures that are not global and synthetic, but rather are segmented more ike words. Thus it may be appropriate to think of these gestures as imagistic words that take the place of linguistic words, at least within the confines of this particular interaction, and in this respect gestures with uses quite different from anything found in spontaneous narrative discourse. When Hadamard in- sists that mathematicians do not think with linguistic words, we should ask if instead they are thinking with gestural words. Other Kinds of Abstract Gestures The ability of gestures to refer to abstract meanings is not limited to met- aphorics. In particular, besides these imagistic gestures, beats and ab- stract uses of space greatly add to the expressive power of the gesture channel, Finally there are abstract uses of gesture repetition. Gertures ofthe Abstract 169 Beats ‘The semiotic value ofthe beat is that something is significant, not for its normal referential value, but because of is relationships to the overarch- ing discourse. [tis somewhat akin to using a highlighter in a written text. "The marked word is made to stand out of its normal context, and this highlighting sends us, the reader, in search of a different context for the ‘word, Extra emphasis on a word when itis in anormal contextinduces us to seek of invent different context for it, and beats function ina similar ‘way. Beats, in analogous fashion, signal that the word they accompany is prof some other context than the one that iti immediately presented in, Very often the external contexts the larger discourse. Although beats are simple as movements, they are cognitively complex. They do not ‘emerge in children until age 5 and are not abundant until age 11 (chap. 11), The limiting factor appears to be whether the child has developed the narrative structures in terms of which discontinuities and relation ships to the external context can be defined. Young children have not yet developed them and thus have no basis for beats, despite the motoric simplicity of the gesture The following examples illustrate typical contexts in which beats ap- pear during narratives by adults and older childrens in every example, the beat marks the relationship of the word it coincides with to the larger context. RBParRs, The speaker mentioned one of the characters and decided to tase a more specific referring term: (6.33) and the bird... the ca[ NARJy -. throws a bowling ball Beat. ‘The beat marked the word that was the reparitsef, not the word deemed in need of repair (bied), With a repair, clearly, the relationship of the re- pairing word to its context, the word itis replacing, is crucial, and the beat highlights this relationship. NEW CHARACTERS. When a characteris introduced into a narrative, the ‘mention of the characteris important for its relationship to the story as @ whole, not for anything the character is then doing. For example, this ‘was the first mention of Granny in one narrative: (6.34) and [the old] woman who keeps Tweety ‘Beat170 Varieties of Gescare ‘The reference is not to the character performing an action in the story, but on a different level to her being introduced as a character. . ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, In the following, the introduction of a new character is accompanied by a conduit presentation gesture, but when her two names are mentioned, each is accompanied by a beat. ‘Moreover, the second beat accompanies exactly what was the added in- formation, viz., her family name, even though the first name was also re- peated: (6.35) his [git}friend . _Metaphorc: presenting the character (6.36) [Alice ... Alice [White] Bear ‘Beat SUPERIMPOSED ON OTHER GESTURES, The above examples of beats all occutred alone, when the speaker was departing briefly from the main story line to repair something, to introduce a character, to add further details, etc. It is also possible to highlight words in relation to other ges- tures. In these cases an iconic or metaphoric gesture has beats superim- posed on it. Each beat signals that the word it accompanies should be interpreted in relation to the gesture image. The following is such a case, where beats are added to an iconic gesture in the Chinese narrative of the film story: (6.37) yi_kan ba Llimian you [yige __tiao] qQ) (2) ‘once look you know [inside have [a-clasifer slip] ‘as she looks in you know, [theres [a slip)’ (2 Teonie: shows hands holding a slip of paper. (2) Superimposed beat (a). (6.38) nei_ftiaoshang] jiu xiede ba, ashi (3) that [slip-on] just write you know, ah be ling yige ren) _gei ta] _xiede @) other a-classfier person) give her] write ‘fon fe slip] there’s writing you know, ah written to her by [another Gases ofthe Abstract a (1 Teonie fr holding slip of paper continu. (3) anc (4) superimposed beats (8) andl (0 This example was analyzed with Nancy L. Dray (Dray and McNeill 1990) in the following way. Throughout the passage, papetholding was central to the scene, but first (beat a) it was a piece of paper regarded as paper (a physical object), then (beat b) it wasa piece of paper regarded as, ‘note (with writing on it), and finally (beat ¢) it was a piece of paper regarded as a message-bearer (transmitting a message from the other ‘man). Each of the points of reanalysis of the role of the paper was indi- cated by a beat superimposed on the iconic gesture of paper holding. ‘Maintaining the iconic gesture throughout, the speaker was maintaining, a focus on the paper (which corresponds to its importance in the scene of the movie), and at another level, marking contrasts within that con- tinuity, corresponding to the different ways the paper was being repre- sented. Thus, we find superimposed beats when narrators are presenting, ‘events on mukiple levels and relating words to an ongoing iconic ges- ture Bearing in mind the constant temporal relationship of gestures to speech, we can say from the phenomenon of superimposed beats that, in their primitive stages, utterances are already organized on both narrative and metanarrative levels (see chap. 7) Abstract Uses of Space ‘Gesture space itself can be endowed with abstract meaning, For example, a part of space can be identified with a particular character or place in the story. Then subsequent events involving that character or place may be accompanied by gestures in the same space, This produces a cohesive linkage, and often there are linguistic reflections of the cohesion in choices of words and sentence structures, and these might change when a new spacc is entered or the meaning of the space itself changes. This “en: dowed space” motivates both abstract pointing—the pointing finger aimed at a concept—and an axial division of space into different roles or meanings. The first example here shows this axial division where two slices of space represent two roles in the story. SPLITTING THE GESTURE SPACE. My illustration comes from another of the full-length film narratives. The speaker was setting up a new scene (the characters had already appeared in earlier scenes), and said:* “she 3, The null sign is used to indicate the locus in speech of deleted grammatical subjees—sometime refered to a5 “nullubjects.”in Varieties of Gesoure [picks up a] palette of his [and f attempts to do a painting] which she does not do very well and then [what he} does is [he steadics her hand to complete] just a-a line sketch and [then she] signs the painting and sits down and {he gets} her a drinkand [B starts to play the piano]as artists of that time y’know were wont to do.” The linguistic references to the two characters are thoroughly interleaved. However, gesturaly, the refer- ences were separated into two spaces (only the utterances accompanied by gestures are represented) (6.39) Center Space (male character) Right Space (male character) she picks up a palette and 6 attempts to do a paint- then what he does is he steadies her hand then she signs the painting and he gets her a drink and B starts to play the piano Speech and gesture are coexpressive in this passage in two ways. The linguistic forms referring to the two characters show a progression from more explicit to less explicit, and this progression is defined separately for cach space. Morcover, entering or reentering a particular space was the ‘occasion for upping the explicitness of the referring form, In the female charactet’s space, the references are, successively, “she”— 8—“she.” The first pronoun declines to aero, thus a relatively more ex plicic referring form is followed by a less explicit one. These were succes- sive references within the same space, with the male character’s space not intervening, The zero subject then was followed by “she,” an increase of cexplicitness, and this was because the male character's space had inte:~ vened. Similarly with references in the male character’s space. The sequence was: “then what he does is”—“he—8, that is, a steady decline of ex: Plicieness. The overmarked reference, “then what he does is,” in which the referring form gets its own clause, creates a major discontinuity atthe first mention of the male character and the first time his space was used. (c&. Levy 1984). This was just after a double use of the female character's space. The speaker was thus introducing the spatial dichotomy as well as. the male character, The highly explicit marking of the refecring form, which at first seems so excessive, in fact was appropriate for cocx- Gastures of te Abstract 173 pressivity with the gesture. The rest ofthe references to the male charac- ter followed a steady decline within his space and are quite orderly in expressing, with gesture, the continuation of the artis’s space. ABSTRACT POINTING. Concrete pointing in a narrative uses space icon- ically. The left-right, up-down axes are homologous to the equivalent axes of the space occupied by events of the story. An example of such a referential use of pointing is this: (6.40) and [throws him off] the window sill Pointing: right band points to lower right space ‘The gesture depicts the trajectory and final destination of the character. ‘The path and destination iconically represent the layout in the cartoon itself Pointing also has an abstract function in narratives, and itis this kind of pointing —abstract pointing —that we will focus on. This isa gesture ‘where the speaker appears to be pointing at empty space, but in fact the space is not empty; it is full of conceptual significance. Such abstract deixis implies a metaphoric use of space in which concepts are given spa- tial form, and this space can be indexed by pointing. The objects are not actually present, but the compulsion to point at their space remains. In the following two examples, the speaker is at a point of transition in his narrative and is introducing a new character and new development in the plot: (6.41) and in facta few minutes later we see [the artist] Pointing: right hand points to lefeside of pace ‘The gesture was synchronous with mentioning the artist for the first time. Orienting to the artist was paramount. This characteris referred to again in the following clause and there i again a pointing gesture indicat- ing the same space, but now the gesture is timed with the reference to an action. The space has been revalued and indexed as the space of the scene itself. These abstract uses of pointing perform major discourse functions (chap. 7). (6.42) and uh she [looks over] Fran! Points to left side of space again. houlder at him SHIFTS OF ORIGO. Thus far we have defined pointing in terms of the target of pointing. Pointing, however, is more complex. Iti inherently orientational. The speaker orients toward a target and a region of space.174 Varieties of Gesture ‘A pointing finger iconically depictsa line that runs from an “origo” to the target (the term “origo” is from Biller 1934 also sce Jarvella and Kein 1982), A pointing gesture is thus complicated, it consists of three parts Origo— Referent Object where the gesture proper depicts the line that connects the origo to the target. The origo implied in the gesture can be identified by tracing back the line to its starting point; this is not always the speaker himself. For ‘example, in the following, from a conversation, a speaker contrasts two kinds of pointing, the first with an origo not at himself, the second with the origo shifted to his own locus, and these correspond roan attempt 0 shift the thematic content of the conversation (fg. 6.18 and 6.19): Figure 6.18, Poining gesture with ‘origo not tse with "id you [go to) school [there) or uh?” The speak i orienting the listener to the listeners space for “there” and this fivors the oigo ro the side. (Compare with fig. 6.19.) Figure 6.19, Pointing gesture with corigo at self with “oh an" you went rovundergraduae here)?” The “ere in question s where the speaker is located, The speaker it ‘orienting himself tothe space and the origo shifts to refer this, (Compare with Bg. 6.18.) Guseres of the Abstract 175 (6.43) did you [go to) school {there} or uh? ‘Points with an rig of tothe side: orienting from someplace other than self (6.44) (Interlocutor: I did go to school there, T went to school here also, umso [came back kind ofl war) (6-48) oh an’ you went to undergraduate {here] or? ‘Points but with erigo naw at self orienting from self The gesture at (6.43) had an origo nota the speaker and implied that the speaker was establishing someone, not himself asthe origin of the space for “there.” The gesture at (6.45), when the origo swung to himself, im- plied that he was now orienting for himself. This self-origo wasiin fact the first to be used by this speaker. The preceding pointing gestures, in- cluding the one in (6.43), had origos not at himself. The complete mean- ing of (6.43) thus seems to have been: in relation to you, did you goto school “there?” In contrast, the meaning of (6.45) was: in relation to me, did you go to schoo! “here.” The first space left it open to the listener to define “there,” bur the second space could only be a here” defined by the speaker. These examples are from the cat-and-mouse interaction that I presented in chapter 4 to illustrate gestural mind reading, The speaker of (6.43) and (6.45) was attempting to find out where the listener had gone to school, and the listener had merely said, “at Chicago.” The new orig at (6.45) can be seen as part of the speaker’s attempt to pin down the listener, By insisting on his own person as the origo, he could exclude the ambiguous reference to Chicago that had been the listener's way of avoiding disclosure. The gesture at (6.45) could only be the University cof Chicago, while the gesture at (6.43) and earlier could have been any- where the listener imagined himself to be. The word selection, “under- graduate,” in (6.45) had the same effect of excluding the city meaning as the referent of “here,” since only a university has undergraduates. Thus the origo shift and the word choice (through its implications) were the coexpressive clements in this situation Gesture Repetsions Sometimes gestures are repeated but rarely isthe second gesture an exact repetition ofthe fist. Ifa contrast is implied, the second gesture may be ‘enhanced, The enhancement conveys the contrast. On the other hand, if a gesture is repeated without an implied contrast the second gesture usually a diminished version of the first. The diminution conveys the lack of contrast. Thus we have two opposite situations, gesture enhancement (for contrast) and gesture diminution (for lack of contrast). The follow- ing are two illustrative examples,176 Varieties of Gesture ENHANCEMENT. The contrast is between uses of space on two levels. The first gesture is pointing that sets up a locus in the narration itself (thae’s my father’s newsstand?) The second gesture is also pointing but now it sets up a repair of the speaker's own speech (“not newsstand, news sHor”), The values of the spaces aré quite different—one part of the story line, the other part of the speaker’s own discourse—and this con- tras mathe with enancement (forward movementis added) (ei 20): (b) Figure 6.20. Gestural enhancement of meaning, Panel a) shows the gestute with “that’s {oy father's newsstand; chs sets up che newsstand in the eft space. Panel (b) shows the {enhanced poine with the correction, “not [newsstand] [news s¥00]” The pointing ind ‘ates further space onthe lft and mark the dierence berween referring to the news stand fist gesture) and referring ona metalinguisic or metapragmtic evel the speaker's own discourse (the point). (6.46) that’s [my father’s newsstand @ (L) Deictc: band swings ra left (6.47) not [newsstand] [news SHOP] (2) @) (2) Deicic: hand swings forward and 0 right, (3) Deictic: band swings formara and left ‘The gesture at (1) is to the left; that at (2) is to the right (contrast of negation); the one at (3) is the enhancement and conveys the speaker’s metalinguisticrepaie. DIMINUTION. The following example again includes a metalinguistic comment, butin this case the comment belittles the concurrent utterance Gestures ofthe Absracs 7 (with the word “whatever”) and doesn't bring in contrasting informa- tion (sce fig. 6.21), and the second gesture is about half the physical size ofthe first. (6.48) oh and then you sce him trying to get into the apartment a ‘over some wires and [it the the trolley car... | eon: shows maving tally connector (fig. 6210). (6.49) [wires whatever] Teonie: repeats showing the connector, but much smaller (fig. 6.218). (b) @ P WV/\ STs bw a AQ. Mery fs i g l F swith vires whatever)” The dis- paregement of the word choice ‘vires by whatever” is conveyed inthe diminution, CONTINUATION, A different type of gesture repetition is the following. Inthis case, the same iconic handshape is maintained throughout a series, of descriptive statements, each of which occurred with its own gesture performed with the other hand. The maintained handshape created a cohesive ink uniting all the statements and other gestures. At the end of the string of statements, the speaker referred to the entity that had been depicted all along in the continued gesture, and utilized for this a definite referring noun phrase (implying that the entity wes an established refer- ent; Chafe 1976). ‘The speaker was describing a scene in the movie in which a character is shown lying in bed holding a newspaper. The narrator's left hand per- forms a gesture for holding the newspaper, and this was preserved throughout che description, Simmultancously, the right hand performed a series of different gestures for the successive clauses (6.50) he’s [in his bed] Toomic: holding the “newspaper” with bis eft band. - (6.51) and he can sce [the door] Iconic: balding the “newspaper” with his left hand. « ‘Paints to right with right hand,178 Varieties of Gesture (6.52) from [a mirror] which is on the other side of the room Teonie: bolding the “newspaper” with bis left band. « Points to front with right band. (6.53) hejust [sces him] in the mieror Iconic: balding the “newspaper” with bis left band. - Teonie: right hand wipes across “mirror surface. (6.54) and uh he’s [trying] Teonie: bath hands bold the “newspaper.” - (6.55) {to put down the paper stowty] Iconic: bth bands slowly move the “newspaper” downward, - ‘The narrator refers to the newspaper verbally for the firs time only in (6.55), but the reference is made with a definite noun phrase, “the pa- per,” not “a paper.” To the speaker, the newspaper was an established, recoverable object in the scene and he presents it as such to the listenet (cf. Chafe 1974, 1976). The newspaper in fact had been present in the scene all along, but only as an image, not as a verbally designated entity, and this image was enough to bring out definite reference to it SELF-GENERATION OF OPPOSITIONS THROUGH REPETITION. The forward movement of the hand with “news SHOP” conveyed nothing, ‘about news shops or the location of the news shop in relation to the ‘newsstand (since they were one and the same thing); itconveyed only the ‘existence of a contrast between two levels of meaning. The “newsstand” of (6.41) was normal language, referring to something in the story, ‘whereas the “news SHOP” of (6.47) was metalanguage, referring to lan- ‘guage itself (in fact, to (6.46)). Many metaphoric gestures can be seen to form chains in this way in which mini-systems of opposition briefly ‘emerge. The diminution in (6.49) contrasted on the parameter of extent ‘of movement, and this also had no iconic significance; the content ofthe diminution was coexpressive with the spoken form “whatever.” These ‘ini-systems are not structures derived ftom the spoken language, but temporary structures, good only as long as these specific contrasts are at the forefront of the speaker’s thoughts (sce chap. 9) Conclusions ‘Metaphors, including metaphoric gestures, provide us with the power to think of the abstract in concrete terms—in images of space, form, and ‘movement that ate not just concrete images but that become abstract Geseres ofthe Abstract 179 concepts. Many psychological studies have demonstrated the efficiency ‘ofhuman thought in concrete contexts, and conversely, the striking lack Of efficiency of thought forced to deal with abstract modes of representa- tion such as the symbols of formal logic (Johnson-Laird 1983). Meta- pphoric images thus can be said to play a crucial role in the effectiveness of hhuman thought; and gesture images, because they are ubiquitous and readily available, can be claimed to play this crucial role with great fre- ‘quency. This fact explains why metaphoric gestures are such a common accompaniment of speech in narrations and conversations and why ap- parently all cultures provide schematas for constructing homologies be- ‘ween abstract content and concrete imagery. Metaphoric images are the culture's way of influencing individuals’ thought. Society cannot directly control thinking, but it does influence it by providing schemata for creat- jing metaphoric images. ‘What can we conclude about the metaphoric process itself The crca- tion of homologies depends on an ability to consider space, movement, tc, in anew light. Itis notjust space, movement, et., but these qualities imbued with abstract content. The important thing about metaphoric imagery is thats simultaneously concrete and abstract, and this is what theefficiency of thought requires. There is therefore ameta-level capacity inherent in metaphoric thinking, Philosophers such as Max Black (1982) and I. A. Richards (1936) have emphasized the “interanimation” of the ‘Topic and Vehicle; the psychologists Glucksberg and Keysar (1990) em- phasize the formation of new categories by combining the Topic with the Vehicle. But, in addition, the Vehicle is used for conveying, nor just an ‘image, but an image felt to be homologous with abstract content, This image isthe abstract thought. The meta-level process indeed forms a new category, as Glucksberg and Keysar maintain, and depends on inter- animation, as Black and Richards proposed, but it also reveals a capacity tothink about one thing in two ways. Without this capacity, we would be confined to concrete levels of thought or to assaults on the abstract that are painfully inefficient and prone to error. Young children in fact do seem to have a limited capacity to adopt meta-level perspectives, even though they are not limited in their ability to see the world in terms of novel or fanciful imagery. The almost total absence of metaphoric ges- tures in children until a late stage of development thus emphasizes the importance of meta-level thinking in the creation of gesturcs of the ab- stract (see chap. 11),