Volume 16, Issue 1
  • ISSN 1568-1475
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9773
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



Research on manual gesture has been preoccupied with unconventionalized and conventionalized extremes. Homesigns developed spontaneously by deaf children unexposed to standardized sign languages have been used as a window onto more general socio-cognitive processes of semiotic systemization. Spontaneous, idiosyncratic gesticulation has been contrasted with shared, highly regimented “emblematic” or “quotable” gestures to reveal a cline of conventionalization. I direct attention here to the vast and relatively understudied middle ground in which manual gesture shows evidence of only partial conventionalization. Using a corpus of televised political debate data from a US presidential campaign cycle, I note, first, that there is nothing as coherent and systematized as a “register” of political gesture here. Focusing on gesture variation in precision-grip and index-finger-extended gestures of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, I identify form-functional “pragmatic affinities” among gestures that have not crystallized into stable types or classes. Dwelling on the specificities of gesture variation, with its mercurial forms and incomplete conventionalization, may allow us to appreciate the processual complexities of gestural enregisterment in social and historical life.

This work is currently available as a sample.

Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Agha, Asif
    (2007) Language and social relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Austin, John
    (1962) How to do things with words. Edited byJ. O. Urmson. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bate, Bernard
    (2009) Tamil oratory and the Dravidian aesthetic: Democratic practice in South India. New York: Columbia University Press. 10.7312/bate14756
    https://doi.org/10.7312/bate14756 [Google Scholar]
  4. Beaver, David I. & Brady Z. Clark
    (2002) The proper treatments of focus sensitivity. InLine Mikkelsen & Chris Potts (Eds.), WCCFL 21 Proceedings (pp.15–28). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Borges, Jorge Luis
    (1962) Funes, the memorious. InJorge Luis Borges, Labyrinths: Selected stories & other writings (pp.65–71). New York: New Directions.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Brentari, Diane, Marie Coppola, Laura Mazzoni, & Susan Goldin-Meadow
    (2012) When does a system become phonological? Handshape production in gesturers, signers, and homesigners. Nat Lang Linguist Theory, 30 (1), 1–31. doi:  10.1007/s11049‑011‑9145‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-011-9145-1 [Google Scholar]
  7. Brookes, Heather J.
    (2001)  O clever ʻHe’s streetwise.’ When gestures become quotable: The case of the clever gesture. Gesture, 1 (2), 167–184. doi:  10.1075/gest.1.2.05bro
    https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.1.2.05bro [Google Scholar]
  8. (2004) A repertoire of South African quotable gestures. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 14 (2), 186–224. doi:  10.1525/jlin.2004.14.2.186
    https://doi.org/10.1525/jlin.2004.14.2.186 [Google Scholar]
  9. (2011) Amangama amathathu ‘The three letters’: The emergence of a quotable gesture (emblem). Gesture, 11 (2), 194–218. doi:  10.1075/gest.11.2.05bro
    https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.11.2.05bro [Google Scholar]
  10. Calbris, Geneviève
    (2011) Elements of meaning in gesture. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi:  10.1075/gs.5
    https://doi.org/10.1075/gs.5 [Google Scholar]
  11. Enfield, Nick J.
    (2009) The anatomy of meaning: Speech, gesture, and composite utterances. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:  10.1017/CBO9780511576737
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511576737 [Google Scholar]
  12. Fleming, Luke, & Michael Lempert
    (2014) Poetics and performativity. InNick J. Enfield, Paul Kockelman, & Jack Sidnell (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of linguistic anthropology (pp.485–515). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:  10.1017/CBO9781139342872.023
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139342872.023 [Google Scholar]
  13. Fox, James J.
    (1974) Our ancestors spoke in pairs. InRichard Bauman & Joel Sherzer (Eds.), Explorations in the ethnography of speaking (pp.65–85). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Fromkin, Victoria
    (1980) Errors in linguistic performance: slips of the tongue, ear, pen, and hand. San Francisco: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Goffman, Erving
    (1956) The nature of deference and demeanor. American Anthropologist, 58, 472–502. doi:  10.1525/aa.1956.58.3.02a00070
    https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1956.58.3.02a00070 [Google Scholar]
  16. Goldin-Meadow, Susan
    (2014) Homesign: When gesture is called upon to be language. InCornelia Müller, Alan J. Cienki, Ellen Fricke, Silva H. Ladewig, David McNeill, & Sedinha Teßendorf (Eds.), Body – language – communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction. Vol.2 (pp.113–125). Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Goldin-Meadow, Susan & Heidi Feldman
    (1977) The development of language-like communication without a language model. Science, 197 (4301), 401–403. doi:  10.1126/science.877567
    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.877567 [Google Scholar]
  18. Goodman, Nelson
    (1972) Seven strictures on similarity. InNelson Goodman (Ed.), Problems and projects (pp.437–446). New York: Bobbs-Merrill Company.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Goodwin, Charles
    (2003) Pointing as situated practice. InSotaro Kita (Ed.), Pointing: where language, culture, and cognition meet (pp.217–241). Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Gundel, Jeanette K.
    (1999) On different kinds of focus. InPeter Bosch & Rob A. van der Sandt (Ed.), Focus: Linguistic, cognitive, and computational perspectives (pp.293–305). Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Gundel, Jeanette K. & Thorstein Fretheim
    (2006) Topic and focus. InLaurence R. Horn & Gregory L. Ward (Eds.), The handbook of pragmatics (pp.175–196). Malden, MA & Oxford: Blackwell. doi:  10.1002/9780470756959.ch8
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756959.ch8 [Google Scholar]
  22. Gundel, Jeanette K., Nancy Hedberg, & Ron Zacharski
    (1993) Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language, 69 (2), 274–307. doi:  10.2307/416535
    https://doi.org/10.2307/416535 [Google Scholar]
  23. Haviland, John B.
    (2013) The emerging grammar of nouns in a first generation sign language: Specification, iconicity, and syntax. Gesture, 13 (3), 203–247. doi:  10.1075/gest.13.3.04hav
    https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.13.3.04hav [Google Scholar]
  24. Kendon, Adam
    (1988) How gestures can become like words. InFernando Poyatos (Ed.), Cross-cultural perspectives in nonverbal communication (pp.131–141). Toronto: Hogrefe.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. (1990) Gesticulation, quotable gestures, and signs. InMichael Moerman and Masaichi Nomura (Eds.), Culture embodied (pp.53–78). Osaka, Japan: National Museum of Ethnology.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. (1992) Some recent work from Italy on ʻquotable gestures’ (ʻemblems’). Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 2, 92–108. doi:  10.1525/jlin.1992.2.1.92
    https://doi.org/10.1525/jlin.1992.2.1.92 [Google Scholar]
  27. (2004) Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge, UK & New York: Cambridge University Press. doi:  10.1017/CBO9780511807572
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511807572 [Google Scholar]
  28. Lempert, Michael
    (2011) Barack Obama, being sharp: Indexical order in the pragmatics of precision-grip gesture. Gesture, 11 (3), 241–270. doi:  10.1075/gest.11.3.01lem
    https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.11.3.01lem [Google Scholar]
  29. (2012a) Discipline and debate: The language of violence in a Tibetan Buddhist monastery. Berkeley: University of California Press. doi:  10.1525/california/9780520269460.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1525/california/9780520269460.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  30. (2012b) Where the action isn’t: Review article on Nick Enfield’sThe anatomy of meaning: Speech, gesture, and composite utterances. Language in Society, 41 (2), 259–266.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. (2014) Imitation. Annual Review of Anthropology, 43, 379–395. doi:  10.1146/annurev‑anthro‑102313‑030008
    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-anthro-102313-030008 [Google Scholar]
  32. Lempert, Michael & Michael Silverstein
    (2012) Creatures of politics: Media, message, and the American presidency. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Matoesian, Gregory & Kristin Enola-Gilbert
    (2016) Multifunctionality of hand gestures and material conduct during closing argument. Gesture, 15 (1), 79–114.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. McNeill, David
    (1992) Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. (2005) Gesture and thought. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. doi:  10.7208/chicago/9780226514642.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226514642.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  36. Morris, Desmond
    (1977) Manwatching: a field guide to human behaviour. London: Cape.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Newkirk, Don, Edward S. Klima, Carlene Canady Pendersen, & Ursula Bellugi
    (1980) Linguistic evidence from slips of the hand. InVictoria Fromkin (Ed.), Errors in linguistic performance: Slips of the tongue, ear, pen, and hand (pp.165–197). San Francisco: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Parmentier, Richard J.
    (1994a) Naturalization of convention. InRichard J. Parmentier (Ed.), Signs in society: Studies in semiotic anthropology (pp.175–190). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. (1994b) The semiotic regimentation of social life. InRichard J. Parmentier (Ed.), Signs in society: Studies in semiotic anthropology (pp.125–155). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Prince, Ellen F.
    (1981) Toward a taxonomy of given-new information. InPeter Cole (Ed.), Radical pragmatics (pp.223–255). New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Rains, Charleen
    (1992) “You die for life”: On the use of poetic devices in argumentation. Language in Society, 21, 253–276. doi:  10.1017/S0047404500015281
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500015281 [Google Scholar]
  42. Sandler, Wendy
    (2012) Dedicated gestures and the emergence of sign language. Gesture, 12 (3), 265–307. doi:  10.1075/gest.12.3.01san
    https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.12.3.01san [Google Scholar]
  43. Sapir, Edward
    (1921) Language: An introduction to the study of speech. New York: A Harvest/HBJ Book.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Schuler, Edgar A.
    (1944) V for victory: a study in symbolic social control. The Journal of Social Psychology, 19, 283–299.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Senghas, Ann
    (2003) Intergenerational influence and ontogenetic development in the emergence of spatial grammar in Nicaraguan Sign Language. Cognitive Development, 18 (4), 511–531. doi:  10.1016/j.cogdev.2003.09.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2003.09.006 [Google Scholar]
  46. Senghas, Ann & Marie Coppola
    (2001) Children creating language: How Nicaraguan sign language acquired a spatial grammar. Psychological Science, 12 (4), 323–328. doi:  10.1111/1467‑9280.00359
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00359 [Google Scholar]
  47. Silverstein, Michael
    (2003) Indexical order and the dialectics of sociolinguistic life. Language & Communication, 23 (3/4), 193–229. doi:  10.1016/S0271‑5309(03)00013‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0271-5309(03)00013-2 [Google Scholar]
  48. Singleton, Jenny L., Jill P. Morford, & Susan Goldin-Meadow
    (1993) Once is not enough: Standards of well-formedness in manual communication created over three different timespans. Language, 69 (4), 683–715. doi:  10.2307/416883
    https://doi.org/10.2307/416883 [Google Scholar]
  49. Streeck, Jürgen
    (2009) Gesturecraft: the manu-facture of meaning. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi:  10.1075/gs.2
    https://doi.org/10.1075/gs.2 [Google Scholar]
  50. Streeck, Jürgen
    (2008) Gesture in political communication: A case study of the Democratic presidential candidates during the 2004 primary campaign. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 41 (2), 154–186. doi:  10.1080/08351810802028662
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351810802028662 [Google Scholar]
  51. Tannen, Deborah
    (2007) Talking voices: repetition, dialogue, and imagery in conversational discourse (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:  10.1017/CBO9780511618987
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511618987 [Google Scholar]
  52. Teßendorf, Sedinha
    (2014) Emblems, quotable gestures, or conventionalized body movements. InCornelia Müller, Alan J. Cienki, Ellen Fricke, Silva H. Ladewig, David McNeill, & Sedinha Teßendorf (Eds.), Body – language – communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction, Vol.2 (pp.82–100). Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Uhmann, Susanne
    (1992) Contextualizing relevance: On some forms and functions of speech rate changes in everyday conversation. InPeter Auer & Aldo Di Luzio (Eds.), The contextualization of language (pp.297–336). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi:  10.1075/pbns.22.19uhm
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.22.19uhm [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): conventionalization; indexicality; pointing; politics; pragmatics; precision grip; register
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error