1887
Volume 16, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1568-1475
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9773
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

This paper lays out the foundations of a frame-based account of gesture pragmatics through detailing how frames and metonymy interact not only in motivating gestural sign formation, but also in guiding crossmodal processes of pragmatic inferencing. It is argued that gestures recruiting frame structures tend to profile deeply embodied, routinized aspects of (in the Fillmorian sense of the term), that is, of the motivating context of frames. Two kinds of embodied frame structures situated at different levels of abstraction, schematicity, and entrechment are proposed: (A) understood as directly experientially grounded frames involving physical action and interaction with the material and social world; (B) that are more detached from the motivating contexts of experience. It is further suggested that gestures exhibiting a comparably low degree of iconicity and/or indexicality are likely to assume pragmatic rather than referential functions. Finally, potential avenues for further research into the relation of scenes, frames, and (multimodal) constructions are outlined.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/gest.16.2.03mit
2018-01-12
2019-10-20
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Andrén, Mats
    (2010) Children’s gestures from 18 to 30 months. Lund: Centre for Languages and Literatures, Lund University.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. (2014) Multimodal constructions in children: Is the headshake part of language?Gesture, 14 (2), 141–170. doi: 10.1075/gest.14.2.02and
    https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.14.2.02and [Google Scholar]
  3. Arnheim, Rudolf
    (1969) Visual thinking. Berkeley & Los Angeles: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Barcelona, Antonio
    (2003) The case of a metonymic basis of pragmatic inferencing: Evidence from jokes and funny anecdotes. In Klaus-Uwe Panther & Linda Thornburg (Eds.), Metonymy and pragmatic inferencing (pp.81–102). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.113.07bar
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.113.07bar [Google Scholar]
  5. (2009) Motivation of construction meaning and form: The roles of metonymy and inference. In Klaus-Uwe Panther , Linda L. Thornburg , & Antonio Barcelona (Eds.), Metonymy and metaphor in grammar (pp.363–401). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/hcp.25.22bar
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.25.22bar [Google Scholar]
  6. Bavelas, Janet , Nicole Chovil , Douglas Lawrie , & Allan Wade
    (1992) Interactive gestures. Discourse Processes, 15, 469–489. doi: 10.1080/01638539209544823
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539209544823 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bavelas, Janet , Nicole Chovil , Jan L. Coates , & Lori Roe
    (1995) Gestures specialized for dialogue. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 394–405. doi: 10.1177/0146167295214010
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167295214010 [Google Scholar]
  8. Benazzo, Sandra & Aliyah Morgenstern
    (2014) A bilingual child’s multimodal path into negation. Gesture, 14 (2), 171–202. doi: 10.1075/gest.14.2.03ben
    https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.14.2.03ben [Google Scholar]
  9. Benczes, Reka , Antonio Barcelona , & Francisco José Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez
    (Eds.) (2011) Defining metonymy in cognitive linguistics. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/hcp.28
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.28 [Google Scholar]
  10. Bressem, Jana
    (2012) Repetitions in gesture: Structures, functions, and cognitive aspects. Ph.D. dissertation, European University Viadrina, Frankfurt (Oder).
  11. Bressem, Jana & Cornelia Müller
    (2014) The family of AWAY-gestures. In: Cornelia Müller , Alan Cienki , Ellen Fricke , Silva H. Ladewig , David McNeill , & Jana Bressem (Eds.), Body – language – communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction, Volume2 (pp.1592–1604). Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Calbris, Geneviève
    (1990) The semiotics of French gestures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. (2003) From cutting an object to a clear cut analysis. Gesture as the representation of a preconceptual schema linking concrete actions to abstract notions. Gesture, 3 (1), 19–46. doi: 10.1075/gest.3.1.03cal
    https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.3.1.03cal [Google Scholar]
  14. (2011) Elements of meaning in gesture. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/gs.5
    https://doi.org/10.1075/gs.5 [Google Scholar]
  15. Cienki, Alan
    (1998) Metaphoric gestures and some of their relations to verbal metaphoric expressions. In John-Pierre Koenig (Ed.), Discourse and cognition: Bridging the gap (pp.189–204). Stanford: CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. (2013a) Cognitive Linguistics: Spoken language and gesture as expressions of conceptualization. In Cornelia Müller , Alan Cienki , Elan Fricke , Silvia H. Ladewig , David McNeill , & Sedinha Tessendorf (Eds.), Body – language – communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction, Volume1 (pp.182–201). Berlin & Boston: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. (2013b) Mimetic schemas and image schemas in cognitive linguistics and gesture studies. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 11 (2), 417–432. doi: 10.1075/rcl.11.2.13cie
    https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.11.2.13cie [Google Scholar]
  18. Cienki, Alan & Cornelia Müller
    (Eds.) (2008) Metaphor and gesture. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/gs.3
    https://doi.org/10.1075/gs.3 [Google Scholar]
  19. Clark, Herbert H.
    (1996) Using language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511620539
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620539 [Google Scholar]
  20. (2003): Pointing and placing. In Sotaro Kita (Ed.), Pointing: Where language, culture, and cognition meet (pp.243–268). Mahwah, N.J. & London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Coulson, Seana
    (2001) Semantic leaps: Frame-shifting and conceptual blending in meaning construction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511551352
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511551352 [Google Scholar]
  22. Croft, William
    (1993) The role of domains in the interpretation of metaphor and metonymy. Cognitive Linguistics, 4, 335–370. doi: 10.1515/cogl.1993.4.4.335
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1993.4.4.335 [Google Scholar]
  23. Croft, William & Alan A. Cruse
    (2004) Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511803864
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511803864 [Google Scholar]
  24. Dancygier, Barbara & Eve E. Sweetser
    (2005) Mental spaces in grammar: Conditional constructions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511486760
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486760 [Google Scholar]
  25. (2012) Viewpoint in language: A multimodal perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139084727
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139084727 [Google Scholar]
  26. (2014) Figurative language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Debras, Camille
    (2014) L’Expression multimodale du positionnement interactionnel (multimodal stance-taking). Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Université Sorbonne Nouvelle – Paris 3.
  28. Dirven, René & Ralf Pörings
    (Eds.) (2002) Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Enfield, Nick J.
    (2011) Elements of formulation. In Jürgen Streeck , Charles Goodwin , & Curtis LeBaron (Eds.), Embodied interaction: Language and the body in the material world (pp.59–66). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Fauconnier, Gilles & Mark Turner
    (2002) The way we think. New York: Basic Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Feyaerts, Kurt
    (1999) Metonymic hierarchies. The conceptualization of stupidity in German idiomatic expressions. In: Klaus-Uwe Panther & Günther Radden (Eds.), Metonymy in language and thought (pp.309–332). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/hcp.4.18fey
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.4.18fey [Google Scholar]
  32. Fillmore, Charles J.
    (1975) An alternative to checklist theories of meaning. In Cathy Cogen , Henry Thompson , Graham Thurgood , Kenneth Whistler , & James Wright (Eds.), Proceedings of the first annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (pp.123–131). Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. (1977) Scenes-and-frames semantics. In Antonio Zampolli (Ed.), Linguistic structures processing, Volume4 (pp.55–81). Amsterdam & New York: North Holland.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. (1982) Frame semantics. InLinguistic Society of Korea (Ed.), Linguistics in the morning calm (pp.111–137). Seoul: Hanshin.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. (1985) Frames and the semantics of understanding. Quarderni di Semantica, 6, 222–254.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. (1988) The mechanisms of construction grammar. Berkeley Linguistics Society, 14, 35–55. doi: 10.3765/bls.v14i0.1794
    https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v14i0.1794 [Google Scholar]
  37. Fillmore, Charles J. & Collin F. Baker
    (2009) A frames approach to semantic analysis. In Bernd Heine & Heiko Narrog (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis (pp.313–340). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Fricke, Ellen
    (2012) Grammatik multimodal: Wie Wörter und Gesten zusammenwirken. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110218893
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110218893 [Google Scholar]
  39. Gibbs, Jr., Raymond W.
    (1994) The poetics of mind: Figurative thought, language, and understanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. (1999) Speaking and thinking with metonymy. In Günter Radden & Zoltan Kövecses (Eds.) Metonymy in language and thought (pp.61–76). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/hcp.4.04gib
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.4.04gib [Google Scholar]
  41. (2006) Embodiment and cognitive science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. (2017). The embodied and discourse view of metaphor: Why these are not so different and how they can be brought closer together. In Beate Hampe Ed. Metaphor: Embodied cognition and discourse (pp.319–334). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Goldberg, Adele
    (1995) Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Goodwin, Charles
    (2007) Environmentally coupled gestures. In Susan Duncan , Justine Cassell , & Elena Levy (Eds.), Gesture and the dynamic dimensions of language (pp.195–212). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/gs.1.18goo
    https://doi.org/10.1075/gs.1.18goo [Google Scholar]
  45. (2011) Contextures of action. In Jürgen Streeck , Charles Goodwin , & Curtis LeBaron (Eds.), Embodied interaction: Language and body in the material world (pp.182–193). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Grady, Joe
    (1997) Foundations of meaning: primary metaphors and primary scenes. Doctoral dissertation, University of California at Berkeley.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Grady, Joe & Christopher Johnson
    (2002) Converging evidence for the notions of subscene and primary scene. In René Dirven & Ralph Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (pp.533–554). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110219197.533
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110219197.533 [Google Scholar]
  48. Grandhi, Sukeshini A. , Gina Joue , & Irene Mittelberg
    (2011) Understanding naturalness and intuitiveness in gesture production: Insights for touchless gestural interfaces. Proceedings of the ACM2011 conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI), Vancouver, B.C. doi: 10.1145/1978942.1979061
    https://doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1979061 [Google Scholar]
  49. Hassemer, Julius
    (2016) Towards a theory of Gesture Form Analysis: Imaginary forms as part of gesture conceptualisation with empirical support from motion‐capture data. Doctoral dissertation, RWTH Aachen University.
  50. Hopper, Paul & Sandra Thompson
    (1980) Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language, 56, 251–299. doi: 10.1353/lan.1980.0017
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1980.0017 [Google Scholar]
  51. Hostetter, Autumn. B. , & Martha W. Alibali
    (2008) Visible embodiment: Gestures as simulated action. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15 (3), 495–514. doi: 10.3758/PBR.15.3.495
    https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.15.3.495 [Google Scholar]
  52. Jakobson, Roman
    (1956/1990) Two aspects of language and two types of aphasic disturbances. In Linda R. Waugh & Monique Monville-Burston (Eds.), Roman Jakobson, On language (pp.115–133). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. (1960/1987) Linguistics and poetics. In Krystyna Pomorska & Stephen Rudy (Eds.), Roman Jakobson – Language in literature (pp.62–94). Cambridge, MA: Belknap of Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Jakobson, Roman & Krystyna Pomorska
    (1983) Dialogues. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Janzen, Terry & Barbara Shaffer
    (2002) Gesture as substrate in the process of ASL grammaticalization. In Richard P. Meier , Kearsy Cormier , & David Quintos-Pozos (Eds.), Modality and structure in signed and spoken language (pp.199–223). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511486777.010
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486777.010 [Google Scholar]
  56. Johnson, Mark
    (1987) The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. (2005) The philosophical significance of image schemas. In Beate Hampe (Ed.), From perception to meaning: Image schemas in cognitive linguistics (pp.15–33). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110197532.1.15
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197532.1.15 [Google Scholar]
  58. (2007) The meaning of the body: Aesthetics of human understanding. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. doi: 10.7208/chicago/9780226026992.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226026992.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  59. Kendon, Adam
    (1995) Gestures as illocutionary and discourse structure markers in southern Italian conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 23, 247–279. doi: 10.1016/0378‑2166(94)00037‑F
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(94)00037-F [Google Scholar]
  60. (2004) Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511807572
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511807572 [Google Scholar]
  61. (2008) Some reflections on the relationship between ‘gesture’ and ‘sign’. Gesture, 8 (3), 348–366. doi: 10.1075/gest.8.3.05ken
    https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.8.3.05ken [Google Scholar]
  62. (2017) Pragmatic functions of gestures: Some observations on the history of their study and their nature. Gesture, 16 (2), 157–175 ( this issue ). doi: 10.1075/gest.16.2.01ken
    https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.16.2.01ken [Google Scholar]
  63. Labov, William
    (1972) The transformation of reality in narrative syntax. In William Labov , Language in the inner city (pp.354–396). Philadelphia: The University of Pennsylvania Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Ladewig, Silva H.
    (2014) Recurrent gestures. In: Cornelia Müller , Alan Cienki , Ellen Fricke , Silva H. Ladewig , David McNeill , & Jana Bressem (Eds.), Body – language – communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction, Volume2 (pp.1558–1575), Berlin & Boston: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Lakoff, George
    (1987) Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. doi: 10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  66. Langacker, Ronald W.
    (1987) Foundations of cognitive grammar: Theoretical prerequisites, Volume1. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  67. (1993) Reference-point constructions. Cognitive Linguistics, 4, 1–38. doi: 10.1515/cogl.1993.4.1.1
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1993.4.1.1 [Google Scholar]
  68. (2009) Metonymic grammar. In Klaus-Uwe Panther , Linda L. Thornburg , Antonio Barcelona (Eds.), Metonymy and metaphor in grammar (pp.45–71). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/hcp.25.04lan
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.25.04lan [Google Scholar]
  69. Littlemore, Jeanette
    (2015) Metonymy: Hidden shortcuts in language, thought and communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781107338814
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107338814 [Google Scholar]
  70. McNeill, David
    (1992) Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  71. (2005) Gesture and thought. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. doi: 10.7208/chicago/9780226514642.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226514642.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  72. Mittelberg, Irene
    (2006) Metaphor and metonymy in language and gesture: Discourse evidence for multimodal models of grammar (Doctoral dissertation, Cornell University). Ann Arbor, MI: UMI.
    [Google Scholar]
  73. (2008) Peircean semiotics meets conceptual metaphor: Iconic modes in gestural representations of grammar. In Alan Cienki & Cornelia Müller (Eds.), Metaphor and gesture (pp.115–154). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  74. (2010a) Geometric and image-schematic patterns in gesture space. In Vyvyan Evans & Paul Chilton (Eds.), Language, cognition, and space: The state of the art and new directions (pp.351–385). London: Equinox.
    [Google Scholar]
  75. (2010b) Interne und externe Metonymie: Jakobsonsche Kontiguitäts-beziehungen in redebegleitenden Gesten. Sprache und Literatur, 41 (1), 112–143.
    [Google Scholar]
  76. (2013a) The exbodied mind: Cognitive-semiotic principles as motivating forces in gesture. In Cornelia Müller , Alan Cienki , Ellen Fricke , Silva H. Ladewig , David McNeill , & Sedinha Tessendorf (Eds.), Body – language – communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction (pp.750–779). Berlin & Boston: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  77. (2013b) Balancing acts: Image schemas and force dynamics as experiential essence in pictures by Paul Klee and their gestural enactments. In Michael Bokrent , Barbara Dancygier , & Jennifer Hinnell (Eds.), Language and the creative mind (pp.325–346). Stanford: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  78. (2014) Gestures and iconicity. In Cornelia Müller , Alan Cienki , Ellen Fricke , Silva H. Ladewig , David McNeill , & Jana Bressem (Eds.), Body – language – communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction (pp.1712–1732). Berlin & Boston: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  79. (2017) Multimodal existential constructions in German: Manual actions as experiential substrate for grammatical and gestural patterns. Linguistics Vanguard, 3, s1. doi: 10.1515/lingvan‑2016‑0047.
    https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2016-0047 [Google Scholar]
  80. Mittelberg, Irene & Linda R. Waugh
    (2009) Metonymy first, metaphor second: A cognitive-semiotic approach to multimodal figures of thought in co-speech gesture. In Charles Forceville & Eduardo Urios-Aparisi (Eds.), Multimodal metaphor (pp.329–356). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  81. (2014) Gestures and metonymy. In: Cornelia Müller , Alan Cienki , Ellen Fricke , Silva H. Ladewig , David McNeill , & Jana Bressem (Eds.), Body – language – communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction (pp.1747–1766). Berlin & Boston: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  82. Mittelberg, Irene & Gina Joue
    (2017) Source actions ground metaphor via metonymy: Toward a frame-based account of gestural action in multimodal discourse. In Beate Hampe (Ed.), Metaphor: Embodied cognition and discourse (pp.119–137). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/9781108182324.008
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108182324.008 [Google Scholar]
  83. Müller, Cornelia
    (1998) Redebegleitende Gesten: Kulturgeschichte – Theorie – Sprachvergleich. Berlin: Spitz Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  84. (2004) Forms and uses of the palm up open hand: A case of a gesture family?In Cornelia Müller & Roland Posner (Eds.), The semantics and pragmatics of everyday gesture: The Berlin conference (pp.233–256). Berlin: Weidler Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  85. (2017) How recurrent gestures mean: Conventionalized contexts-of-use and embodied motivation. Gesture, 16 (2), 277–304 ( this issue ).
    [Google Scholar]
  86. Nerlich, Brigitte & David D. Clarke
    (2001) Ambiguities we live by: Towards a pragmatics of polysemy. Journal of Pragmatics, 33 (1), 1–20. doi: 10.1016/S0378‑2166(99)00132‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00132-0 [Google Scholar]
  87. Núñez, Rafael E.
    (2008) A fresh look at the foundations of mathematics: Gesture and the psychological reality of conceptual metaphor. In Alan Cienki & Cornelia Müller (Eds.), Metaphor and gesture (pp.93–114). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  88. Panther, Klaus-Uwe & Günter Radden
    (Eds.) (1999) Metonymy in language and thought. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/hcp.4
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.4 [Google Scholar]
  89. Panther, Klaus-Uwe & Linda L. Thornburg
    (Eds.) (2003) Metonymy and pragmatic inferencing. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.113
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.113 [Google Scholar]
  90. (2004) The role of conceptual metonymy in meaning construction. Metaphorik.de, 06, 91–113.
    [Google Scholar]
  91. Panther, Klaus-Uwe , Linda L. Thornburg , & Antonio Barcelona
    (Eds.) (2009) Metonymy and metaphor in grammar. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. doi: 10.1075/hcp.25
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.25 [Google Scholar]
  92. Parrill, Fey
    (2009) Dual viewpoint in gesture. Gesture, 9 (3), 271–289. doi: 10.1075/gest.9.3.01par
    https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.9.3.01par [Google Scholar]
  93. Parrill, Fey & Eve E. Sweetser
    (2004) What we mean by meaning: Conceptual integration in gesture analysis and transcription. Gesture, 4 (2), 197–219. doi: 10.1075/gest.4.2.05par
    https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.4.2.05par [Google Scholar]
  94. Peirce, Charles S.
    (1960) Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (1931–1958), Volume I: Principles of philosophy; Volume II: Elements of logic. Charles Hartshorne & Paul Weiss (Eds.). Cambridge, MA: The Belknap of Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  95. Pfau, Roland & Markus Steinbach
    (2004) On grammaticalization: Do sign languages follow the well-trodden paths?Proceedings of the 8th Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research (TISLR 8) Conference, Barcelona.
    [Google Scholar]
  96. Peirsman, Yves & Dirk Geeraerts
    (2006) Metonymy as a prototypical category. Cognitive Linguistics, 17 (3), 269–316. doi: 10.1515/COG.2006.007
    https://doi.org/10.1515/COG.2006.007 [Google Scholar]
  97. Priesters, Matthias A.
    (2012) Functional patterns in gesture space. Correlating location and function of gestures using 3D motion capture technology. Unpublished M.A. thesis, RWTH Aachen University.
    [Google Scholar]
  98. Rizzolazzi, Giacomo & Michael A. Arbib
    (1998) Language within our grasp. Trends in Neurosciences, 21 (5), 188–194. doi: 10.1016/S0166‑2236(98)01260‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-2236(98)01260-0 [Google Scholar]
  99. Schank, Robert. C. & Robert Abelson
    (1977) Scripts, goals, plans, and understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  100. Schoonjans, Steven
    (2014) Modalpartikeln als multimodale Konstruktionen. Eine korpusbasierte Kookkurrenzanalyse von Modalpartikeln und Gestik im Deutschen. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, KU Leuven.
    [Google Scholar]
  101. Schoonjans, Steven , Paul Sambre , Geert Brône , & Kurt Feyaerts
    (2016) Vers une analyse multimodale du sens. Perspectives constructionnelles sur la gestualité co-grammaticale. Langages, 201, 33–50. doi: 10.3917/lang.201.0033
    https://doi.org/10.3917/lang.201.0033 [Google Scholar]
  102. Slobin, Dan
    (1985) Crosslinguistic evidence for the language-making capacity. In Dan Slobin (Ed.), A crosslinguistic study of language acquisition. Volume 2: Theoretical issues (pp.1157–1256). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  103. Sperber, Dan & Deirdre Wilson
    (1986/1995) Relevance: Communication and cognition (2nd Ed.), Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  104. Steen, Francis & Mark Turrier
    (2013) Multimodal construction grammar. In Mike Borkent , Barbara Dancygier , & Jennifer Hinnell (Eds.), Language and the creative mind (pp.255–274), Stanford: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  105. 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]
  106. (2013) Praxeology of gesture, In Cornelia Müller , Alan Cienki , Ellen Fricke , Silvia H. Ladewig , David McNeill , & Jana Bressem (Eds.), Body – language – communication. An international handbook of multimodality in human interaction, Volume1 (pp.674–688). Berlin & Boston: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  107. Streeck, Jürgen , Charles Goodwin , & Curtis LeBaron
    (Eds.) (2011) Embodied interaction: Language and the body in the material world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  108. Sweetser, Eve E.
    (1990) From etymology to pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511620904
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620904 [Google Scholar]
  109. (1998) Regular metaphoricity in gesture: Bodily-based models of speech interaction. Actes du 16e Congrès International des Linguistes (CD-ROM), Elsevier.
    [Google Scholar]
  110. (2007) Looking at space to study mental spaces: Co-speech gesture as a crucial data source in cognitive linguistics. In Monica Gonzalez-Marquez , Irene Mittelberg , Seana Coulson , & Michael Spivey (Eds.), Methods in cognitive linguistics (pp.201–224). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/hcp.18.15swe
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.18.15swe [Google Scholar]
  111. (2012) Viewpoint and perspective in language and gesture: From the ground down. In Barbara Dancygier & Eve E. Sweetser (Eds.), Viewpoint in language: A multimodal perspective (pp.1–24). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139084727.002
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139084727.002 [Google Scholar]
  112. Sullivan, Karen
    (2013) Frames and constructions in metaphoric language. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/cal.14
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.14 [Google Scholar]
  113. Tabacaru, Sabina
    (2014) Humorous implications and meanings: A multimodal study of sarcasm in interactional humor. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Université Charles de Gaulle – Lille 3.
  114. Talmy, Leonard
    (1988) Force dynamics in language and cognition. Cognitive Science, 12, 49–100. doi: 10.1207/s15516709cog1201_2
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1201_2 [Google Scholar]
  115. (2013) Gestures as cues to a target. Manuscript of talk presented at the ICLC 12, University of Edmonton, Alberta, June24 2013.
  116. Waugh, Linda R. & Monique Monville-Burston
    (1990) Roman Jakobson: His life, work and influence. Introduction to: Linda R. Waugh & Monique Monville Burston (Eds.), Jakobson on language (pp.1–45). Cambridge: Belknap of Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  117. Wehling, Elisabeth
    (2010) Argument is gesture war: Function, form and prosody of discourse structuring gestures in political argument. Proceedings of the 35th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (pp.54–65). Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  118. (2017) Discourse management gestures. Gesture, 16 (2), 245–276 ( this issue ).
    [Google Scholar]
  119. Wilcox, Phyllis P.
    (2004) A cognitive key: Metonymic and metaphorical mappings in ASL. Cognitive Linguistics, 15 (2), 197–222. doi: 10.1515/cogl.2004.008
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.2004.008 [Google Scholar]
  120. Wilcox, Sherman
    (2004) Gesture and language: Cross-linguistic and historical data from signed languages. Gesture, 4, 43–73. doi: 10.1075/gest.4.1.04wil
    https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.4.1.04wil [Google Scholar]
  121. Ziem, Alexander
    (2014) Frames of understanding in text and discourse. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/hcp.48
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.48 [Google Scholar]
  122. Zima, Elisabeth
    (2014) Gibt es multimodale Konstruktionen? Eine Studie zu [V(motion) in circles] und [all the way from X PREP Y], Gesprächsforschung, 15, 1–48.
    [Google Scholar]
  123. Zima, Elisabeth & Alexander Bergs
    (Guest Eds.) (2017) Toward a multimodal construction grammar (Special Issue). Linguistics Vanguard, 3, s1.
    [Google Scholar]
  124. Zlatev, Jordan
    (2005) What’s in a schema? Bodily mimesis and the grounding of language. In Beate Hampe & Joe Grady (Eds.), From perception to meaning: Image schemas in cognitive linguistics (pp.313–342). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110197532.4.313
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197532.4.313 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/gest.16.2.03mit
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/gest.16.2.03mit
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): frames , indexicality , metaphor , metonymy , motivation , multifunctionality , pragmatic inferencing and scenes
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