1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Gesture
  4. Online First Articles
  5. Online First Article
image of Beyond Foreigner Talk
PDF
EPUB

Abstract

Abstract

This paper challenges the common belief that first language (L1) speakers simplify their language when communicating with second language (L2) users, which is captured in Charles Ferguson’s ‘Foreigner Talk’ hypothesis. Academic research has long suggested that, along with simplified vocabulary and syntax, L1 speakers use more illustrative and larger gestures to accommodate L2 addressees. Since this stereotype remains empirically unverified, we analyzed L1 gesture production in two video corpora, implementing automated motion-tracking techniques to measure gesture size. We found that L1 speakers produced larger gestures when describing a picture to an L2 addressee than to an L1 addressee, whereas this difference did not occur during free conversation. In both communicative tasks, however, they used more deictic gestures and organized their gesture space to structure the interaction. In sum, gesture qualifies as a versatile resource in L1–L2 interaction, which is tailored to the conversational task at hand.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Available under the CC BY 4.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/gest.25006.pro
2026-01-30
2026-02-14

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/gest.25006.pro
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/10.1075/gest.25006.pro/gest.25006.pro.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/gest.25006.pro&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Adams, T. W.
    (1998) Gesture in foreigner talk. University of Pennsylvania. https://repository.upenn.edu/dissertations/AAI9829850
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Bergmann, K., Cordero Rull, M. & Lugrin, B.
    (2018) A pilot study on Adaptive Gesture Use in interaction with non-native listeners. InProceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Multimodal Analyses Enabling Artificial Agents in Human-Machine Interaction, pp.–. ACM. 10.1145/3279972.3279978
     https://doi.org/10.1145/3279972.3279978 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bressem, J. & Ladewig, S. H.
    (2011) Rethinking gesture phases: Articulatory features of gestural movement?Semiotica, , –. 10.1515/semi.2011.022
     https://doi.org/10.1515/semi.2011.022 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bressem, J., Ladewig, S. H. & Müller, C.
    (2013) Linguistic annotation system for gestures. InMüller, C., Cienki, A., Fricke, E., Ladewig, S., McNeill, D. & Tessendorf, S. (Eds.), Body, language, communication: An international handbook in multimodality and interaction, Vol., pp.–. De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110261318.1098
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110261318.1098 [Google Scholar]
  5. Calbris, G.
    (2011) Elements of meaning in gesture. John Benjamins. 10.1075/gs.5
     https://doi.org/10.1075/gs.5 [Google Scholar]
  6. Calbris, G., & Copple, M.
    (2024) The gestural sign: A concrete and reasoned analysis of co-speech gesture. InCienki, A. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of gesture studies, pp.–. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108638869.010
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108638869.010 [Google Scholar]
  7. Cao, Z., Simon, T., Wei, S.-E., & Sheikh, Y.
    (2017) Realtime multi-person 2D pose estimation using part affinity fields. arXiv. 10.1109/CVPR.2017.143
     https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.2017.143 [Google Scholar]
  8. Cienki, A.
    (2017) Analysing metaphor in gesture: A set of metaphor identification guidelines for gesture (MIG-G). InSemino, E. & Demjén, Z. (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of metaphor and language, pp.–. Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. (2022) The study of gesture in cognitive linguistics: How it could inform and inspire other research in cognitive science. WIREs Cognitive Science, (), –. 10.1002/wcs.1623
     https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1623 [Google Scholar]
  10. (2024) Variable embodiment of stance-taking and footing in simultaneous interpreting. Frontiers in Psychology, , –. 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1429232
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1429232 [Google Scholar]
  11. Close, B., Zurbenko, I., & Mingzen, S.
    (2020) Kza: Kolmogorov-Zurbenko adaptive filters [Computer software]. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=kza
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Cooperrider, K., & Goldin-Meadow, S.
    (2017) When gesture becomes analogy. Topics in Cognitive Science, (), –. 10.1111/tops.12276
     https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12276 [Google Scholar]
  13. Dahl, D.
    (1981) The role of experience in speech modifications for second language learners. Minnesota Papers in Linguistics and Philosophy of Language, (), –.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Derwing, T. M.
    (1987) Individual differences in foreigner talk: Factors in successful communication with non-native speakers [Doctoral dissertation, University of Alberta.]
  15. Dewaele, J.-M.
    (2018) Why the dichotomy ‘L1 versus LX user’ is better than ‘native versus non-native speaker.’Applied Linguistics, (), –. 10.1093/applin/amw055
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amw055 [Google Scholar]
  16. Duranti, A.
    (2011) Linguistic anthropology: The study of language as a non-neutral medium. InMesthrie, E. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of sociolinguistics, pp.–. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511997068.006
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511997068.006 [Google Scholar]
  17. Ellis, R.
    (1985) Understanding second language acquisition. 2nd edn. Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Fafchamps, S.
    (2019) Multimodale foreigner talk: Hoe moedertaalsprekers hun handgebaren aanpassen in gesprekken met vreemdetaalsprekers. Liège Université.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Ferguson, C. A.
    (1971) Absence of copula and the notion of simplicity: A study of normal speech, baby talk, foreigner talk and pidgins. InHymes, D. (Ed.), Pidginization and creolization of languages, pp.–. Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. (1975) Toward a characterization of English foreigner talk. Anthropological Linguistics, (), –.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. (1981) ‘Foreigner talk’ as the name of a simplified register. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, , –. 10.1515/ijsl.1981.28.9
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.1981.28.9 [Google Scholar]
  22. Fischer, K.
    (2016) Designing speech for a recipient: The roles of partner modeling, alignment and feedback in so-called “simplified registers”. John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.270
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.270 [Google Scholar]
  23. Freed, B. F.
    (1978) Foreigner talk: A study of speech adjustments made by native speakers in English in conversation with non-native speakers [Doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.]
  24. (1981) Foreigner talk, baby talk, native talk. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, , –. 10.1515/ijsl.1981.28.19
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.1981.28.19 [Google Scholar]
  25. Fricke, E.
    (2014) Deixis, gesture, and embodiment from a linguistic point of view. InMüller, C., Fricke, E., Ladewig, S. H., McNeill, D., & Teßendorf, S. (Eds.), Body — language — communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction, Vol., pp.–. De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110302028.1803
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110302028.1803 [Google Scholar]
  26. Gamer, M., Lemon, J., & Fellows, I. P. S.
    (2019) Irr: Various coefficients of interrater reliability and agreement (Version 0.84.1) [Computer software].
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Gullberg, M.
    (2013) So you think gestures are compensatory? Reflections based on child and adult learner data. InMattsson, A. F. & Norrby, C. (Eds.), Language acquisition and use in multilingual contexts, pp.–. Lund University.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Harrison, S.
    (2018) The impulse to gesture: Where language, minds, and bodies intersect. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108265065
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108265065 [Google Scholar]
  29. Hu, M.
    (2022) When native speakers meet non-native speakers: A case study of foreigner talk. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, (), –. 10.17507/jltr.1304.12
     https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.1304.12 [Google Scholar]
  30. Jehoul, A., Brône, G., & Feyaerts, K.
    (2017) The shrug as marker of obviousness: Corpus evidence from Dutch face-to-face conversations. Linguistics Vanguard, (), –. 10.1515/lingvan‑2016‑0082
     https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2016-0082 [Google Scholar]
  31. Kendon, A.
    (2004) Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511807572
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511807572 [Google Scholar]
  32. Ladewig, S.
    (2014) Recurrent gestures. InMüller, C., Cienki, A., Fricke, E., Ladewig, S., McNeill, D., & Tessendorf, S. (Eds.), Body, language, communication: An international handbook in multimodality and interaction, Vol., pp.–. De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110261318.1098
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110261318.1098 [Google Scholar]
  33. (2024) Recurrent gestures: Cultural, individual, and linguistic dimensions of meaning-making. InCienki, A. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of gesture studies, pp.–. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108638869.003
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108638869.003 [Google Scholar]
  34. Lausberg, H.
    (2019) The NEUROGES® analysis system for nonverbal behavior and gesture: The complete research coding manual including an interactive video learning tool and coding template. Peter Lang. 10.3726/b15103
     https://doi.org/10.3726/b15103 [Google Scholar]
  35. Lemmens, M.
    (2025) Idiogests: Gestural idiolects reveal variation in discursive focus. Lege artis Language yesterday, today, tomorrow, (). –. https://shs.hal.science/halshs-05023594v1. 10.34135/lartis.25.10.1.04
     https://doi.org/10.34135/lartis.25.10.1.04 [Google Scholar]
  36. Lempert, M.
    (2011) Barack Obama, being sharp: Indexical order in the pragmatics of precision-grip gesture. Gesture, (), –. 10.1075/gest.11.3.01lem
     https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.11.3.01lem [Google Scholar]
  37. Long, M. H.
    (1980) Input, interaction and second language acquisition [Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.]
  38. McNeill, D.
    (1992) Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought. University of Chicago Press. -.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. McNeill, D., Quek, F., McCullough, K.-E., Duncan, S. D., Furuyama, N., Bryll, R., Furuyama, N., & Ansari, R.
    (2001) Catchments, prosody and discourse. Gesture, (), –. 10.1075/gest.1.1.03mcn
     https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.1.1.03mcn [Google Scholar]
  40. McNeill, D.
    (2024) The Growth Point. InCienki, A. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of gesture studies, pp.–. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108638869.019
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108638869.019 [Google Scholar]
  41. Mittelberg, I.
    (2019) Visuo-kinetic signs are inherently metonymic: How embodied metonymy motivates forms, functions, and schematic patterns in gesture. Frontiers in Psychology, , . 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00254
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00254 [Google Scholar]
  42. Müller, C.
    (2017) How recurrent gestures mean: Conventionalized contexts-of-use and embodied motivation. Gesture, (), –. 10.1075/gest.16.2.05mul
     https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.16.2.05mul [Google Scholar]
  43. Müller, C., & Tag, S.
    (2010) The dynamics of metaphor: Foregrounding and activating metaphoricity in conversational interaction. Cognitive Semiotics, (), –. 10.1515/cogsem.2010.6.spring2010.85
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cogsem.2010.6.spring2010.85 [Google Scholar]
  44. Petrou, M., & Dragojevic, M.
    (2023) “Where are you from?” Language attitudes and (non)accommodation during native–nonnative speaker interactions in Germany. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, (), –. 10.1177/0261927X231222447
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X231222447 [Google Scholar]
  45. Prové, V., & Feyaerts, K.
    (2022) Pitch metaphors and the body in singing classes. CogniTextes. Revue de l’Association française de linguistique cognitive, . 10.4000/cognitextes.2037
     https://doi.org/10.4000/cognitextes.2037 [Google Scholar]
  46. Prové, V.
    (2024) Beyond Foreigner Talk. Multimodal repertoires in L1–L2 interaction. Unpublished thesis. https://lirias.kuleuven.be/4201789&lang=en
     [Google Scholar]
  47. R Core Team
    R Core Team (2021) R: A language and environment for statistical computing [Software]. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Ravid, D., Olshtain, E., & Ze’elon, R.
    (2003) Gradeschoolers’ linguistic and pragmatic speech adaptation to native and non-native interlocution. Journal of Pragmatics, (), –. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(02)00081‑4
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00081-4 [Google Scholar]
  49. Roche, J.
    (1989) Xenolekte: Struktur und Variation im Deutsch gegenüber Ausländern. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110862775
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110862775 [Google Scholar]
  50. Rohrer, P., Vilà-Giménez, I., Florit-Pons, J., Gibert, N., Ren, P., Shattuck-Hufnagel, S., Prieto, P., & Glenda
    (2021) The MultiModal MultiDimensional (M3D) labeling system [Version 1]. Open Science Framework. 10.17605/OSF.IO/ANKDX
     https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/ANKDX [Google Scholar]
  51. (2023) The MultiModal MultiDimensional (M3D) labeling system [Version 1]. Open Science Framework. 10.17605/OSF.IO/ANKDX
     https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/ANKDX [Google Scholar]
  52. Smith, S. W., Scholnick, N., Crutcher, A., Simeone, M. & Smith, W. R.
    (1991) Foreigner talk revisited: Limits on accommodation to nonfluent speakers. InBlommaert , J. & Verschueren, J. (Eds.), Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, (), pp.–. John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/pbns.6.3.11smi
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.6.3.11smi [Google Scholar]
  53. Snow, C. E., Eeden, R., & Muysken, P.
    (1981) The interactional origins of foreigner talk: Municipal employees and foreign workers. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, , –. 10.1515/ijsl.1981.28.81
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.1981.28.81 [Google Scholar]
  54. Stukenbrock, A.
    (2014) Pointing to an ‘empty’ space: Deixis am Phantasma in face-to-face interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, , –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2014.08.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.08.001 [Google Scholar]
  55. Tellier, M., Stam, G., & Ghio, A.
    (2021) Handling language: How future language teachers adapt their gestures to their interlocutor. Gesture, (), –. 10.1075/gest.19031.tel
     https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.19031.tel [Google Scholar]
  56. Tweissi, A.
    (1990) Evidence for the universality of language simplification: ‘Foreigner Talk.’InEid, M. & McCarthy, J. (Eds.), Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics: Papers from the Annual Symposium on Arabic Linguistics, . John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.72.16twe
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.72.16twe [Google Scholar]
  57. Uzawa, K.
    1986 Foreigner Talk in Japanese: speech adjustments of native speakers with intermediate and advanced non-native speakers. Unpublished thesis. University of British Columbia.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Wagner, J.
    (1996) Foreign language acquisition through interaction: A critical review of research on conversational adjustments. Journal of Pragmatics, (), –. 10.1016/0378‑2166(96)00013‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(96)00013-6 [Google Scholar]
  59. Warren-Leubecker, A., & Bohannon, J. N.
    (1982) The effects of expectation and feedback on speech to foreigners. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, (), –. 10.1007/BF01067564
     https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01067564 [Google Scholar]
  60. Winter, B.
    (2013) Linear models and linear mixed effects models in R with linguistic applications. arXiv Preprint. arxiv.org/pdf/1308.5499.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Wittenburg, P., Brugman, H., Russel, A., Klassmann, A., & Sloetjes, H.
    (2006) ELAN: A professional framework for multimodality research. InCalzolari, N., Choukri, K., Gangemi, A., Maegaard, B., Mariani, J., Odijk, J., Tapias, D. (Eds.), Proceedings of LREC 2006, Fifth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, pp.–. European Language Resources Association.
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Calbris, G.
    (2011) Elements of meaning in gesture. John Benjamins. . 10.1075/gs.5
     https://doi.org/10.1075/gs.5 [Google Scholar]
  63. Cienki, A.
    (2022) The study of gesture in cognitive linguistics: How it could inform and inspire other research in cognitive science. WIREs Cognitive Science, (). 10.1002/wcs.1623
     https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1623 [Google Scholar]
  64. Ladewig, S.
    (2024) Recurrent gestures: Cultural, individual, and linguistic dimensions of meaning-making. InA. Cienki (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of gesture studies (pp.–). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108638869.003
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108638869.003 [Google Scholar]
  65. Mittelberg, I.
    (2019) Visuo-kinetic signs are inherently metonymic: How embodied metonymy motivates forms, functions, and schematic patterns in gesture. Frontiers in Psychology, , . 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00254
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00254 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/gest.25006.pro
Loading
Beyond Foreigner Talk
John Benjamins ; https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.25006.pro
/content/journals/10.1075/gest.25006.pro
/content/journals/10.1075/gest.25006.pro
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: gesture size ; motion-tracking ; linguistic simplification ; Foreigner Talk ; L2 accommodation

Most Cited

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