Cover not available
Part of
Perspectives on Pantomime
Edited by Przemysław Żywiczyński, Johan Blomberg and Monika Boruta-Żywiczyńska
[Advances in Interaction Studies 12] 2024
► pp. 159–187

Chapter 7
The pantomime roots of Sao Tome and Principe Sign Language

| Universidade Católica Portuguesa
| Universidade Católica Portuguesa | NOVA University Lisbon
Pantomime is a unique semiotic resource for human communication despite its non-linguistic character because it allows a wide spectrum of meanings (Zlatev et al., 2020). In our view, gestures and vocalizations are interconnected from the beginning of the emergence of language in human beings (Corballis, 2014). Recent studies in a newborn language showed a boost of linguistic systematicity (Mineiro et al., 2021; Abreu et al., 2022), which included a reduction in the use of pantomime, amplitude of signs, and an increase in articulation economy within a social interaction process. We claim this process constitutes a continuum and not a cut-off system. The evolution of a newborn sign language seems to follow the same phases of psychomotor development and to be linked to efficient use of energy while enhancing cognition, allowing for the accomplishment of social communication enabled by sign language.
Keywords: pantomime, sign language, newborn language, language evolution
Article outline
  • 1.Brief notes on language genesis
  • 2.Background information on the LGSTP studies
    • 2.1Participants
    • 2.2Procedures
  • 3.From pantomime to proto and early sign
    • 3.1From pantomime to early signs
      • 3.1.1What did the evolution from pantomime to signs look like?
    • 3.2Evolution of movement and articulatory properties
      • 3.2.1Body movement
      • 3.2.2The involvement of body articulators (non-manual articulators)
    • 3.3The role of iconicity in the emerging phonological system
      • 3.3.1Iconic signs in the evolution of a new sign language
      • 3.3.2Internal structure emergence in iconic signs in the evolution of a new sign language
    • 3.4The evolution of basic order
    • 3.5The emergence of linguistic complexity
      • 3.5.1The articulatory and phonological characteristics of emerging signs
      • 3.5.2Trends in emergent morphology
  • 4.Signs do not emerge ex-nihilo
  • 5.End note
  • Acknowledgments
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 15 February 2024
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ais.12.07min
References (73)
References
Abreu, A. M., Mineiro, A., Ribeiro da Silva, C. & Castro-Caldas, A. (2022). Space, movement and articulation in a newly emergent sign language: Contributions for neural and sociocognitive efficiency. International Journal of Psychology and Neuroscience 8(1), 1–18.Google Scholar
Arbib, M. A. (2024). Pantomime within and beyond the evolution of language. In P. Żywiczyński, J. Blomberg & M. Boruta-Żywiczyńska (Eds). Perspectives on pantomime (pp. 16–57). Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012). How the brain Got language: The mirror system hypothesis. In How the brain Got language. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aronoff, M., Meir, I., Padden, C., & Sandler, W. (2003). Classifier constructions and morphology in two sign languages. In K. Emmorey (Ed.), Perspectives on classifier constructions in sign languages (pp. 53–84). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.Google Scholar
Bellugi, U., Klima, E. S., & Poizner, H. (1988). Sign language and the brain. Research Publications – Association for Research in Nervous and Mental Disease, 66, 39–56.Google Scholar
Brentari, D. (2019). Sign language phonology. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, S. (2024). The pantomimic origins of the narrative arts. In P. Żywiczyński, J. Blomberg & M. Boruta-Żywiczyńska (Eds). Perspectives on pantomime. (pp. 141–160). Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carmo, P., Oliveira, R., & Mineiro, A. (2014). Dicionário da Língua Gestual de São Tomé e Príncipe – Dicionário oficial da República de São Tomé e Príncipe. UCEditora.Google Scholar
Caroça, C. (2017). Contribution to the study of epidemiological factors associated with neurosensorial hearing loss in the population of Sao Tome and Principe. [Phd]. Universidade NOVA.Google Scholar
Code, C. (2021). The prehistory of speech and language is revealed in brain damage. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 376(1824), rstb.2020.0191, 20200191. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Corballis, M. C. (2003). From hand to mouth: The gestural origins of language. In Language evolution. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2009). The evolution of language. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1156(1), 19–43. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014). The word according to Adam. The role of gesture in language evolution. In M. Seyfeddinipur & M. Gullberg (Eds.), From gesture in conversation to visible action as utterance (pp. 177–198). John Benjamins Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Cuxac, C., & Sallandre, M.-A. (2007). Iconicity and arbitrariness in French Sign Language (LSF): Highly iconic structures, degenerated iconicity and diagrammatic iconicity. In E. Pizzuto, P. Pietrandrea, & R. Simone (Eds.), Verbal and signed languages: Comparing structures, constructs and methodologies (pp. 13–33). De Gruyter Mouton. [URL]Google Scholar
Dronkers, N. F., Ludy, C. A., & Redfern, B. B. (1998). Pragmatics in the absence of verbal language: Descriptions of a severe aphasic and a language-deprived adult. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 11(1–2), 179–190. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Emmorey, K., McCullough, S., Mehta, S., Ponto, L. L. B., & Grabowski, T. J. (2011). Sign language and pantomime production differentially engage frontal and parietal cortices. Language and Cognitive Processes, 26(7), 878–901. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Emmorey, K., Mehta, S., & Grabowski, T. J. (2007). The neural correlates of sign versus word production. NeuroImage, 36(1), 202–208. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gärdenfors, P. (2024). The relations of demonstration and pantomime to causal reasoning and event cognition. In P. Żywiczyński, J. Blomberg & M. Boruta-Żywiczyńska (Eds). Perspectives on pantomime. (pp. 58–78). Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2021). Demonstration and pantomime in the evolution of teaching and communication. Language and Communication, 80, 71–79. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gasser, M. (2004). The prigins of arbitrariness in language. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 26(26). [URL]Google Scholar
Gell-Mann, M., & Ruhlen, M. (2011). The origin and evolution of word order. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 108(42), 17290–17295. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibson, E., Piantadosi, S. T., Brink, K., Bergen, L., Lim, E., & Saxe, R. (2013). A noisy-channel account of crosslinguistic word-order variation. Psychological Science, 24(7), 1079–1088. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Göksun, T., Lehet, M., Malykhina, K., & Chatterjee, A. (2015). Spontaneous gesture and spatial language: Evidence from focal brain injury. Brain and Language, 150, 1–13. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldin-Meadow, S., So, W., Özyürek, A., & Mylander, C. (2008). The natural order of events: How speakers of different languages represent events nonverbally. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hewes, G. W., Andrew, R. J., Carini, L., Choe, H., Gardner, R. A., Kortlandt, A., Krantz, G. S., McBride, G., Nottebohm, F., Pfeiffer, J., Rumbaugh, D. G., Steklis, H. D., Raliegh, M. J., Stopa, R., Suzuki, A., Washburn, S. L., & Wescott, R. W. (1973). Primate communication and the gestural origin of language [and comments and reply]. Current Anthropology, 14(1/2), 5–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Israel, A., & Sandler, W. (2011). Phonological category resolution in a new sign language: A comparative study of handshapes. In Formational units in sign languages (pp. 177–202). De Gruyter Mouton. [URL]Google Scholar
Kendon, A. (1980). Gesture and speech: Two aspects of the process of utterance. In M. R. Key (Ed.), Nonverbal communication and language. Mouton.Google Scholar
(2004). Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Klima, E. S., & Bellugi, U. (1979). The signs of language. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Kooij, van der, E. (2002). Phonological categories in sign language of the Netherlands: The role of phonetic implementation and iconicity. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
Marentette, P., Inaba, C., & Petrie, R. (2024). Symbolic distancing in three-year-old children’s pantomime. In P. Żywiczyński, J. Blomberg & M. Boruta-Żywiczyńska (Eds). Perspectives on pantomime. (pp. 190–218). Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McNeill, D. (1992). Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
(2012). How language began: Gesture and speech in human evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meir, I., & Sandler, W. (2008). A language in space: The story of Israeli Sign Language (1st ed.). Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Meir, I., Sandler, W., Padden, C., & Aronoff, M. (2010). Emerging sign languages. In M. Marschark & P. E. Spencer (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of deaf studies, language, and education, Vol. 2 (pp. 267–280). Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mineiro, A. (2016). Língua gestual de São Tomé e Príncipe: Retrato dos primeiros gestos. In Revista de estudos linguísticos da Universidade do Porto (Faculdade de Letras da Universidade do Porto e Centro de Linguística da Universidade do Porto, Vol. 11, p. 22).Google Scholar
(2020). Ensaio sobre génese e evolução da linguagem na espécie humana: Entre o gesto, a fala e a escrita. Novas Edições Acadêmicas.Google Scholar
(2022). Evolução da linguagem e ordem natural de Palavras: Os verbos reversíveis e não reversíveis na gestual de São Tomé e Príncipe num estudo piloto. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mineiro, A., Báez-Montero, I. C., Moita, M., Galhano-Rodrigues, I., & Castro-Caldas, A. (2021). Disentangling pantomime from early sign in a new sign language: Window into language evolution research. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 1130. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mineiro, A., Carmo, P., Caroça, C., Moita, M., Carvalho, S., Paço, J., & Zaky, A. (2017). Emerging linguistic features of Sao Tome and Principe Sign Language. Sign Language & Linguistics, 20(1), 109–128. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moita, M., Abreu, A. M., & Mineiro, A. (2023). Iconicity in the emergence of a phonological system?. Journal of Language Evolution, 8(1), 1–17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moita, M., Gonçalves, E., Medeiros, C., & Mineiro, A. (2018). A phonological diachronic study on Portuguese Sign Language of the Azores. Sign Language Studies, 19(1), 138–162. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Osiurak, F., Crétel, C., Uomini, N., Bryche, C., Lesourd, M., & Reynaud, E. (2021). On the neurocognitive co-evolution of tool behavior and language: Insights from the massive redeployment framework. Topics in Cognitive Science, 13(4), 684–707. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Padden, C. A., Meir, I., Hwang, S.-O., Lepic, R., Seegers, S., & Sampson, T. (2013). Patterned iconicity in sign language lexicons. Gesture, 13(3), 287–308. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Padden, C., Hwang, S.-O., Lepic, R., & Seegers, S. (2015). Tools for Language: Patterned Iconicity in Sign Language Nouns and Verbs. Topics in Cognitive Science, 7(1), 81–94. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pagel, M. (2009). Human language as a culturally transmitted replicator. Nature Reviews Genetics, 10(6), 405–415. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perniss, P., Thompson, R., & Vigliocco, G. (2010). Iconicity as a general property of language: Evidence from spoken and signed Languages. Frontiers in Psychology, 1. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perniss, P., & Vigliocco, G. (2014). The bridge of iconicity: From a world of experience to the experience of language. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 369(1651), 20130300. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Petitto, L. A. (1987). On the autonomy of language and gesture: Evidence from the acquisition of personal pronouns in American Sign Language. Cognition, 27(1), 1–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Petitto, L. A., Holowka, S., Sergio, L. E., Levy, B., & Ostry, D. J. (2004). Baby hands that move to the rhythm of language: Hearing babies acquiring sign languages babble silently on the hands. Cognition, 93(1), 43–73. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Petitto, L. A., & Marentette, P. F. (1991). Babbling in the Manual Mode: Evidence for the Ontogeny of Language. Science, 251(5000), 1493–1496. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rizzolatti, G., & Arbib, M. A. (1998). Language within our grasp. Trends in Neurosciences, 21(5), 188–194. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sandler, W. (2009). Symbiotic symbolization by hand and mouth in sign language. [URL]Google Scholar
(2012). Dedicated gestures and the emergence of sign language. Gesture, 12(3), 265–307. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013). Vive la différence: Sign language and spoken language in language evolution. Language and Cognition, 5(2–3), 189–203. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014). The emergence of the phonetic and phonological features in sign language. Nordlyd, 41(2), 183–212. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2017). The challenge of sign language phonology. Annual Review of Linguistics, 3(1), 43–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sandler, W., Aronoff, M., Padden, C., & Meir, I. (2014). Language emergence: Al-Sayyid Bedouin Sign Language. In J. Sidnell, N. J. Enfield, & P. Kockelman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of linguistic anthropology (pp. 250–284). Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Senghas, A., & Coppola, M. (2001). Children creating language: How Nicaraguan sign language acquired a spatial grammar. Psychological Science, 12(4), 323–328. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stokoe, W. C. (1980). Sign language structure. Annual Review of Anthropology, 9(1), 365–390. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sibirska, M., Boruta-Żywiczyńska, M., Żywiczyński, P., & Wacewicz, S. (2022). What's in a mime? An exploratory analysis of predictors of communicative success of pantomime. In M. Couto, S. Chandra, E. Yadollahi and V. Charisi (Eds). Interactions studies, 23(2) (pp. 289-321). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2008). Origins of human communication. The MIT Press. [URL]. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vieira, A. B. (1995). Ensaios sobre a evoluc̜ão do homem e da linguagem. Fim de Século.Google Scholar
Wacewicz, S., & Żywiczyński P. (2024). Two types of bodily-mimetic communication: Distinct design specifications and evolutionary trajectories. In P. Żywiczyński, J. Blomberg & M. Boruta-Żywiczyńska (Eds). Perspectives on Pantomime (pp. 101–115). Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Whiteside, S. P., Dyson, L., Cowell, P. E., & Varley, R. A. (2015). The relationship between apraxia of speech and oral apraxia: Association or dissociation? Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 30(7), 670–682. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilbur, R. B. (2000). Phonological and prosodic layering of nonmanuals in American Sign Language. In K. Emmorey & H. Lane (Eds.), The signs of language revisited: An anthology to honor Ursula Bellugi and Edward Klima (pp. 215–244). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.Google Scholar
Zlatev, J. (2008). The co-evolution of intersubjectivity and bodily mimesis. In J. Zlatev, T. Racine, C. Sinha, & E. Itkonen (Eds.), The shared mind: Perspectives on intersubjectivity (pp. 215–224). John Benjamins Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zlatev, J., Wacewiz, S., Żywiczyński, P. & deWeijer, J. (2017). Multimodal-first or panomime-first? Communicating events through pantomime with and without vocalization. In S. Hartmann, M. Pleyer, J. Winters and J. Zlatev (Eds.) Interaction in the evolution of language (pp. 465-488). John Benjamin Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zlatev, J., Sibierska, M., Żywiczyński, P., van de Weijer, & Boruta-Żywiczyńska, M. (2024). Can pantomime narrate? A cognitive semiotic approach. In P. Żywiczyński, J. Blomberg & M. Boruta-Żywiczyńska (Eds). Perspectives on Pantomime. (pp. 116–140.) Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zlatev, J., Żywiczyński, P., & Wacewicz, S. (2020). Pantomime as the original human-specific communicative system. Journal of Language Evolution, 5(2), 156–174. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Żywiczyński, P., Sibierska, M., Wacewicz, S., van de Weijer, J., Ferretti, F., Adornetti, I., Chiera, A., & Deriu, V. (2021). Evolution of conventional communication. A cross-cultural study of pantomimic re-enactments of transitive events. Language & Communication, 80, 191–203. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Żywiczyński, P., Wacewicz, S., & Lister, C. (2021). Pantomimic fossils in modern human communication. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 376(1824), 20200204. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Żywiczyński, P., Wacewicz, S., & Sibierska, M. (2018). Defining Pantomime for Language Evolution Research. Topoi, 37(2), 307–318. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Arbib, Michael
2024. Chapter 1. Pantomime within and beyond the evolution of language. In Perspectives on Pantomime [Advances in Interaction Studies, 12], ► pp. 16 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.