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. 217–241

Chapter 9
Gestural mimesis as “as-if” action

| European University Viadrina Frankfurt (Oder)
It is argued that gestural mimesis involves “as-if” actions that explain the transition from practical and literal actions with the hands to communicative actions of the hands. Concerning the term and the concept “pantomime,” it is suggested that it be primarily reserved for artistic practice and used for this type of communicative action only with great care. Given the fundamental role of mimesis to gestures (hand-gestures as well as full body gestures), it is proposed that gestures in general be conceived of as “mimetic expressive movements” – no matter whether they are used in the presence or absence of spoken or signed language. In order to underline the continuity between gestures created on the spot and conventionalized gestural forms, It is suggested to use the term miming or mimesis no matter whether gestures replace or accompany language. The chapter offers an introduction to the theoretical motivations and illustrates the empirical and methodological implications of this proposal. It first sketches three key aspects of an approach to gestures as mimetic expressive movements, then shows that mimesis grounds gestures with different communicative functions, illustrating its emergent productivity along the dynamics of different types of discourse and briefly touches upon dynamics in terms of historical change and how this affects the kinesics and the meaning of gestures. Finally, it is briefly indicated how conceiving of gestures as mimetic expressive movements affects the methodology for gesture analysis.
Keywords: gestural mimesis, gesture studies, as-if action, mimesis, hand-gestures, mimetic expressive movements
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • 1.Gestures as mimetic expressive movements
    • 1.1Gesture phrases and the meaning of a gesture (Kendon)
    • 1.2Expressive movements as movement images and how gestures are understood (Plessner)
    • 1.3Mimesis as anthropological constant (Aristotle)
  • 2.How miming as as-if action grounds gestural meaning dynamically
    • 2.1Miming as as-if action in a story-telling about a family event
    • 2.2Miming as as-if action in an interview with barack obama
    • 2.3Miming as as-if action and historical processes of stabilization
  • 3.Miming as as-if action in the context of gesture analysis
  • Summary and conclusion
  • References
Published online: 15 February 2024
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ais.12.09mul
References (45)
References
Arbib, M. A., (2012). How the brain got language: The mirror system hypothesis 16. Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bressem, J., & Ladewig, S. H. (2011). Rethinking gesture phases: Articulatory features of gestural movement? Semiotica, 184(1/4), 53–91. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bressem, Jana, Silva H. Ladewig & Cornelia Müller (2013). Linguistic Annotation System for Gestures (LASG). In C. Müller, A. Cienki, E. Fricke, S. H. Ladewig, D. McNeill & S. Teßendorf (Eds.) Body – language – communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction. (Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Science 38.1.), 1098–1124. Berlin/ Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Bressem, J., & Müller, C. (2014a). The family of Away gestures: Negation, refusal, and negative assessment. In C. Müller, A. Cienki, E. Fricke, S. H. Ladewig, D. McNeill, & J. Bressem (Eds.), Body – language – communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction (Vol. 2, pp. 1592–1604). De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014b). A repertoire of German recurrent gestures with pragmatic functions. In C. Müller, A. Cienki, E. Fricke, S. H. Ladewig, D. McNeill, & J. Bressem (Eds.), Body – language – communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction (Vol. 2, pp. 1575–1591). De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ekman, Paul (1993). Facial expression and emotion. American Psychologist, 384–392. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldin-Meadow, S., & Brentari, D. (2017). Gesture, sign, and language: the coming of age of sign language and gesture studies. Behav. Brain Sci., 40, 1–17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harrison, S, Ladewig, S. H. & Bressem, J. (Eds). (2021) Recurrent Gestures. Special Issue. Gesture 20/2. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kappelhoff, H. (2004). Matrix der Gefühle. Das Kino, das Melodrama und das Theater der Empfindsamkeit (13774895). Vorwerk 8.Google Scholar
(2018). Kognition und Reflexion. Zur Theorie filmischen Denkens. Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kendon, A. (2004). Gesture: Visible action as utterance (1. Aufl.). Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Laban, von R. (1956). Principles of Dance and Movement Notation. Macdonald & Evans.Google Scholar
Laban, R., & Lawrence, F. C. (1947). Effort: Economy in body movement. MacDonald and Evans.Google Scholar
Kendon, A. (1972). Some relationships between body motion and speech. In A. Seigman, & B. Pope (Eds.), Studies in dyadic communication (pp. 177–216). Pergamon Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1980). Gesture and speech: Two aspects of the process of utterance. In M. R. Key, (Ed.), Nonverbal Communication and Language (pp. 207–227). Mouton.Google Scholar
(1983) Gesture and speech: How they interact. In Wiemann & R. Harrison (Eds.). Nonverbal Interaction (Sage Annual Reviews of Communication, Volume 11, pp. 13–46). Sage Publications.Google Scholar
(1988). How gestures can become like words. In F. Poyatos (Ed.), Crosscultural Perspectives in Nonverbal Communication (pp. 131–141). Hogrefe.Google Scholar
Kendon, A. (2014). Semiotic diversity in utterance production and the concept of ‘language’. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol Sci. 369:20130293. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kendon, Adam (2016). Reflections on the ‘Gesture First’ hypothesis of language origins. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ladewig, Silva H. (2014a). Recurrent gestures. In C. Müller, A. Cienki, E. Fricke, S. H. Ladewig, D. McNeill & Jana Bressem (Eds.,), Body – language – communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction (pp. 1558–1575). De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Ladewig, S. H. (2014b). The cyclic gesture. In C. Müller, A. Cienki, E. Fricke, S. H. Ladewig, D. McNeill, & J. Bressem (Eds.), Body – language – communication. An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction (pp. 1605–1618). De Gruyter MoutonGoogle Scholar
Lausberg, H., Cruz, R. F., Kita, S., Zaidel, E., und Ptito, A. (2003). Pantomime to visual presentation of objects. Left hand dyspraxia in patients with complete callosotomy. Brain, 126, 343–360. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McNeill, D. (1985). So you think gestures are nonverbal? Psychol. Rev. 92, 350–371. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1992). Hand and mind. What gestures reveal about thought. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
(2000). Language and Gesture. In D. McNeil (Hrsg.), Introduction (S. 1–10). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(2013). The co-evolution of gesture and speech, and downstream consequences. In C. Müller, A. Cienki, E. Fricke, S. H. Ladewig, D. McNeill & Jana Bressem (Eds.,), Body – language – communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction (pp. 480–512). De Gruyter Mouton. 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
Morris, D. (1977) Manwatching. A field guide to human behavior. New York: Abrams.Google Scholar
Müller, C. (1998). Redebegleitende Gesten: Kulturgeschichte—Theorie—Sprachvergleich. Berlin Verlag Arno Spitz.Google Scholar
(1998a) Redebegleitende Gesten. Kulturgeschichte – Theorie – Sprachvergleich. Berlin Verlag Arno Spitz GmbHGoogle Scholar
(2010). Wie Gesten bedeuten. Eine kognitiv-linguistische und sequenzanalytische Perspektive. In Irene Mittelberg (Ed.), Sprache und Gestik. Sonderheft der Zeitschrift Sprache und Literatur, 41(1): 37–68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Müller, C., Cienki, A., Fricke, E., Ladewig, S. H., McNeill, D. & Teßendorf, S. (Eds.) (2013) Body – language – communication. An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction (Handbooks of linguistics and communication science 38.1.) Berlin/ Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Müller, C., Cienki, A., Fricke, E., Ladewig, S. H., McNeill, D., & Bressem, J. (eds.) (2014) Body – language – communication. An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction (Handbooks of linguistics and communication science 38.2.) De Gruyter MoutonGoogle Scholar
Müller, C. (2017). How recurrent gestures mean: Conventionalized contexts-of-use and embodied motivation. Gesture, 16(2), 277–304.Google Scholar
Müller, C., & Kappelhoff, H. (2018). Cinematic Metaphor. Experience – Affectivity – Temporality. De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Müller, C. (2014). Gestural Modes of Representation as techniques of depiction. Müller, C., Cienki, A., Fricke, E., Ladewig, S. H., McNeill, D., & Bressem, J. (eds.) (2014) Body – language – communication. An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction (Handbooks of linguistics and communication science 38.2.) De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2016). From mimesis to meaning: A systematics of gestural mimesis for concrete and abstract referential gestures. In J. Zlatev, G. Sonesson, & P. Konderak (Eds.), Meaning, mind and communication: Explorations in cognitive semiotics. Peter Lang. 211–226.Google Scholar
(2018). Gesture and Sign: Cataclysmic Break or Dynamic Relations? Frontiers in Psychology, 10 September 2018. DOI logo)Google Scholar
(2019). Metaphorizing as Embodied Interactivity: What Gesturing and Film Viewing Can Tell Us About an Ecological View on Metaphor. Metaphor and Symbol, 34(1): 61–79. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(in press). A Toolbox of Methods for Gesture Analysis. In Cienki, A. (ed.) Handbook of Gesture Studies. Cambridge University Press.
Plessner, H. (1982). Ausdruck und menschliche Natur. G. Dux, O. Marquard & E. Ströker (Eds.). 10 Vol. 7, Helmuth Plessner. Gesammelte Schriften. Suhrkamp. Original edition 1957.Google Scholar
Singleton, J. L., Goldin-Meadow, S., & McNeill, D. (1995). The cataclysmic break between gesticulation and sign: evidence against an evolutionary continuum of manual communication. In K. Emmorey & J. Reilly (Eds.), Language, Gesture, and Space (pp. 287–311). Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Vigliocco, G., Perniss, P., Thompson, R. & Vinson, D. (Eds.) (2014). Language as a multimodal phenomenon: Implications for language learning, processing, and evolution. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 369(1651). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilcox, S. (2007) Routes from gesture to language. In E. Pizzuto, P. Pietrandrea & S. Raffaele (Eds.), Verbal and signed languages: Comparing structures, constructs and methodologies. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 107–131Google Scholar