Article published In:
Sign Language & LinguisticsVol. 17:2 (2014) ► pp.215–238
The non-linguistic status of the Symmetry Condition in signed languages
Evidence from a comparison of signs and speech-accompanying representational gestures
Since Battison (1978), it has been noted in many signed languages that the Symmetry Condition constrains the form of two-handed signs in which two hands move independently. The Condition states that the form features (e.g., the handshapes and movements) of the two hands are ‘symmetrical’. The Symmetry Condition has been regarded in the literature as a part of signed language phonology. In this study, we examine the linguistic status of the Symmetry Condition by comparing the degree of symmetry in signs from Sign Language of the Netherlands and speech-accompanying representational gestures produced by Dutch speakers. Like signed language, such gestures use hand movements to express concepts, but they do not constitute a linguistic system in their own right. We found that the Symmetry Condition holds equally well for signs and spontaneous gestures. This indicates that this condition is a general cognitive constraint, rather than a constraint specific to language. We suggest that the Symmetry Condition is a manifestation of the mind having one active ‘mental articulator’ when expressing a concept with hand movements.
References (22)
Anderson, Stephen R. 1981. Why phonology isn’t “natural”. Linguistic Inquiry 121. 493–539.
Battison, Robbin. 1978. Lexical borrowing in American Sign Language. Silver Spring, MD: Linstok Press.
Blees, Marja, Onno Crasborn, Harry van der Hulst & Els van der Kooij. 1996. SignPhon: A database tool for phonological analysis of sign languages.
Manual, version 0.1. Manuscript, Leiden University.
De Ruiter, Jan Peter. 1998. The production of gesture and speech. PhD dissertation, University of Nijmegen.
Engberg-Pedersen, Elisabeth. 1993. Space in Danish Sign Language. The semantics and morphosyntax of the use of space in a visual language. Hamburg: Signum Verlag.
Gijn, Ingeborg van. 1997. Vormkarakteristieken van gestures en gebaren [Form characteristics of gestures and signs]. MA thesis, Leiden University.
Hulst, Harry van der. 1993. Units in the analysis of signs. Phonology 101. 209–241. 
. 1996. On the other hand. Lingua 981. 121–144.
Kendon, Adam. 1972. Some relationships between body motion and speech. In Aron Siegman & Benjamin Pope (eds.), Studies in dyadic communication, 177–210. New York: Pergamon Press.
. 1988a. Sign languages of Aboriginal Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
. 1988b. How gesture can become like words. In Fernando Poyatos (ed.), Cross-cultural perspectives in nonverbal communication, 131–141. Toronto: Hogrefe.
Kita, Sotaro. 1993. Language and thought: A study of spontaneous gestures and Japanese mimetics. PhD dissertation, University of Chicago.
Kita, Sotaro, Ingeborg van Gijn & Harry van der Hulst. 1998. Movement phases in signs and co-speech gestures, and their transcription by human coders. In Ipke Wachsmuth & Martin Fröhlich (eds.), Gesture and sign language in human-computer interaction, International Gesture Workshop Bielefeld, Germany, September 17-19, 1997, Proceedings (
Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence
Vol. 13171), 23–35. Berlin: Springer.
Krauss, Robert M., Yihsiu Chen & Purnima Chawala. 1996. Nonverbal behavior and nonverbal communication: What do conversational hand gestures tell us? In Mark Zanna (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 389–450. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Mandel, Mark. 1979. Natural constraints in sign language phonology: Data from anatomy. Sign Language Studies 241. 215–229.
McNeill, David. 1985. So you think gestures are nonverbal? Psychological Review 921. 350–371.
. 1992. Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Prillwitz, Siegmund, Regina Leven, Heiko Zienert, Thomas Hanke & Jan Henning. 1989. HamNoSys. Hamburg notation system for sign languages: An introductory guide. Version 2.0. Hamburg: Signum.
Reddy, Michael. 1979. The conduit metaphor – a case of frame conflict in our language about language. In Andrew Ortony (ed.), Metaphor and thought, 284–324. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sandler, Wendy. 1989. Phonological representation of the sign: Linearity and nonlinearity in ASL phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.
. 1993. Hand in hand: The roles of the nondominant hand in sign language phonology. The Linguistic Review 101. 337–390.
Sutton-Spence, Rachel & Bencie Woll. 1999. The linguistics of British Sign Language: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cited by (6)
Cited by six other publications
Mertz, Justine, Chiara Annucci, Valentina Aristodemo, Beatrice Giustolisi, Doriane Gras, Giuseppina Turco, Carlo Geraci & Caterina Donati
2022. Measuring sign complexity: Comparing a model-driven and an error-driven approach. Laboratory Phonology 24:1 
Schönström, Krister & Johanna Mesch
2022. Second language acquisition of depicting signs. Language, Interaction and Acquisition 13:2 ► pp. 199 ff.
Ortega, Gerardo & Aslı Özyürek
2020. Systematic mappings between semantic categories and types of iconic representations in the manual modality: A normed database of silent gesture. Behavior Research Methods 52:1 ► pp. 51 ff.
Brentari, Diane
2019. Sign Language Phonology,
Sandler, Wendy
2018. The Body as Evidence for the Nature of Language. Frontiers in Psychology 9
Cooperrider, Kensy, Dedre Gentner & Susan Goldin-Meadow
2016. Spatial analogies pervade complex relational reasoning: Evidence from spontaneous gestures. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications 1:1
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 26 september 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.