gesture
Latest
Great ape interaction: Ladyginian but not Gricean
Non-human great apes inform one another in ways that can seem very humanlike. Especially in the gestural domain, their behavior exhibits many similarities with human communication, meeting widely used empirical criteria for intentionality. At the same time, there remain some manifest differences. How to account for these similarities and differences in a unified way remains a major challenge. This presentation will summarise the arguments developed in a recent paper with Christophe Heintz. We make a key distinction between the expression of intentions (Ladyginian) and the expression of specifically informative intentions (Gricean), and we situate this distinction within a ‘special case of’ framework for classifying different modes of attention manipulation. The paper also argues that the attested tendencies of great ape interaction—for instance, to be dyadic rather than triadic, to be about the here-and-now rather than ‘displaced’—are products of its Ladyginian but not Gricean character. I will reinterpret video footage of great ape gesture as Ladyginian but not Gricean, and distinguish several varieties of meaning that are continuous with one another. We conclude that the evolutionary origins of linguistic meaning lie in gradual changes in not communication systems as such, but rather in social cognition, and specifically in what modes of attention manipulation are enabled by a species’ cognitive phenotype: first Ladyginian and in turn Gricean. The second of these shifts rendered humans, and only humans, ‘language ready’.
Prosody in the voice, face, and hands changes which words you hear
Speech may be characterized as conveying both segmental information (i.e., about vowels and consonants) as well as suprasegmental information - cued through pitch, intensity, and duration - also known as the prosody of speech. In this contribution, I will argue that prosody shapes low-level speech perception, changing which speech sounds we hear. Perhaps the most notable example of how prosody guides word recognition is the phenomenon of lexical stress, whereby suprasegmental F0, intensity, and duration cues can distinguish otherwise segmentally identical words, such as "PLAto" vs. "plaTEAU" in Dutch. Work from our group showcases the vast variability in how different talkers produce stressed vs. unstressed syllables, while also unveiling the remarkable flexibility with which listeners can learn to handle this between-talker variability. It also emphasizes that lexical stress is a multimodal linguistic phenomenon, with the voice, lips, and even hands conveying stress in concert. In turn, human listeners actively weigh these multisensory cues to stress depending on the listening conditions at hand. Finally, lexical stress is presented as having a robust and lasting impact on low-level speech perception, even down to changing vowel perception. Thus, prosody - in all its multisensory forms - is a potent factor in speech perception, determining what speech sounds we hear.
gesture coverage
2 items