Skip to main content
Log in

Gesture following deafferentation: a phenomenologically informed experimental study

  • Published:
Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Empirical studies of gesture in a subject who has lost proprioception and the sense of touch from the neck down show that specific aspects of gesture remain normal despite abnormal motor processes for instrumental movement. The experiments suggest that gesture, as a linguistic phenomenon, is not reducible to instrumental movement. They also support and extend claims made by Merleau-Ponty concerning the relationship between language and cognition. Gesture, as language, contributes to the accomplishment of thought.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allot, R. 1992. The motor theory of language: origin and function. In: J. Wind et al. (eds). Language Origin: A Multidisciplinary Approach. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anscombe, G.E.M. 1979. Intention. London: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blouin, J., Gauthier, G.M., Vercher J.-L. and Cole, J. 1996. The relative contribution of retinal and extraretinal signals in determining the accuracy of reaching movements in normal subjects and a deafferented patient. Experimental Brain Research 109: 148-153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cole, J. 1995. Pride and a Daily Marathon. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press (originally London: Duckworth, 1991).

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole, J., Gallagher, S., McNeill, D., Duncan S., Furuyama, N. and McCullough, K.-E. 1998. Gestures after total deafferentation of the bodily and spatial senses. In: Santi et al. (eds). Oralité et gestualité: Communication Multi-modale, Interaction, pp. 65-69. Paris: L. Harmattan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole, J. and J. Paillard. 1996. Living without touch and peripheral information about body position and movement: studies upon deafferented subjects. In: J. Bermúdez, A. Marcel and N. Eilan (eds). The Body and the Self, pp. 245-266. Cambridge, MA: MIT/Bradford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denny-Brown, D., Meyer, J.S. and Horenstein, S. 1952. The significance of perceptual rivalry resulting from parietal lesion. Brain 75: 433-471.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher, S. and Cole, J. 1995. Body schema and body image in a deafferented subject. Journal of Mind and Behavior 16: 369-390.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher, S., Cole, J. and McNeill, D. 2001. The language-thought-hand system. In C. Cave, I. Guaitella and S. Santi (eds). Oralité et gestualité: Interactions et comportements multimodaux dans la communication, pp. 420-424. Paris: L'Harmattan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iverson, J.M. and Goldin-Meadow, S. 1998. Why people gesture when they speak.Nature (19 November 1998): 228.

  • Iverson, J.M. and Thelen, E. 1999. Hand, mouth and brain: The dynamic emergence of speech and gesture. Journal of Consciousness Studies 6(11-12): 19-40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kita, S. 2000. How representational gestures help speaking. In: D. McNeill (ed). Language and Gesture, pp. 162-185. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • LeBaron, C. and Streeck, J. (2000). Gestures, knowledge, and the world. In: D. McNeill (ed). Language and Gesture, pp. 118-138. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marcel, A.J. 1992. The personal level in cognitive rehabilitation. In: N. von Steinbuchel, E. Poppel and D. von Cramon (eds). Neurophychological Rehabilitation, pp. 155-168. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milner, D. 1998. Unconscious visual processing for action: Neuropsychological evidence. Paper presented at Towards a Science of Consciousness, Third Conference, Tucson, April 27, 1998.

  • Merleau-Ponty, M. 1962. Phenomenology of Perception, tr. C. Smith. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNeill, D. 1985. So you think gestures are non-verbal? Psychological Review 92: 350-371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNeill, D. 1992. Hand and Mind: What Gestures Reveal about Thought. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ogden, J.A. 1996. Fractured Minds: A Case-Study Approach to Clinical Neuropsychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ojemann, G.A. 1984. Common cortical and thalamic mechanisms for language and motor functions. American Journal of Physiology 246 (Regulatory Integrative and Comparative Physiology 15): R901-R903.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pribram, K.H. 1999. Brain and the composition of conscious experience. Journal of Consciousness Studies 6 (5): 19-42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ricoeur, P. 1992. Oneself as Another, tr. K. Blamey. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Streeck, J. 1996. How to do things with things: Objects trovés and symbolization. Human Studies 19: 365-384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vercher, J-L., Gauthier, G.M., Guedon, O., Blouin, J., Cole J. and Lamarre, Y. 1996. Selfmoved target eye tracking in control and deafferented subjects: Roles of arm command and proprioception in arm-eye coordination. Journal of Neurophysiology 76 (2): 1133-44.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cole, J., Gallagher, S. & McNeill, D. Gesture following deafferentation: a phenomenologically informed experimental study. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 1, 49–67 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015572619184

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015572619184

Keywords

Navigation