Gesture, meaning-making, and embodiment: Second language learning in an elementary classroom

• Authors: Alessandro (Alex) Rosborough
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The purpose of the present study was to investigate the mediational role of gesture and body movement/positioning between a teacher and an English language learner in a second-grade classroom. Responding to Thibault’s (2011) call for understanding language through whole-body sense making, aspects of gesture and body positioning were analyzed for their role as mediational tools for meaning making during a math assignment. Analysis of the teacher-student dyad provides insight as to how they moved from simply exchanging answers to using positions and gestures to embody meaning and feelings, thus establishing strategic ways to solve communication problems in the future. A shift to embodying the communication task provided new meanings not previously afforded while sitting at a desk. Combining a Gibsonian (1979) ecological perspective with Vygotskian (1978, 1986) sociocultural theory provides a way to view the role of embodiment in the social practice of second language learning (van Lier, 2004). Findings provide evidence that gesture along with bodily positions and [inter]actions play a central role in this dyadic meaning- making experience. The data demonstrate the interactive nature of the semiotic resources of the activity (i.e., speech, gesture/hands, math graph, whiteboard), with their materialized bodily/speech-voiced acts coinciding with Thibault’s (2004, 2011) explanation of human meaning-making activity as a hybrid phenomenon that includes a cross-coupled relationship between semiotic affordances and physical-material body activity. This perspective embraces Vygotsky’s (1978, 1997a) view of dialectical development including the importance of psychological and materialized-physical tools such as gesture in dealing with language learning processes (McNeill, 2012).

Keywords

EN

gesture; embodiment; mimesis; second language learning

• Publisher: Sciendo
• Journal: Journal of Pedagogy
• Year: 2014
• Volume: 5
• Issue: 2
• Pages: 227-250

Dates

published

2014-12-01

online

2014-11-25

Contributors

author

Alessandro (Alex) Rosborough

• Teacher Education Department 206-S McKay School of Education Brigham Young University Provo UT 84602 USA

References

• Bakhtin, M. (1981). The dialogic imagination (M. Holquist, Ed.; C. Emerson & M.
• Holquist, trans.). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
• Daniels, H., Cole, M., & Wertsch, J.V. (Eds.). (2007). The Cambridge companion to Vygotsky. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
• Del Rio, P., & Alvarez, A. (2007). Inside and outside the zone of proximal development: An ecofunctional reading of Vygotsky. In H. Daniels, M. Cole, & J.V. Werstch (Eds.), The Cambridge Companion to Vygotsky (pp. 276-303). New York: NY: Cambridge University Press.
• Donald, M. (2001). A mind so rare. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company.
• Echevarria, J., & Graves, A. (2011). Sheltered content instruction: Teaching english learners with divers abilities. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
• Echevarria, J., Short, D., & Vogt, M. (2000). Making content comprehensible for english language learners:The SIOP model. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
• Faraco, M., & Kida, T. (2008). Gesture and the negotiation of meaning in a second language classroom. In S. McCafferty & G. Stam (Eds.), Gesture: Second language acquisition and classroom research (pp. 280-297). New York, NY: Routledge.
• Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. New York, NY: Basic Books Gibson, J.J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston, MA: Cornell University.
• Goodman, N. (1968). The languages of art: An approach to a theory of symbols. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.
• Gullberg, M. (1998). Gesture as a communication strategy in second language discourse: A study of learners of French and Swedish. Lund, Sweden: Lund University Press.
• Gullberg, M., & McCafferty, S. (2008). Introduction to gesture and SLA: Toward an integrated approach. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 3033. 146.
• Haught, J., & McCafferty, S. (2008). Embodied language performance: Drama and the ZPD in the second language classroom. In M. Poehner & J. Lantolf (Eds.), Sociocultural theory and the teaching of second languages. London, UK: Equinox.
• James, W. (1890). Principles of psychology. New York, NY: Dover Publications.
• Kendon, A. (1994). Do gestures communicate? A review. Research on language and social interaction, 27(3), 175-200.
• Kida, T. (2008). Does gesture aid discourse comprehension in the L2? In S. McCafferty & G. Stam (Eds.), Gesture: Second language acquisition and classroom research (pp. 131-156). London, UK: Routledge.
• Kramsch, C. (2008). Ecological perspectives on foreign language education. Language Teaching, 41(3), 389-408.
• Lantolf, J. (2000). Introducing sociocultural theory. In J. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 1-26). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
• Lantolf, J., & Thorne, S. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
• Lazaraton, A. (2004). Gesture and speech in the vocabulary explanations of one ESL teacher: A microanalytic inquiry. Language Learning, 54 (1), 79-117.
• Lindblom, J., & Ziemke, T. (2007). Embodiment and social interaction: A cognitive science perspective. In T. Ziemke, J. Zlatev, & R. Frank (Eds.), Body, language and mind: Vol 1. Embodiment (pp. 129-163). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
• McCafferty, S. (1998). Nonverbal expression and L2 private speech. Applied Linguistics, 19, 73-96.[Crossref]
• McCafferty, S. (2008a). Mimesis and second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30, 147-167.
• McCafferty, S. (2008b). Material foundations for second language acquisition: Gesture, metaphor, and internalization. In S. McCafferty & G. Stam, (Eds.), Gesture: Second language acquisition and classroom research (pp. 47-65). London, UK: Routledge.
• McCafferty, S., & Stam, G. (2008). Gesture: Second Language Acquisition and Classroom Research. New York, NY: Routledge.
• McNeill, D. (1992). Hand and mind. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.
• McNeill, D. (2005). Gesture and thought. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
• McNeill, D. (2012). How language began: Gesture and speech in human evolution. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). Phenomenology of perception (C. Smith, trans.). London, UK: Routledge.
• Rosborough, A. (2012). Teacher and students’ use of gesture as a meaning-making affordance for second language learning. In B. Yoon & H.K. Kim (Eds.), Teachers’ roles in second language learning: Classroom applications of sociocultural theory (pp. 63-80). Charlotte, N.C.: Information Age Publishing.
• Sime, D. (2006). What do learners make of teachers’ gestures in the language classroom? International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 44 (2), 211-230.
• Stam, G. (2008). What gestures reveal about second language acquisition. In S.
• McCafferty & G. Stam (Eds.), Gesture: Second language acquisition and classroom research (pp. 231-255). London, UK: Routledge.
• Thibault, P. (2004). Brain, mind, and the signifying body. London, UK: Continuum.
• Thibault, P. (2011). First-order languaging dynamics and second-order language: The distributed language view. Ecological Psychology, 23 (3), 210-245.[Crossref][WoS]
• Tomasello, M. (2008). Origins of human communication. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Valsiner, J. (1997). Culture and the development of children’s action. New York, NY- :Wiley van Lier, L. (1996). Interaction in the language curriculum: Awareness, autonomy, & authenticity. New York, NY: Longman Publishing. van Lier, L. (2004). The ecology and semiotics of language learning: A sociocultural perspective. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers. van Lier, L. (2008). The ecology of language learning and sociocultural theory. In A.
• Creese, P. Martin, P., & N. H. Hornberger (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education: Vol. 9. Ecology of language (2nd ed., pp. 53-65). Boston, MA: Springer.
• Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT press.
• Vygotsky, L. (1924/1997a). The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky: Vol. 3. Problems of the theory and history of psychology (R.W. Reiber & A.S. Carton, Eds.). New York NY: Plenum Press.
• Vygotsky, L. (1997b). The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky: Vol. 4. History of the development of higher mental functions (R.W. Reiber & A. S. Carton, Eds.). New York, NY: Plenum Press.
• Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic inquiry: Towards a sociocultural practice and theory of education. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• Wells, G. (1986/2009). The meaning makers: Children learning language and using language to learn. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
• Wertsch, J.V. (1985). Vygotsky and the social formation of mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Wertsch, J.V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Wertsch, J.V. (1998). Mind as action. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
• Zlatev, J. (2007). Embodiment, language, and mimesis. In T. Ziemke, J. Zlatev, & R. Frank (Eds.), Body, language and mind: Vol 1. Embodiment (pp. 297-337). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
• Zazzo, R. (1968). Conduites et conscience: Vol. 1. Psychologie de l’enfant et method genetique. SUI, Neuchatel: Delachaux et Niestle.

Identifiers

DOI

10.2478/jped-2014-0011