The shrug as marker of obviousness
-
Annelies Jehoul
,
Geert Brône
Abstract
This contribution focuses on the shrug as it is used in stance taking contexts in face-to-face conversations. The shrug qualifies as a ‘compound enactment’, in which prototypically different gestures are combined: “the eye-brows (which are being raised), the hands (which are turned so that the palms face up), the forearms (which may be lifted), and the shoulders (which are also raised). In addition, the head may be tilted” (Streeck 2009: 189. Gesturecraft. The manu-facture of meaning. Amsterdam: Benjamins). More recent studies show that instead of a head tilt, a headshake can also be a part of the shrug (Schoonjans 2014. Modalpartikeln als multimodale Konstruktionen: Eine korpusbasierte Kookkurrenzanalyse von Modalpartikeln und Gestik im Deutschen. Leuven: KU Leuven dissertation). We report on an empirical study, in which the shrug or some of its gestural components are used to express obviousness on the part of the speaker. Although our data reveal multimodal patterns in the expression of obviousness, this study singles out the gestural dimension. The paper is structured as follows. Section 2 explains the methodological aspects of our study, after which Section 3 presents the formal and quantitative results, illustrated with four examples. The paper ends in Section 4 with a brief discussion of our major findings.
References
Debras, Camille. 2013. Shrugging as stance-taking: Forms and functions of a compound enactment. [talk at the first MaMuD workshop, Aachen, 22-11-2013].Search in Google Scholar
Debras, Camille & Alan Cienki. 2012. Some uses of head tilts and shoulder shrugs during human interaction, and their relation to stancetaking. 2012 ASE/IEEE International Conference on Social Computing and 2012 ASE/IEEE International Conference on Privacy, Security, Risk and Trust. 932–937.10.1109/SocialCom-PASSAT.2012.136Search in Google Scholar
DeCarlo, Doug, Matthew Stone, Corey Revilla & Jennifer J. Venditti. 2004. Specifying and animating facial signals for discourse in embodied conversational agents. Computer Animation and Virtual Worlds 15(1). 27–38.10.1002/cav.5Search in Google Scholar
Du Bois, John. W. 2007. The stance triangle. In R. Englebretson (eds.), Stancetaking in discourse: Subjectivity, evaluation, interaction, 139–182. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.164.07duSearch in Google Scholar
Ferré, Gaëlle. 2011. Functions of three open-palm hand gestures. Multimodal Communication 1(1). 5–20.10.1515/mc-2012-0002Search in Google Scholar
Feyaerts, Kurt, Ilona Papousek, Helmut K. Lackner, Gabriele Gierlinger & Bert Oben (2012). AliLeGra Corpus. Alignment Leuven Graz. Dept. of Linguistics, KU Leuven.Search in Google Scholar
Flecha-García, María. L. 2010. Eyebrow raises in dialogue and their relation to discourse structure, utterance function and pitch accents in English. Speech Communication 52. 542–554.10.1016/j.specom.2009.12.003Search in Google Scholar
Jehoul, Annelies. 2014. Multimodale uitdrukkingen van vanzelfsprekendheid. Een empirische corpusstudie. Master thesis. Dept. of Linguistics, KU Leuven.Search in Google Scholar
Jehoul, Annelies & Kurt Feyaerts. In press. Multimodale uitdrukkignen van vanzelfsprekendheid. Een empirische corpusstudie. Nederlandse Taalkunde.Search in Google Scholar
Kärkkäinen, Elise. 2003. Epistemic stance in English conversation: A description of its interactional functions, with a focus on I think. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.115Search in Google Scholar
Kendon, Adam. 2002. Some uses of the head shake. Gesture 2. 147–182.10.1075/gest.2.2.03kenSearch in Google Scholar
Kendon, Adam. 2004. Gesture. Visible action as utterance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511807572Search in Google Scholar
Mangelschots, Katinka, Annelies Jehoul, Kurt Feyaerts & Steven Schoonjans. Submitted. Multimodal marking of obviousness in German and Dutch: A contrastive study. Cognitextes.Search in Google Scholar
Müller, Cornelia. 2004. Forms of the uses of the palm up open hand. A case of a gesture family? In Posner R. & Müller C. (eds.), The semantics and pragmatics of everyday gestures, 234–256. Berlin: Weidler Buchverlag.Search in Google Scholar
Schoonjans, Steven. 2014. Modalpartikeln als multimodale Konstruktionen: Eine korpusbasierte Kookkurrenzanalyse von Modalpartikeln und Gestik im Deutschen Dissertation. Dept. of Linguistics, KU Leuven.10.1515/9783110566260Search in Google Scholar
Schoonjans, Steven, Geert Brône & Kurt Feyaerts. 2015. Multimodalität in der Konstruktionsgrammatik: Eine kritische Betrachtung illustriert anhand einer Gestikanalyse der Partikel einfach. In Bücker Jörg, Günthner Susanne & Imo Wolfgang (eds.), Konstruktionsgrammatik V: Konstruktionen im Spannungsfeld von sequenziellen Mustern, kommunikativen Gattungen und Textsorten, 291–308. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Search in Google Scholar
Streeck, Jürgen. 2009. Gesturecraft. The manu-facture of meaning. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/gs.2Search in Google Scholar
© 2017 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Multimodality and construction grammar
- Multimodal constructs – multimodal constructions? The role of constructions in the working memory
- Utterance Construction Grammar (UCxG) and the variable multimodality of constructions
- Apposition: A multimodal construction? The multimodality of linguistic constructions in the light of usage-based theory
- Is there a multimodal construction based on non-deictic so in German?
- Multimodal existential constructions in German: Manual actions of giving as experiential substrate for grammatical and gestural patterns
- On the multimodality of [all the way from X PREP Y]
- Timelines and multimodal constructions: Facing new challenges
- Multimodal form-meaning pairs for blended classic joint attention
- Multimodal rhetoric: Fictive interaction strategies in political discourse
- The “Negative-Assessment-Construction” – A multimodal pattern based on a recurrent gesture?
- The shrug as marker of obviousness
- Multimodal Construction Grammar issues are Construction Grammar issues
- Do we really need a Multimodal Construction Grammar?
Articles in the same Issue
- Multimodality and construction grammar
- Multimodal constructs – multimodal constructions? The role of constructions in the working memory
- Utterance Construction Grammar (UCxG) and the variable multimodality of constructions
- Apposition: A multimodal construction? The multimodality of linguistic constructions in the light of usage-based theory
- Is there a multimodal construction based on non-deictic so in German?
- Multimodal existential constructions in German: Manual actions of giving as experiential substrate for grammatical and gestural patterns
- On the multimodality of [all the way from X PREP Y]
- Timelines and multimodal constructions: Facing new challenges
- Multimodal form-meaning pairs for blended classic joint attention
- Multimodal rhetoric: Fictive interaction strategies in political discourse
- The “Negative-Assessment-Construction” – A multimodal pattern based on a recurrent gesture?
- The shrug as marker of obviousness
- Multimodal Construction Grammar issues are Construction Grammar issues
- Do we really need a Multimodal Construction Grammar?
