Acceptability of at-issue co-speech gestures under contrastive focus

Maria Esipova

doi:10.5334/gjgl.635

Abstract

The status of content-bearing co-speech gestures, i.e., gestural adjuncts co-occurring with the verbal expressions they adjoin to, has recently become a matter of debate in formal semantics and pragmatics (Ebert &amp; Ebert 2014; Ebert 2017; Tieu et al. 2017; 2018; Esipova 2018; Schlenker 2018; Zlogar &amp; Davidson 2018). The general tendency has been to claim that co-speech gestures by default make not-at-issue contributions, however, the existing analyses differ in whether they in principle allow for at-issue interpretations of co-speech gestures and, if yes, in how much cost such at-issue interpretations can incur. In this study I use an acceptability judgement task to investigate the acceptability of at-issue interpretations of co-speech gestures forced by contrastive focus, as well as some factors that can potentially affect that acceptability. I conclude that while the overall results are in principle compatible with any analysis that posits a (strong) bias against at-issue interpretations of co-speech gestures, further inspection of individual variation in judgement patterns allows us to argue against analyses in which the level of such bias is fixed across speakers. In particular, the variation data can be taken as evidence against the analysis of co-speech gestures as Pottsian (2005) supplements akin to appositives (Ebert &amp; Ebert 2014; Ebert 2017). As for the factors that can potentially affect the acceptability of at-issue interpretations of co-speech gestures under contrastive focus, neither the type of content encoded by the gesture, nor emphatic production of co-speech gestures have been found to have an effect.

Highlights

The main goal of the present study is to investigate the acceptability of CFforced at-issue interpretations of co-speech gestures
In this study I used an acceptability judgement task to investigate the acceptability of at-issue interpretations of co-speech gestures forced by contrastive focus (CF)
The overall results show that sentences in which at-issue interpretations of co-speech gestures are forced to make CF felicitous are degraded, in particular, when compared to controls in which at-issue interpretations of co-speech gestures are not forced

Summary

Introduction

(2) John might order a large beer. For that reason the authors above conclude that the contribution of cospeech gestures is typically not-at-issue, because their content projects from (i.e., is preserved in) a variety of embedding environments, including from under might. It has been further noted (Esipova 2018; the original observation about examples like (3) is due to Rob Pasternak (p.c.)) that co-speech gestures can in principle be interpreted as at-issue restrictive modifiers, in particular, under contrastive focus: (3). It has been claimed in the literature (Ebert & Ebert 2014; Schlenker 2018; Tieu et al 2017a; b) that (1) gives rise to an inference that if John orders a beer, it will be large (i.e., John won’t order a small beer).

Objectives

Results

Discussion

Conclusion