Goldin-Meadow Susan
University of Chicago, 5848 South University Avenue, Chicago, IL, 60637, USA.
Psychon Bull Rev. 2017 Feb;24(1):213-218. doi: 10.3758/s13423-016-1074-x.
Why, in all cultures in which hearing is possible, has language become the province of speech and the oral modality? I address this question by widening the lens with which we look at language to include the manual modality. I suggest that human communication is most effective when it makes use of two types of formats--a discrete and segmented code, produced simultaneously along with an analog and mimetic code. The segmented code is supported by both the oral and the manual modalities. However, the mimetic code is more easily handled by the manual modality. We might then expect mimetic encoding to be done preferentially in the manual modality (gesture), leaving segmented encoding to the oral modality (speech). This argument rests on two assumptions: (1) The manual modality is as good at segmented encoding as the oral modality; sign languages, established and idiosyncratic, provide evidence for this assumption. (2) Mimetic encoding is important to human communication and best handled by the manual modality; co-speech gesture provides evidence for this assumption. By including the manual modality in two contexts--when it takes on the primary function of communication (sign language), and when it takes on a complementary communicative function (gesture)--in our analysis of language, we gain new perspectives on the origins and continuing development of language.
为什么在所有具备听力的文化中，语言都成了言语和口头形式的范畴呢？我通过拓宽我们看待语言的视角，将手势形式纳入其中，来解答这个问题。我认为，人类交流在利用两种形式时最为有效——一种是离散且分段的代码，与模拟和模仿代码同时产生。分段代码由口头和手势两种形式支持。然而，模仿代码更容易通过手势形式来处理。那么我们可能会预期模仿编码会优先通过手势形式（手势）来完成，而将分段编码留给口头形式（言语）。这个观点基于两个假设：（1）手势形式在分段编码方面与口头形式一样出色；已确立且独特的手语为这一假设提供了证据。（2）模仿编码对人类交流很重要，且最好由手势形式来处理；伴随言语的手势为这一假设提供了证据。通过在两种情境下将手势形式纳入我们对语言的分析中——当它承担主要交流功能时（手语），以及当它承担补充性交流功能时（手势）——我们获得了关于语言起源和持续发展的新视角。
