Gesture and its relationship with English language proficiency

1. Gesture and its Relationship with
Language Proficiency in Iranian EFL Learners
Afrooz Aminzadeh Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

2. Knowing how to speak
English proficiently and
how to use different
communication strategies
particularly in problematic
situations benefit second
and foreign language
learners.

3. Our aspiration as teachers of
second or foreign languages
is to challenge our students
to go beyond using
syntactically correct
sentences
and to achieve
Communicative Competence

4. Communicative Competence
• Communicative Competence (CC) is defined as
the ability to communicate successfully in a wide
variety of circumstances (Gregerson, 2007, p.51).
CC is based on a weaker focus on grammar,
syntactic rules and form, and greater emphasis on
• language use
• acceptability
• appropriateness

5. Communicative competence was further characterized
and classified into four types by Canale and Swain
(1980).
grammatical competence (consisting of linguistic
competence concerning the code)
sociolinguistic competence (concerning the culturally
and socially defined appropriateness of meaning and form)
discursive competence (dealings with the
appropriateness of utterances in linguistic context)
strategic competence (an element which helps the
learner to compensate in cases of communicative
breakdown due to lack of competence in any of the other
areas).

7. Less advanced learners frequently
demonstrated to use more CSs compared to
more advanced learners
(Chen 1990; Glahn 1985)

9. Non-verbal
C
O
M
M
U
N
I
C
A
T
I
O
N

10. Messages are perceived as symbolic and therefore
their use is intentional.
If a language learner extends his arm above to scratch
his itching head, this behavior is not intended as
communication.

11. If the same motion is done while
trying to answer a question in the
classroom, the movement
symbolizes the notion that s/he is
processing the question for the
correct answer.
So the teacher would give them
time to think, and the motion
would thus be considered as
nonverbal communication. That
is to say, not all behaviors lead to
communication. Therefore their
use is intentional.

14. According to the trivial definition, all manual
movements are gestures. However, the dictionary
definitions also refer to intentions and expression.
(Gullberg, 1998)

15. Three fundamental categories of linguistic gestures:
Logical-discursive
Objective
Emblematic or
Symbolic

16. 1) Logical-discursive gestures
(which emphasizes the verbal content)
Baton gestures
Rhythmic gestures
Ideographic gestures
Trace the movement of
thought.

17. 2) Objective gestures
(which have meaning independently of speech)
Deictic or pointing gestures
Physiographic gestures (i.e., Iconic)
Visualize what
they refer to.

18. 3) Emblematic or Symbolic gestures
(which encode meaning in conventionalized
movements of the hands)
Examples:
 Peace sign
 Ok sign
 Disapproval sign

19. Do Gestures Compensate for
Absent or Weak Speech?
It is believed that gestures facilitate speech
production. The idea that gestures facilitate
speech production would be an explanation to
the results showing that the use of gestures
facilitates lexical access; moreover, it could
explain why children who use iconic gestures
can produce longer utterances than when they
use no gestures.
(Nicoladis, 2002).

20. Research Objectives
The present study seeks to investigate the similarities and
differences between intermediate and upper intermediate
level students in terms of the rate of gestures (i.e., deictic
gestures as well as iconic gestures) they use in oral
communication. Attention will be paid to gestures such as
hand and arm movements that Iranian EFL learners use to
solve problems during oral English communication.

21. Research Questions
1. Is there a significant difference between intermediate and upper
intermediate level students in terms of the rate of gestures they use
in oral communication?
2. Is there a significant difference between intermediate and upper
intermediate level students in terms of deictic gestures they use in
oral communication?
3. Is there a significant difference between intermediate and upper
intermediate level students in terms of iconic gestures they use in
oral communication?

22. Participants
10 10
5 5
Language institute studying
the textbook “American
English File 3”.
University, studying as
undergraduate students of
TEFL, in their 3rd semester
Intermediate Advanced

23. The mean age for the participants was 18, with the
youngest and oldest participants being 15 and 31,
respectively.
No language proficiency test was administered to the
participants. The selection was made on the basis of the
learners’ academic levels; based on the assumption that
students who have passed the entrance exam and were in
the same year, having studied English for the same
number of years and passed exams of the same level
would have a similar degree of proficiency in English
language.
Participants

24. The instruments employed in the elicitation of the data were designed
to obtain from the participants a sample of oral production in English
that could be considered as representative as possible of natural oral
communication in the foreign language. It was also essential that
these instruments make the identification and classification of
gestures possible.
Instruments
Photograph description
10-minute conversation

25. Procedure
Students were asked to
describe a photograph in as
much detail as possible.
The conversation task was used in order to obtain a sample
of oral language that could be considered as an example of
normal everyday communication.
The oral language productions of the learners in the
accomplishment of the two communicative tasks were video
recorded, transcribed and analyzed according to Gullberg
(1998) categorization of gestures in order to identify iconic
and deictic gestures instances in the data.

26. Transcription and coding
In order to make the study as
reliable as possible; moreover,
in order to validate the findings
and the procedure of the study a
second rater was also asked to
code the students’ gestures and
the overall results from both
coding (the researcher’s and the
second rater’s) were discussed in
a joint session with the second
rater. Any discrepancy was
discussed and resolved.
Two types of gestures were coded:
deictic and iconic gestures. Both raters
frequently revisited previous
transcriptions and coded gestures to
ensure that gestures were being
consistently categorized.
The statistical analyses were performed
with SPSS version 22.0. Independent
Sample t-test was conducted to compare
the rate of gestures in general and iconic
and deictic gestures in particular, used
by intermediate and upper intermediate
students.

27. Results and DiscussionResults and Discussion

28. • All communications other than
language.
(Andersen, 1999)
• All the messages excluding words
that people exchange.
(DeVito & Hecht, 1990)
The first research question
investigated whether there
was a difference between
intermediate and upper
intermediate level students
in terms of the rate of
gestures they use in oral
communication.
Gestures

29. The results obtained from the two groups on the use of
gesture in oral communication can be seen in the below
Figure .
0
2
4
6
8
3.8
7.2
mean
IntermediateUpper-intermediate
there is a significant difference
between the upper intermediate and
intermediate level students' means.
Correspondingly, there is a
considerable variance between the
two groups of students in terms of
using gestures.
This suggest that students belonging
to intermediate level use gestures at
the higher rate compared to students
with a higher proficiency in spoken
English.

30. The second research
question investigated
whether there was a
difference between
intermediate and upper
intermediate level students
in terms of deictic gestures
they use in oral
communication.
Deictic Gestures

31. The below figure shows the difference
between intermediate level students and
upper intermediate level students in terms of
using deictic gestures.
0
2
4
6 3
4.5
Mean
Upper-intermediate Intermediate
There is a difference between the upper intermediate and intermediate
level students means in terms of using deictic gestures.
Correspondingly, there is a considerable variance between the two
groups of students in terms of using deictic gestures.
It shows that intermediate level students used a higher rate of iconic
gesture in their oral communication compared to upper intermediate

32. Iconic Gestures
Another objective of the study was to find if there is
significant difference between intermediate and upper
intermediate level students in terms of iconic gestures
they use in oral communication.

33. The dissimilarity of the mean values of iconic gestures
between the two groups of students with dissimilar
proficiency level is illustrated in the below figure .
0
2
4
6
8
3.6
6.4
Mean
Upper-intermediate Intermediate
there is a considerable difference and divergence between the upper
intermediate and intermediate level students' iconic gesture means.
Correspondingly, there is a considerable variance between the two
groups of students in terms of iconic gestures rate.
This suggests that students of intermediate level make use of iconic
gesture at the higher rate compared to students of upper intermediate
level.

34. The deictic or pointing
gestures, iconic or what
can be also called as
symbolic gestures are
used at the higher rate
by Iranian intermediate
students compared to
upper intermediate
level students and there
is a significant
divergence between
these two groups of
students.

35. The finding is in line with Hyde's (1982)
findings who assert that compared to
proficient students, lower level students
make more frequent use of
communication strategies such as
gestures, owing to the fact that they
encounter more problems due narrow
knowledge of target language vocabulary.
The findings of the present study are also
in line with the findings of Chen (1990);
Glahn (1985) who agreed that less
advanced learners have frequently been
shown to use more CSs than more
advanced learners.

36. • Using gestures (i.e., deictic and
iconic gestures), for Iranian
intermediate level students
seems to be a way to overcome
their linguistic difficulties and
this is supported by the fact that
some researchers have argued,
gestures serve to facilitate
speech production.
(Cohen & Borsoi, 1996; So et al, 2013; So & Lim, 2012).

37. To summarize, our findings showed that less proficient
speakers tend to use more gestures, both deictic and iconic,
than proficient speakers. This leads us to the wrong
impression that advanced students were using CS more
often than intermediate ones.

38. Teachers should be aware that intermediate
learners, due to their insufficient syntactic
and lexical knowledge, use more CSs such as
gestures. It is teachers’ responsibility to let
the students know that the aim of learning a
second language is to have a comprehensible
communication and not to be syntactically or
phonologically perfect.
They must encourage the learners to convey
their meaning through different strategies
like using gestures. Much further research
needs to be done before reaching a
comprehensive understanding of the
relationship between gesture use and
language proficiency. The limitations of our
study do not allow us to draw a definitive
conclusion on this issue.

39. Limitations of the Study
One is concerned with the body parts or articulators,
ranging all the way from eyes and eyebrows to the
posture of the entire body. Only hand and/or arm
movements are considered in this study. This narrows the
scope of the study significantly.
The second constraint is concerned with the relationship
between these movements and language in a broad sense.
Only language-related movements are considered in this
study. In other words, only gestures used in connection
with speech are taken into account. It means that
movements such as playing with strands of hair,
scratching, or other movements unrelated to speech were
excluded.
According to Gullberg (1998), it is not implied that these movements do
not communicate, but they do not show a clear connection with language.
That is why they are not considered in this study.

40. Thank you ALL
for Listening

41. Levene's Test for
Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-
tailed)
Equal variances assumed
1.227 .283
-3.770 18 .001
Equal variances not
assumed -3.770 15.984 .002
T-test for Gesture Rate

42. Levene's Test for Equality
of Variances t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed)
Equal variances assumed
1.066 .316
-2.133 18 .047
Equal variances not assumed
-2.133 17.366 .047
T-test for Using Deictic Gestures

43. Levene's Test for Equality
of Variances t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed)
Equal variances assumed
2.290 .148
-2.885 18 .010
Equal variances not assumed
-2.885 14.724 .012
T-test for Using Iconic Gestures