Linguistic Aspect of Nonverbal Behaviour
Professor (Dr) Ram
Lakhana Meena, Central University of Rajasthan,Ajmer
1.1.
What is Nonverbal Behaviour?
What is nonverbal behaviour and what does study of
nonverbal include? Nonverbal behaviour refers to communication human acts
distinct from speech. Since nonverbal behaviour includes every communicative
human act other than speech (spoken or written), it naturally covers a wide
variety and range of phenomena: 'everything from facial expression and gesture
to fashion and status symbol, from dance and drama to music and mine, from flow
of affect to flow of traffic, form the territoriality of animals to the
protocol of diplomats, form extra-sensory of violence to the rhetoric of
topless dancers' (Harrison, 1973).
The nonverbal behaviour is taken generally to include
facial and eye expressions, hand and arm gestures, postures, positions, use of
space between individuals and objects, and various movements of the body, legs
and feet. Since nonverbal behaviour is considered as distinct from speech, it
also includes silence as well as dropping of elements form speech and/or the
missing elements in speech utterances. There is a general consensus that,
although nonverbal behaviour means acts other than speech, in a broader sense
nonverbal behaviour includes also a variety of subtle aspects of speech
variously called paralinguistic or vocal phenomena. These phenomena include
fundamental frequency range, intensity range, speech errors, pauses, and speech
rate and speech duration. These features are of a nature that somewhat eludes
explicit description when used in communicative contexts. In other words, these
features are employed for implied meanings and are not explicitly describable
and/or stated through/as linguistic units. Also included in discussions of
nonverbal behaviour are other complex communication phenomena, such as sarcasm,
'wherein consistent combinations of verbal and nonverbal behaviour take on
special significance in subtly conveying feeling' (Mehrabian, 1972).
Thus even though as a working definition nonverbal
behaviour is conceived to be everything other than speech, the boundary between
verbal and nonverbal is always blurred and there are certain aspects of speech
which fall within the domains of nonverbal behaviour. In view of this, it is
not surprising to find that the researchers have differed among themselves as
regards the definition and scope of the study of nonverbal behaviour. For
Argyle (1969), nonverbal behaviour includes bodily contact, posture, physical
appearance, facial and gestural movement, direction of gaze and the
paralinguistic variables of emotional tone, timing and accent. Duncan (1969)
includes body movement or kinesic behaviour, paralanguage, proxemics,
olfaction, skin sensitivity to temperature and touch, and the use of artifacts.
For Scheflen postural, tactile, odorific, territorial, proxemicl vocal
modalities of paralinguistic behaviours. Knapp (1972) includes body motion, or
kinesic behaviour, facial expression, physical characteristics, eye behaviour,
touching behaviour, paralanguage, proxemics, artifacts and environmental
factors. Poyotos (1977) proposes a classification of nonverbal phenomena based
on sensory channels, possible combinations of verbal and nonverbal and on the
interactional potential or otherwise of the behaviour. Thus, the sensory
channels involved are acoustic, visual, olfactory and tactile.
The classes
identified are verbal-vocal, nonverbal-vocal, and nonverbal-nonvocal. Some acts
are interactional and come are not interactional. Harrison (1973) covers the
nonverbal behaviour domain under four codes: preformance codes based on bodily
actions, artifactual codes (the use of clothing, jewellery, etc.), mediational
codes involving manipulation of the media, and contextual codes such as
employment of nonverbal signs in time and space. Harper et al (1978) limit
their consideration of nonverbal phenomena to those that are most important in
the structuring and occurrence of interpersonal communication and the movement
to movement regulation of the interaction. The nonverbal phenomena include, for
them, consideration of spatial (proxemic) aspects of the physical setting of
interaction, but not dress, use of artifacts and physical characteristics, as
constituting nonverbal behaviour. Note that all these definitions generally
centre on body area and body activities. Several of these also cover the use of
artifacts. Most of the definitions cover the user of paralanguage and
manipulation of certain aspects of speech under nonverbal behaviour. In this
paper nonverbal behaviour is studied from the following angles: (i) Proxemic,
(ii) Postural, (iii) Facial, (iv) Movement, (v) Paralanguage, (vi) Eye, (vii)
Silence, (viii) Perceptual features (artifacts) and (ix) Gesture. These
features are covered under several chapters. First, apart from presenting the
scope and definition of nonverbal behaviour, discusses the relationship between
verbal and nonverbal communication and various approaches to the study of
nonverbal communication. Second, presents proxemic behaviour; Third, presents
nonverbal communication as expressed through eye and face; Forth, discusses
nonverbal behavioural aspects of language use and silence; Fifth, discusses
gesture; and Sixth, presents salient
features of nonverbal communication in abnormal individuals.
1.2.
Relationship Between Verbal and Nonverbal Communication
There are several ways in which the nonverbal behaviour
is seen clearly related to verbal behaviour. This relationship is one of
dependence and also of independence. There are nonverbal communicative acts
that are easily and accurately translated into words. Several gestures clearly
illustrate this relationship. For example, the gesture of folded hands for
namaste, the gesture of handshake, a smile, a frown, etc., are generally
translatable into words. There is also a class of nonverbal acts that are very
much a part of speech and serves the function of emphasis. Examples are head
and hand movements that occur more frequently with words, and phrases of
emphasis. There are acts which draw pictures of the referents tracing the
contour of an object or person referred to verbally. Yet another class of acts
is employed for displaying the effects (feelings). Another class refers to acts
that help to initiate and terminate the speech of participants in a social
situation. These regulators might suggest to a speaker that he keep talking,
that he clarify, or that he hurry up and finish (Ekman and Friesen, 1969).
There are at least six ways in which the relationship
between verbal and nonverbal communication can be characterized. These areas as
follows:
(1) The relationship between verbal and nonverbal
communication is one of the latter playing a supplementary role to the former.
The nonverbal acts that are supplementary to verbal acts may precede or follow
or be simultaneous with the verbal acts. For example, in many verbal acts one
notices an accompaniment of one or more nonverbal acts, such as gestures,
facial expressions, and movement towards or away from the addressee, to
illumine the meaning of the former. While for any verbal acts such an
accompaniment may only be considered redundant, for several others, such an
accompaniment explicitness, clarity, emphasis, discrimination and
reinforcement.
(2) The relationship between verbal and nonverbal
communication is also one of the former playing a supplementary role to the
latter. In many verbal acts, both in children and adults, in normals with all
the linguistic organs intact, and normals with some handicap to the linguistic
organs, as well as in abnormal individuals, nonverbal acts may take precedence
over the verbal acts in several ways. In the normals with all the linguistic
organs intact, occasions demand the use of nonverbal acts such as pantomime and
gestures for aesthetic purposes, and for purposes of coded (secret)
communication. Indulgence in nonverbal acts as primary medium is also
necessitated by the distance that separates the parties which can, however,
retain visual contact while engaging themselves in communication.
(3) The relationship between verbal and nonverbal
communication could be one of correspondence as well. That is, there are
several nonverbal acts that can be accurately translated into words in the
language of a culture in which such nonverbal acts are performed. A handshake,
shaking a fist at someone, a smile, and frown, etc., is all nonverbal acts
translatable into verbal medium in a particular language. The functions of
these nonverbal acts, context to context, are also codified in aesthetic
nonverbal acts, such as dance, sculpture and other arts. The correspondence is
sometimes translatable into words, sometimes into phrases and sentences, and
several times translatable into compressed episodes involving lengthy language
discourses. But the correspondence is there all the same and the import of this
correspondence is shared between individuals within a community. There is also
yet another correspondence of nonverbal acts in the sense that similar
nonverbal acts could mean different things in different cultures.
(4) Yet another relationship between a verbal act and a
nonverbal act is one of dependence. A verbal act may depend for its correct
interpretation entirely on a nonverbal act. Likewise a nonverbal act may depend
for its correct interpretation entirely on a verbal act. In extreme
circumstances, the former is caused because of deliberate distortion of the
verbal act, or because of the difficulty in listening clearly to the verbal
act, or because of the difficulty in reading with clarity what is intended to
be read in the written verbal message. Deliberate distortion is not found only
in contrived acts such as poetry or drama. It is done in day to day language
itself. Distortion and opacity of the verbal message are also required in
certain socio-cultural contexts wherein it is demanded that verbal acts be
suppressed and made dependent on nonverbal acts. The dominant nonverbal act
also depends on verbal acts for clarity. This dependence also depends on verbal
acts for clarity. It also occurs in daily life.
(5) Verbal and nonverbal acts can be independent of one
another. Something is communicated through a verbal act. The continued
manifestation of this communicative act may be in the form of nonverbal acts.
That is, in a single communicative act, part of the message may be in verbal
form and the rest in nonverbal, in an alternating way. Each part is independent
of the other. This is contrived in poetry and drama. It is also found in
everyday life. An extreme form of this independence is the gulf that we notice
between what one says and what one does. Also prevarication both in word and
deed derives its strength, among others, from this feature.
(6) Another relationship between verbal and nonverbal
acts in one of non-relevance. This is most commonly found in normal adult
speech and its accompanying gestures which are produced simply without any
communicative intent. We move our hands, snap our fingers, move our bodies
while speaking, with these gestures having no relevance to the speech we make.
When this non-relevance between verbal and nonverbal acts found in normal is
shifted to non-relevance or irrelevance within the ingle domain, within speech
itself or within nonverbal act itself (during which coherence in speech or act
is lost), we start considering the individual abnormal in some way. That is,
non-relevance across the verbal and nonverbal media is normal, but
non-relevance within a single medium is abnormal. The non-relevance is
idiosyncratic and could be limitational as well. In the normals the excessive
non-relevance of nonverbal acts accompanying speech comes to hamper the
understanding of the verbal acts.
Harrison (1973) has suggested the following functions
for nonverbal communications:
(1) Nonverbal signs define, conditions, and constrain
the system; for example, time, place and arrangement may provide cues for the
participants as to who is in the system, what the pattern of interaction will
be, and what is appropriate and inappropriate communication content.
(2) Nonverbal signs help regulate the system, cueing
hierarchy and priority among communicators, signalling the flow of interaction,
providing meta-communication and feedback.
(3) Nonverbal signs communicate content, sometimes more
efficiently than linguistic signs but usually in complementary redundancy to
the verbal flow.
Ekman and Friesen (1969) specify five general functions
for nonverbal behaviour, namely, repetition, contradiction, complementation,
accent and regulation. In repetition there is both verbal and nonverbal
expression made simultaneously, where one will do. In contradiction, the verbal
and nonverbal behaviours contradict one another as in the case of a verbal
praise in a sarcastic tone. In accent, spoken words are emphasized through
nonverbal acts. Through the use of eye contact, gestures and others, nonverbal
behaviour is employed to regulate human interaction and communication. Based on
the above brief discussion, we find that the relationship between verbal and
nonverbal behaviours can be considered as follows:
(1) The relationship between verbal and nonverbal
communication is one of the latter playing a supplementary role to the former.
(2) The relationship between verbal and nonverbal
communication could be one of the former playing a supplementary role to the
latter.
(3) The relationship between verbal and nonverbal
communication could be one of correspondence.
(4) The relationship between verbal and nonverbal communication could be one of
mutual dependence.
(5) The relationship between the two could also be one
of independence from one another.
(6) The relationship between the two could be one of
non-relevance as well.
(7) The relationship between verbal and nonverbal
communication could be one of one repeating the message of the other.
(8) The relationship between verbal and nonverbal
communication could be one act contradicting the other.
(9) The relationship between verbal and nonverbal
communication could also be one of mutual emphasis.
(10) Finally, the relationship between the two could
also be one of mutual regulation.
While the study of verbal behaviour and nonverbal has
been done independently in several disciplines, the relationship between the
two has not received the attention it deserves. Human communication is a
wholesome fusion of both verbal and nonverbal acts. This fusion appears to have
both physiological (genetic) as well as socio-cultural consequences. The fusion
of verbal and nonverbal behaviours in a communicative act marks the human
species distinct from other species. That is, the manner in which the fusion
between verbal and nonverbal acts has taken place in humans marks the humans
distinct from other species. Also, societies and cultures are exploitation of
this fusion of verbal and nonverbal acts for varying contexts, pursuits and purposes.
Moreover, various cognitive disorders, including language disorders, found in
humans can be seen as those of differences in the degree and manner of fusing
the verbal and nonverbal behaviours.
That the verbal and nonverbal behaviours are closely related
is well recognized by all. Socialization processes in every society insist upon
mastery and exploitation of this relationship in both children and adults in
their communication modes. For example, what postures, voice modulations,
facial expressions, gestures, etc., that one should or should not employ in a
particular context for a particular pursuit and purpose are all predetermined
in cultures. Deviations from the well-set norm are allowed certain effects
only. Deviations are also classified into several abnormal varieties. In
esssence, what makes communication essentially human is the intrinsic binding
within all such communication between verbal and nonverbal facets.
This binding between verbal and nonverbal behaviour is
the result of their phylogeny. Some have claimed that the same deep cognitive
system is used in language and nonlinguistic behaviour . Some have claimed that
nonverbal behaviour is a developmentally earlier and more primitive form of
communication which man shares with animals (Werner, 1957). Reusch (1955)
distinguishes between analogically and digitally coded information. The
analogically coded information contains the immediate state of felling of the
individual. There is a continuous relationship between the events and the interacting
individuals. The digitally coded information is verbally or numerically coded
information which employs discrete units such as words and numbers. The
digitally coded information is much more divorced from the interacting
individuals than the analogically coded information.
These, unlike the analogically coded information,
pertain to matter which may or may not be temporally or spatially tied to the
prevailing interaction. Also the information could be resent in propositional
form. Reusch suggests that actions, practical or expressive, convey their
messages analogically whereas words and discrete symbols convey their message
digitally. According to Reusch, the analogic codification occurred first in the
development of communication. Also, analogic codification is viewed as related
phylogenetically than digital codification to all communication. While the
latter (digital codification) is more amenable for conscious control, the
former is not and this is also taken to indicate the precedence of analogic codification
over digital codification.
Nonverbal behaviours reflect very basic social
orientations that are correlates of major categories in the cognition of social
environments (Plaget, 1960). In other words, the nonverbal behaviours pursued
in a society reveal the orientations towards interactions between persons that
individual members of that society consider as basic. There are also common
cognitive and behavioural dimensions for both animal and human social systems.
Hence, some have claimed that primates, in particular, can provide
complementary information, about certain aspects of affect and attitude
communication in humans (Sommer, 1967). That is, the observation of animal
social interactions can complement the study of individuals of a single culture
and provide corraboration for identified dimensions of social interaction.
Furthermore, it has been suggested by many that nonverbal behaviour is also
produced by the same underlying processes employed in the production of
linguistic utterance and that it shares some of the structural properties of
the speech it accompanies.
Research strategies employed in the study of nonverbal
behaviour can be grouped as those following or falling within linguistic
methodologies, methodologies of anthropological investigations and
methodologies of psychological investigations. Note, however, that within each
of these major pursuits there are several variations based on the approaches
and aims of schools within these disciplines. Also note that there are mutual
influences found among these strategies. Some of the strategies are not
followed widely and some have become strategies rather clearly identified with
individual scholars.
1.3.1. Linguistically-oriented
Studies of Nonverbal Behaviour
Modern linguistics, both Indian and Western, does not
include study of nonverbal behaviour as part of grammar. There are elements of
nonverbal behaviour, or rather elements shared both by verbal and nonverbal
behaviour, such as implied meanings (presupposition, illocutionary acts whose
implications could be brought out by paraphrase etc.) that are sought to be
treated within grammar in modern times. However, these attempts have become
characteristics of certain off-beat grammatical studies, rather than the core or
integral part of grammatical approaches and general practice. In contrast,
traditional Indian studies of language always include study of nonverbal
behaviour as an integral part of grammar (See below 1.3.5 for a brief
descriptive statement and summary). Bloomfield (1933) distinguished between the
act of speech and other occurrences which he called practical events. Any
incident for him consisted of three parts, in order of time: practical events
preceding the act of speech, speech itself, and practical events following that
act of speech. While there is, thus, recognition of occurrence of both speech
and nonspeech acts in a communicative act, linguists generally focus upon
speech rather than on the practical events preceding, accompanying and
following act of speech. In general, linguists ignore the nonverbal
concomitants of verbal act.
Linguistically-oriented studies of nonverbal behaviour
are, indeed, very few and those few studies also generally aim at adequacy of
language description by way of describing such nonverbal behaviours that
impinge on verbal behaviour and/or exploit verbal-like elements in the
nonverbal act. Moreover, the linguistically-oriented studies of nonverbal
behaviour extend the method of description and transcription of linguistic elements
to a description and transcription of nonverbal behaviour. A clear case of
linguisticlly-oriented description of nonverbal behaviour is that of Trager
(1958). Another study is that of West (1963) who seeks to identify sign
language units corresponding to linguistic units, such as words, clauses,
phrases and sentences.
Trager recognizes that communication is more than
language. Although linguistics aims at the description of language as a system
of communication, linguists limit themselves to examination of such parts of
linguistic structures as they could define and examine objectively. In view of
this self-imposed restriction, communication systems other than language remain
outside their purview of research. Trager finds this an unsatisfactory approach
to the study of language and seeks to devise ways and means to describe systems
adjunct to language. Trager calls the study of language and its attendant
phenomena as macrolinguistics and divides it into prelinguistics,
microlinguistics, and metalinguistics. Prelinguistics is said to include
physical and biological events. The statement of the relationship between
language and any of other cultural systems constitute metalinguistics while
microlinguistics is linguistics proper.
Communication, according to Trager (1958), is divided
into language, vocalizations and kinesics. Language employs certain noises made
by organs of speech. It combines these noises into recurrent sequences and
arranges these sequences in systematic distributions in relation to each other
and in reference to external world. Vocalizations do not have the structure of
language and consist of variegated noises. Vocalizations also include
modifications of language and other noises. In general, vocalizations may be
seen as consisting of paralanguage, voice set and voice qualities. Variegated
noises other than language ones, and modified language and other noises
together are called paralanguage. Voice set involves the physiological and
physical peculiarities of noises. With the help of these peculiarities we
identify individuals as members of a societal group. We identify them as
belonging to certain set, age, state of health, body build, rhythm state, and
position in a group, mood, bodily condition and location. Much other
identification is also made. Voice qualities consist of matters such as
intonation. These are recognizable as forming part of actual speech events and
are identified in what is said and heard. Trager lists the following as voice
qualities identified so far-pitch range, vocal lip control, glottis control,
pitch control, articulation control, rhythm control, resonance and tempo.
The voice set and voice qualities are over all or
background characteristics of the voice, whereas the vocalizations are
identifiable noises. All these are different from language sounds proper.
Trager identifies three kinds of vocalizations constituting paralanguage. These
are vocal characterizers, vocal qualifiers and vocal segregates. The vocal
characterizers are laughing, crying, giggling, swickering, whimpering, sobbing,
yelling and whispering, moaning, groaning, whining, breaking, belching and
yawning. The vocal qualifiers are those of intensity, pitch height, and extent.
Vocal segregates are items, such as uh-uh, uh-huh and uh, sh! These are sounds
which do not fit into phonological and/or word frames in sequences in a
language. Trager has viewed study of paralanguage as contributing directly to
an understanding of kinesics (study of movement, posture and position
individuals assume in their interaction). It may be that in their overall
structure these two fields of human behaviour may be largely analogous to each
other. For all the variables identified, Trager provides symbols for
transcription. The scope of description of the nonverbal behaviour is limited
to descriptions of sound features and their functions in manifest behaviour.
Thus, even in Trager's efforts, while the importance of nonverbal behaviour for
a total description of communication process is recognized, its accomodation in
the discipline of linguistics is only towards an illumination and adequate
coverage of linguistic behaviour. Also the method of description of nonverbal
behaviour is always an extension of the methods of study of linguistic
behaviours. Attempts are also made, in this process of extension, to posit
corresponding levels of linguistic and nonverbal behaviour.
1.3.2. Anthropologically-oriented
Studies of Nonverbal Behaviour
The anthropologically-oriented studies of nonverbal
behaviour have a long history. The sign languages of the aboriginals, the
communication processes carried on through (non-sign language) gestures,
postures, and exchange of goods and rituals, etc., have been discussed in
anthropological studies. Nineteenth century American anthropologists showed a lot
of interest in the aboriginal sign languages of the Americas. They recognized
that the conventional gestural codes employed by American Indians (Red Indians)
are independent communication systems which have the range and flexibility
found in speech. This recognition is still continued as we find in the works of
Kroeber characterizing the sign language communication as follows: 'What makes
it an effective system of communication is that it did not remain on a level of
naturalness, spontaneity, and full transparency, but made artificial
commitments, arbitrary choices between potential expressions and meanings'. The
early 19th century work by Colonel Garrick Mallery, who made a collection and
study of North American Plains sign language gestures and made a comparison of
the same with other codes such as gestures and sign languages of the deaf, gave
an impetus to modern interests in nonverbal communication processes in the
West. This interest and study influenced anthropological studies in the
beginning. At one time nonverbal behaviour within anthropological studies
focused only on gestures. Later on other aspects of nonverbal behaviour were
also studied. And very soon, in modern anthropology, culture itself began to be
viewed as communication. Yet the study of nonverbal communication, in the sense
of communication as it is effected through behaviour whose communicative
significance cannot be achieved in any other way, is only a recent introduction
to anthropology. However, even today the communication processes in the sense
of oral and nonverbal interaction has not attracted much attention in
anthropological studies. To quote Codere (1966) 'the subjects of gestures,
medicine, or games are rarely considered in any single volume ethnography and
are even more rarely given any extended treatment.... Once the major
ethnographic topics of social organization, economic organization and religion
are dealt with, the task is not done if it is defined as giving and sense or
indication of the richness and complexity of the culture concerned. Yet why do
such topics as technology, the yearly round, and the life cycle have a secure
conventional place as secondary topics; such topics as humour and the three
mentioned here, no place at all; and such topics as the arts only, and occasional
one'. However, in the evolution of studies on nonverbal behaviour as a
comprehensive and perhaps an independent discipline, anthropology has played a
crucial role. Hall's study of proxemics (See, Chapter-2) has revolutionalized
ideas, assumptions and identification of domains of nonverbal behaviour
studies. And Hall's contributions come from anthropological bases. If the study
of aboriginals' signs is considered the precursor of modern
anthropologically-oriented studies of nonverbal behaviour, Hall's contributions
have led the anthropologically-oriented nonverbal behaviour studies to explore
areas such as proxemics that have become since then bases of ideas and
assumptions as well as subject matter of experimental investigations on
nonverbal behaviour. Likewise Birdwhistell's works present a formal tool for a
description and understanding of nonverbal communication.
Birdwhistell's research strategy (Birdwhistell, 1970)
is a clear and illustrious example of the influence of linguistics on the study
of nonverbal behaviour. Influenced by development s in American structural
linguistics, Birdwhistell makes a very significant contribution, adopting and
effectively modifying underlying concepts, methods, and tools of transcription
and description of units of language, as propounded and practised in
neo-Bloomfieldian structural linguistics. According to Birdwhistell, our
communication system is not something we invented but rather something which we
internalized in the process of becoming man. Also, research on communication as
a systematic and structured organization could not be initiated until we have
some idea about the organization of society itself. Bridwhistell contends that
communication is multi-channel. It includes both language and paralanguages it also
includes gesture and kinesics. There is the inter dependence of visible and
audible behaviour in the flow of conversation. Meaning includes both the
contents of words and other measures. Also, not all shifts of the human body
are not of equal importance or significance to the human communicational
system. 'As the organs involved in breathing and swallowing are also involved
in vocalic communicative behaviour, so also is the activity of the skin,
musculature, and skeleton involved in communicative behaviour. Which particular
behaviours are of patterned communicative value, and thus abstractable without
falsification, can be determined only by the systematic investigation of the
behaviour in the communicational context' (Birdwhistell, 1970). So, what Birdwhistell
seeks is not idiosyncratic nonverbal behaviour but patterned behaviour within
individuals and across individuals and a systematic study of the same.
Birdwhistell believes that the investigation of human
communication by means of linguistic and kinesic techniques is desirable and
relevant, Body motion is a learned form of communication, which is patterned
within a culture and which can be broken down into an ordered system of
isolable elements, just as language. Hence, Birdwhistell pursues the research
for communication units based upon linguistic and kinesic analysis. The
dependency of Birdwhistell's analysis of body motion on structural linguistics
is seen throughout his work. He also finds that such a dependency is not
without handicap:
'Techniques and theories developed over the last 2000
years of linguistic research are now and may in the future remain quite
relevant for kinesic research and are absolutely necessary to communicational
research. However, these techniques are not all immediately and without
adaptation transferable to kinesic research. For example, the informant
technique, so basic to research on spoken language, is difficult to control in
the investigation of kinesic material'.
The influence of linguistics in Birdwhistel's study of kinesic
behaviour is clearly seen in his coinage of technical terms for the description
of kinesic behaviour, identification of units of kinesic behaviour,
correspondence of units between kinesic and linguistic behaviour, method of
identification of units, description of units, transcription of units and
building up of smaller units into components of larger units. In all these, we
find Birdwhistell adopting terms from linguistics. Parallel between linguistic
behaviour and kinesic behaviour is rather too manifestly emphasized. This does
not mean, however, that Birdwhistell has simply transferred linguistics to the
analysis of nonverbal behaviour or that he has nothing new to offer by way of
analysis of nonverbal behaviour. Birdwhistell's contribution lies not only in
showing the applicability of linguistic analytical tools and methods to kinesic
behaviour, but also in itself in several cultures. He has also demonstrated the
parallel characteristics of different modalities of communication. We present a
few of his contributions in our chapter on proxemics.
Another significant anthropologically-oriented study of
nonverbal behaviour is that of E. T. Hall (1959, 1969 and 1977). While
Birdwhistell focuses his attention on the description of kinesic behaviour in
formulaic expressions, involving a number of derived technical terms, Hall
looks at nonverbal behaviour from a descriptive, ethnographic angle without
much technical terms and formulaic expressions. Hall's approach to study of
nonverbal behaviour is decidedly anthropological and very much ethnographic and
crosscultural as well as meant to be a guide for a better world of
understanding, tolerance and insightful utilization of human resources: it is
also linguisticaally influenced at least in its origins. There is not much of
an influence of linguistic terms but there is a sharing of concepts from
structural linguistically influenced of linguistic terms but there is a sharing
of concepts form structural linguistics. However, Hall's work is more an
anthropologist's study of nonverbal behaviour. His transcription system does
not draw from linguistic as much as the Birdwhistell's system draws from
linguistics. Also, Hall's work is more a comparative ethnographic study of
nonverbal behaviour whereas Birdwhistell's approach generally restricts itself
to the description of nonverbal behaviour, in particular, the kinesic behaviour
of a group without resorting to any comparison of the same with others.
E. T. Hall considers that culture is bio-basic; it is
rooted in biological activities. There is an unbroken continuity between the
very distant past and the present in the sense that although man is a
culture-producing animal at present, there were times when that was non man and
no culture. There was infra-culture that preceded culture. This infra-culture
became elaborated by man into culture. Hall argues that by going back to
infra-culture we could demonstrate the complex biological bases upon which
human behaviour has been built at different times in the history of evolution.
Infra-culture is behaviour on lower organizational levels that underlie
culture. Hall suggests (along with his colleague Linguist Trager) that the
number of infra-cultural bases are indeed few and bear little or no apparent
relationship to each other on the surface. These are called Primary Message
Systems. There are then systems:
(1) Interaction,(2) Association, (3) Subsistence, (4)
Bisexuality,(5) Territoriality,(6) Temporality,
(7) Learning,(8) Play,(9) Defence, and (10) Exploitation (use of materials).
Note that only the first, the primary message system of
interaction, involves language. All other systems are nonlinguistic forms of
communication. Hall finds that language is the most technical of the message
systems. It is to be used as a model for the analysis of others. In other
words, Hall implies that the analysis of other forms of communication may
follow the procedures of analysis of language. He also emphasizes that in
addition to language there are other ways in which man communicates that either
reinforce or deny what he has said with words. Nonverbal behaviour is an
integral part of culture and it includes not only acts but also material
objects having the potential for communication:
'Like a telephone system, any communication system has
three aspects: its over-all structure, comparable to the telephone network; its
components, comparable to switch boards, wires and telephones; and the message
itself, which is caried by the network. Similarly messages can be broken down
into three components: sets (like words), isolates (like sounds), and patterns
(like grammar or syntax). A breakdown of messages into these components, sets,
isolates, and patterns is basic to understanding culture as communication'.
Patterns are implicit cultural rules by which sets are arranged to give
meaning. For example, most people take horses as a single set whereas a trainer
of horses examines a number of sets such as height, weight, length of barrel,
thickness of chest, depth of chest, configuration of the neck and head, stance,
coat conditions, hoofs and gait. These are seen as isolates by laymen but the
trainers of horses see them as sets leading on to patterns. Order, selection
and congruence characterize the system of communication.
Hall's major investigations centre around man's use of
space. Every living thing has physical boundary that separates it from its
external environment. That space communicates is well recognized in all
societies. Space as an informal cultural system is studied by Hall in all its
details. Formal patterning of space has varying degrees of importance and
complexity. Use of space is closely linked with status as well. Hall
investigates the use of space by humans in relation to distance regulation in
animals, crowding and social behaviour in animals, distance receptors such as
eyes, ears and nose, immediate receptors such as skin, and muscles, visual
space, and use of space in cross-cultural contexts. Hall's investigations also
exploit literary works and other arts to an understanding of use of space by
individuals, social groups and different language communities. Hall presents
his work on use of space for a better understanding of different peoples and
their cultures, and for a better world of living and understanding. He finds
that literally thousands of our experiences teach us unconsciously that space
communicates. A painstaking and laborious process awaits one who wishes to
uncover the specific cues. The child who is learning the language cannot
distinguish one space category from another by listening to other talk (example
are, He found a place in her heart, He has a place in the mountains, I am tired
of this place, and so on). In spite of thsi the children are able to make the
difference between various space terms from the very few cues provided by
others: Space as an informal cultural system is different from space as it is
technically elaborated by classroom geography and mathematics. Hall seeks to
identify what space is in various cultures, how it is interwoven with
individual and social behaviour, how space comes to communicate various values
and how its use becomes the diagnostic marker of various individual and social
values. Hall is the one who systematized the study of space in human
interactions and brought out various crucial facts underlying use of space. All
this he does taking and interdisciplinary attitude, but all the same the
approach is anthropologically-oriented.
It is seen from the study of literature on nonverbal
behaviour that modern growth of explicitly stated studies in communicative
nonverbal behaviour in communicative interactions, especially in the United
States, indeed, is closely linked with the contributions of Trager,
Birdwhistell and Hall. Trager's contributions remained an island, continue to
be so even now within linguistic, which, while giving a spurt to investigations
of language-related disciplines, has somehow continued to treat nonverbal
behaviour studies and a peripheral matter. A remarkable fact is that in spite
of the very many attractions within his own paradigm, calling him to go beyond
languae variables and to attack variables that impinge on nonverbal behaviour,
the linguist in Trager has not strayed beyond what is strictly and formally
linguistic (according to trager) and relevant to an understanding of nonverbal
behaviour. Birdwhistell's investigations continue but not with many adherents,
and yet his investigations have a distinct bearing on studies of nonverbal
behaviour. Hall's work is largely absorbed in the current experimental
investigations of nonverbal behaviour although it is generally restricted only
to some aspects of nonverbal behaviour. Hall's work, unlike those of men other
authors, has also caught the imagination of popular science writers leading on
to both insightful investigations of nonverbal behaviour, and to speculations.
All said and done, anthropologically-oriented approaches to the study of
nonverbal behaviour is a continuing and positive aspect of nonverbal behaviour
studies and enriches the experimental investigation by providing possible and
insightful variables for research and for cross cultural validation of
experimental findings.
1.3.3. Psychologically-oriented
Approaches to the Study of Nonverbal Behaviour
The psychologically-oriented approaches to the study of
nonverbal behaviour are many and they currently dominate the nonverbal
communication research scene. Some psychologically-oriented studies focus upon
the association of psychological states with nonverbal behaviours. The
nonverbal behaviours are taken to be indicative of underlying psychological
states. In these studies description on nonverbal behaviour is linked with the
description of psychological states of the individuals emitting nonverbal
behaviour. In another approach, the studies focus upon observers. The observers
are asked to interpret the given nonverbal behaviour in terms of psychological
states. These are studies that involve decoding of nonverbal behaviours
presented to observe. In encoding studies, different situations, to which
corresponding attitudes are explicitly ascribable and clearly linked and
elicited, are identified, subjects are placed in these situations and their
responses measured. These studies are generally of a role playing type. There
is also another approach in which various choices of nonverbal behaviours are
presented to subjects. They are asked to indicate their preference among
situations. That is, subjects are asked to choose among forms or combinations
of behaviour to communicate various attitudes. Evaluation these approaches, Mehrabian
(1972) suggests that whereas encoding methods are appropriate in the beginning
stages of communication research, the last mentioned above, which he calls the
encoding-decoding method, is appropriate for highly developed phrases of
nonverbal behaviour research.
The psychologically-oriented approaches have led to a
wider coverge of a variety of nonverbal behaviours. Currently studies of all
forms of nonverbal behaviour, such as crowding, space utilization, visual
behaviour, facial expressions, and abnormal nonverbal behaviour are generally
initiated and enriched by the emergence of psychologically-oriented researches.
These researches can be traced back to the beginning of modern psychological
investigations. After all, retrieval of meanings of human behaviour, and
interpretation of human behaviour have been the major purpose of psychology.
The specific communicative means of behaviour have always been subject matter
of investigation along with the behaviour itself. A salient feature of
psychologically-oriented studies of nonverbal behaviour is the exploitation of
statistical measures which are generally not resorted to (or even avoided) in
the linguistically and anthropologically-oriented studies. Also, in contrast
too linguistically and anthropologically-oriented studies, the
psychologically-oriented studies of nonverbal behaviour are mainly experimental
studies, hardly based exclusively on observations. These studies are generally
based on individual psychological factors, rather than on social factors, although
the social function is not lost sight of. Moreover, the feeling, attitudes and
evaluations of individuals are the basic referents of nonverbal behaviour in
these studies. Confirmation of these behaviours across statistically
significant sets of populations leads on to the social basis, and to
confirmation and revelation of the social function of thus proven nonverbal
behaviours. In addition, these studies also aim at identification of variables
of nonverbal behaviours in communicative contexts. For example, some studies
focus on status, positive-ness, etc.
Generally speaking, the psychologically-oriented
studies of nonverbal behaviour are typically articles in research journals
based on controlled experiments focusing on limited variables. Validation or
rejection of hypotheses, description and explanation of processes involved and
an attempt at bringing out a hierarchy of events and variables involved and the
hidden processes through an understanding of manifest processes become the
focus of these psychologically-oriented studies of nonverbal behaviour. All
aspects of nonverbal behaviour are sought to be dealt with under experimental
conditions. Accordingly a lot of energy is expended not on identifying facets
and aspects of nonverbal behaviour per se, but on means to bring out the
observed nonverbal behaviour variables in a form suitable for controlled
experiments. The significance of these variables is hypothesized beforehand and
their validity proved or disproved in the experiments. In the process, however,
several new meanings hither to hidden are identified and a pattern as well as a
hierarchy is established. The psychologically-oriented studies of nonverbal
behaviour, naturally, are influenced by various models of psychology,
particularly of learning. The psychologically-oriented studies of nonverbal
behaviour, in a manner of speaking, have become the central part of all
nonverbal behaviour studies. These studies are more in number, cove most of the
aspects of nonverbal behaviour, attract more investigators and students, and
accommodate findings on nonverbal behaviour worked out in other fields, such as
linguistic, anthropology and semiotics.
Since most of the psychologically-oriented studies are
independent articles, the overall assumptions of psychologically-oriented
nonverbal studies are not generally explicitly stated. Mehrabian (1972)
suggests that any attempt at a comprehensive description of findings in the
study of nonverbal of behavioural cues that are studied (e.g., eye contact,
distance leg, and foot movements, facial expressions, voice qualities).
Further, the description should also account for the relationships among these
cues, the relationships between these and the feelings, attitudes, and
personalities of the communicators, and the qualities of the situations in
which the communications occur. Note that this scheme is carried out with well
designed tools of questionnaires administered orally or usually under
appropriate situations for both controlled and experimental groups. Also, appropriate
statistical measures are applied to data thus obtained to prove or disprove
proposed hypotheses.
1.3.4. Semiotically-oriented Studies
of nonverbal Behaviour
Where psychologically-oriented studies of methods and
findings, subjecting them to statistical measures and arriving at theoretical
models that are generally found in psychology proper, semiotics draws facts
from different disciplines and views them from the points of view of sign
theory or theories. There is no experiment conducted as a matter of routine, or
as a norm in semiotic investigations. Observation, and reasoning out the
inter-relationships between observed facts, identification of patterns,
validation of facts based o patterns worked out, and identification of/or
bringing out manifestly the covert processes through proposals as regards
patterns and dynamic processes dominate semiotic investigations. There is,
indeed, no model building in semiotic investigations in the sense of forming
schools and restricting pursuits within the assumptions and postulates of the
school. However, there is a body of knowledge contributed by different scholars
as regards the nature, function and componential features of signs and their
inter-relationships. There are also procedures, generally not stated explicitly
but found practised in most of the semiotic investigations.
The semiotically-oriented studies of nonverbal
behaviour view it as constituting semiotic systems involving various types of
signs. Investigations may be carried out based on models of experimental
psychology by individual authors. They may, however build their theory and
explanations in a semiotic fashion, taking the sign value of facts as crucial.
The semiotic analysis of nonverbal behaviour is mainly the interpretation and
explanation of date collected through other means. This interpretation and
explanation, however, leads on to newer insights and identification of hitherto
unknown facts. This is, indeed, one of the major strengths and achievements of
the semiotic methods. The semiotically-oriented studies of nonverbal behaviour,
generally speaking, compare and contrast the verbal with the nonverbal
behaviour. This comparison and contrast takes on the presentation of features
involved in a binary opposition. It is also shown as to how the features
balance themselves in a communicative act. In this analysis, hidden processes
and new information and variables are also revealed and added on.
A sign is everything which can be taken as
significantly substituting for something else. This something else does not
necessarily have to exist or actually be somewhere at the moment in which a
sign stands in for it. Saussure (1915) implicitly regarded sign as a
communicative device taking place between two human beings intentionally aiming
to communicate or to express something. Not all signs are, however,
communicative signs. For example, black clouds are a sign of rain, but we do
not communicate with it; the clouds do not respond to us. The communicative
signs are all artifacts expressed by persons. Unless there is a response to a
sign, the sing cannot be interpreted and is not considered an communicative
sign. As Cherry (1980) points out, any artifact may possibly be a sign (a
scratch on a stone, a printed mark, a sound - anything), but its sign-hood arises
solely from the observer's assumption that it is a sign: 'Signs are outward
happenings and thus are observable, which calls for interpretation, or meaning.
Such interpretation is of course mental (not observable) so it is revealed by a
response sign or reply. All signs require another sign to interpret them; no
event can exist as a working system of signs' (Cherry, 1980). Note that
nonverbal behaviour does fall within the system of signs directly and
immediately, because nonverbal behaviours are acts of communication.
Peirce (1931-1935) finds sign as something which stands
to somebody for something in some respects or capacity. Morris (1938) suggests
that something is a sign only because it is interpreted as a sign of something
by some interpreter. Eco (1977) defines sign as everything that, on the grounds
of previously established social convention, can be taken as something standing
for something else. It has been defined as a proposition constituted by a valid
and revealing connection to its consequent, when this association is culturally
recognized and systematically coded. Half a dozen possible relationships are
empirically found to prevail between the signifier and the signified. Signifier
is the sound or visual image of a sign. Signified is the concept aspect of a
sign. Both the signified and the signifier are dialectically united in the
sign. The six species of the sign are as follows (Sebeok, 1976):
(1) Signal: When a sign token mechanically (naturally)
or conventionally triggers some reaction on the part of a receiver, it is said
to function as a signal. Examples of signals are the exclamation 'go!' or
alternatively the discharge of a pistol to start a foot face.
(2) Symptom: A symptom is a compulsive, automatic,
nonarbitrary sign, with a natural link between it and what it signifies. For
example, bodily symptoms indicate the underlying disease.
(3) Icon: A sign is said to be iconic when there is a
topological similarity between it and what it signifies. Examples are pictures,
diagrams, etc.
(4) Index: A sign is said to be indexic in so far as it
is contiguous with what it signifies. Indexes give physical indication.
Examples are compass, needles, weather vanes, footprints and droppings of
animals, etc.
(5) Symbol: A sign is said to be a symbol when it does
not have similarity or continuity with what it signifies, but a conventional
link between them is established. Examples are badges, flags, etc.
(6) Name: A sign which has an extensional class for its
designation is called a name. In accordance with its definition, individuals
denoted by a proper name as Veronica have no common property attributed to them
save the fact that they all answer to Veronica.
Note that of the six types of signs listed above,
signal, symptom, icon and index fall within nonverbal domain fairly
comprehensively and fully. There are elements of symbol as well in nonverbal
communication, but these are of a limited quality and quantity. The sign name
is perhaps nonexistence is probably a distinguishing mark of nonverbal
communication. There are also scholars who consider all the six types of signs
occurring in nonverbal communication. Semiotic approaches to the study of
nonverbal communication focus more on the dialectics within nonverbal
behaviour, on how patterns are formed, and on how the inter-relationships
between verbal and nonverbal communication balance themselves in communicative
contexts. Coupled with the experimental investigations and findings of
psychologically-oriented studies of nonverbal communication, the semiotic approaches
to the study of nonverbal communication, indeed, dominate the current
assumptions and procedures in studies on nonverbal communication.
1.3.5. Indian Studies of Nonverbal
Behaviour
Traditional studies of nonverbal behaviour by Indian
scholars link the nonverbal behaviour of everyday life with those of performing
and other aesthetic arts and see these behaviours in terms of their
exploitation and function in these arts. In other words, nonverbal behaviours
are seen as something which occur in nature, in normal communication and as
something not fully at the conscious level. These unconscious acts are studied
to reveal their communicative nature and to bring out their functions and
patterns. In the process of study, the roots of nonverbal behaviour in
language, social acts and biology are emphasized. While every act of nonverbal
behaviour has its basis in language, society and biology, their exploitation,
use, and the manner of their use is based on the psychological need and state
of the individual. The ultimate goal of the study of nonverbal behaviour is
their exploitation for effective communication in aesthetic arts, for enhancing
the aesthetic value of the communication resorted to. It is then seen as an
effective tool for aesthetic value of the communication, providing a variety of
techniques and a variety of acts. Because the study of nonverbal behaviour is
tied to performance, their physical manifestation in the body and the intent of
these manifestations to represent underlying psychological needs and states
were emphasized. Since in the view of Indian scholars there is a unity of
purpose between poetry and drama, indeed, between all arts, physical
manifestation of nonverbal behaviour as representations of underlying
psychological needs and states is included in every art, in poetry through
appropriate description and metaphor using language, in sculpture through
direct, indirect and oblique representation of nonverbal acts as physical
manifestations, and in dance combining both poetry and sculpture adding to the
combination the dimension of movement and symbol.
A chief characteristic of Indian studies of nonverbal
behaviour is the inclusion of the same in grammar. For example, Indian
traditional grammar include not only the description of intonation patterns and
their functions within their scope but also other paralanguage features meant
for sarcasm, doubt, emphasis, contradiction and specific identities of
registers. This is sought to be achieved in two ways - one, by a direct
description and analysis of utterances in terms of their functions in
communicative contexts of their functions in communicative contexts just as in linguistic
description which present how segmental sounds and sentence intonations get
elliptical in the speech of certain professional groups; secondly, by
identifying linguistic mechanisms that carry these nonverbal acts, as in the
case of prolonging the pronunciation of consonants for certain effects. Also,
Indian traditional grammars have developed so as to include separate chapters
on nonverbal behaviours, and their import for poetry and other aesthetic arts.
The incorporation here with linguistic facts is sometimes peripheral, at times
not relevant, but many a time highly relevant for effective communication,
choice of diction and standard speech. Thus, by incorporating chapters on
nonverbal manifestations, the grammars focus on the performative factors of
speech as well, apart from forming a bridge between language of every day
discourse and the language of poetry and aesthetic arts. Then, by the mere
inclusion of study of nonverbal acts, the overall goal of grammar and its
learning is changed. History has not, however, seen to it that what began
originally as a descriptive-cum-prescriptive approach to account for the then
prevailing practices grew wide and dynamic enough to be alive to the changes in
practices or to further develop the system of research applicable to matter
other than texts.
In the Sanskrit school of grammar, nonverbal behaviour
is prominently discussed within rasa theory. The theory of rasa is intimately
connected with the theory of dhvani. It forms the most important aesthetic
foundation of Sanskrit poetics. It first appears in the dramatic theory of
Bharata; originally in connection with drama (explicit nonverbal behaviour),
then as one of the essential factors of poetic theory (description of the
nonverbal as suggestive of the underlying intent). While the theory of rasa
itself is older than Bharata (500 B.C.?) the general conditions of the theory
as fixed by Bharata continue to be accepted as the basis. Elevation of
nonverbal communication to aesthetic status and the exploitation of models of
nonverbal communication for aesthetic purpose is clearly seen in the concept of
abhinaya in treatises on drama and dance, in essence on theatrical performance.
Abhinaya, according to Bharata Muni (Nayasastra Chapter IV : verse 23,
translation as found in Ghosh, 1967) has four kinds of histrionic
representation, or shall we say that communication is carried on through four
kinds of means in dance and drama. These are a´gika which deals with bodily
movements in their subtle intricacies, vacika which refers to vocal delivery,
aharya is communication via costume and make up and sattvika is communication
through the accurate representation of the mental and emotional feeling. All
these are physical manifestations. The angikabhinaya, which is the visible form
of communication through bodily gestures and facial expressions, is certainly
primary nonverbal communication mode; there is an insistence on the need for
gestures and facial expressions to be in consonance with one another.
Communication through perceptual factors such as costume and make up, and the
physical manifestation of mental states and emotional feeling are also
emphasized for a successful performance. The role of vocal delivery is not
minimized either in the process of communication. The practice of
representation in a dramatic performance is twofold: realistic (Natural,
popular) lokadharmi and conventionally) (theatrical innovation, and used
conventionally) nayadharmi (Naya¿astra, Chapter VI and verse 24, as found in
the translation of Ghosh, 1967). In other words the communication in aesthetic
arts is carried on both by natural (realistic) and conventional signs. Of all
the modes of nonverbal communication, gestures and implied meanings in oral
delivery have been given a pointed attention in the elucidation and
exploitation of nonverbal communication for aesthetic arts in Chapter 5,
section 5.4.5. As regards implied meanings we may make a brief statement here
on the role of suggestion treated in the Dhvani School of Sanskrit scholars,
since we do not deal with the Indian position in Chapter 4 which discusses
nonverbal characteristics of language use and silence. In course of our
discussions on the scope and definition of nonverbal behaviour we suggested
that implied meanings, through an absence of linguistic units, are a form of
nonverbal expression. In the dhvani school of poetics, it is suggestion/implied
meaning that is considered the essential characteristic of good poetry. The
dhvani school, in its analysis of the essentials of poetry, finds that the
contents of a good poem may be generally distinguished into two parts. One part
is that which is expressed and thus it includes what is given in words; the
other part is the content that is not expressed, but must be added to it by the
imagination of the reader or the listener. The unexpressed or the suggested
part, which is distinctly linked up with the expressed and which is developed
by a peculiar process of suggestion, is taken to be soul or essence of poetry.
The suggestive part is something different from the merely metaphorical. The
metaphorical or the allegoric, however veiled it may be, is still in a sense
expressed and must be taken as such; but the suggestive is always unexpressed
and is therefore a source of greater charm through its capacity for
concealment; for, this concealment in which consists the essence of art, is in
reality no concealment at all. The unexpressed in most cases is a mood or
feeling (rasa) which is directly inexpressible. The dhvani school took up the
moods and feelings as an element of the unexpressed and harmonized the idea of
rasa with davani. It is suggested that poetry is not the mere clothing of
agreeable ideas in agreeable language. In poetry, the feelings and moods also
play an important part. The poet awakens in us, through the power of suggestion
inherent in words or ideas, the feelings and moods. Rasa is brought into
consciousness by the power of suggestion inherent in words and their sense.
Thus, nonverbal communication in aesthetic arts is viewed in Indian treatises
as spectacular presence of physical manifestation and suggestive absence of
vocal elements.
In the Dravidian School of Grammar (Tolkappiyam of
pre-Christian era, 300 B.C.?) also, description and study of nonverbal
behaviour is an integral part of grammar, poetry and drama. Nonverbal
communication is seen anchored on to physical (and physiological)
manifestations. The term used to refer to the nonverbal itself clearly reveals
that the idea of nonverbal communication is grounded in physical and
physiological manifestations. meyppau (mey meaning body and pau meaning the
acts based on body or expressed through bodily acts) is the term used to refer
to those manifestations which appear on the body of an individual as a sign of
what goes on inside the mind. Those need be no deliberation and whose
occurrence is revealed (in poetry and drama) in a natural manner through the
bodily acts form the scope of the study of nonverbal behaviour. Tolkappiyam
presents eight types of meyppau. All of these are grounded in bodily
manifestations. Each one of these eight manifestations is related to four moods
or feelings. These moods or feelings may be either causative or consequential.
In other words, the major eight manifestations are related to 32 different
types of moods/feelings; the latter could be either the causative mechanisms or
consequential results. Commentators have differed among themselves as to the
content of 32 items, but not on the essentiality of body acts for nonverbal
communication, it being the natural, exteran manifestation of internal states,
and its retrievability and comprehension without deliberation. It is also
considered an essential component of poetry. The grammar prescribes that the
poets are not to refer to the feelings as such experienced by the individuals
but only to the external manifestations on the body. By reference to the bodily
manifestations, and with the help of such references, the reader retrieves the
causative and consequential contexts of the poem, its intent and so on. Because
of this device, suggestion reigns supreme in poetry. The injunction that the
poet is not to refer directly to the feelings of characters but only to bodily
manifestation, while recognizing the communicative function of bodily
manifestations, aims at making a poem more suggestive and open for varied
interpretations and enjoyment. The nonverbal mode is considered a tool to
express the internal states. The scheme also includes certain verbal acts as
part of the nonverbal. 'We see that even speeches by the heroine and others
have been included as forming part of the (nonverbal) group. If the speeches
are mere expressions of inner thoughts they are speeches. But if they are
emotional outbursts of inner commotion and feeling they are certainly meyppau.
If we closely scrutinize the list of meyppau in Tolkappiyam we will see that
only such emotional expressions have been listed under meyppau' (Sundaramurthy,
1974). Suggestive power includes under the rubric of the nonverbal whatever has
been left out, not said, in the verbal act but is communicated because of their
being left out, not said, in the verbal act. Another dimension included is that
the nonverbal also includes the verbal if the latter is one of emotional
outcome. Note that these view points are also currently held in modern studies
of nonverbal behaviour (See Mehrabian, 1972). Also note that in traditional
Indian treatises the nonverbal exploits both aural and vision media. The same
classification of the nonverbal we find in the traditional Indian grammars is
also found in several modern studies of nonverbal behaviour.
1.3.6. Literature and Text-oriented
Studies of Nonverbal Behaviour
Creative artists provide insights into human mind,
human behaviour, and individual and social thought and behaviour. Both
intuitive observations and empirical experimentations of nonverbal behaviour
benefit a lot from absorbing what the creative artists have to say on various
facets of nonverbal communication and what they have identified and exploited
as regards nonverbal behaviour and communication in their works. Creative
artists are similar to the investigators who prefer to use mainly their own
intuitive analysis, but with one difference. The investigators may tend to look
at an object and/or a phenomenon with their own set of rules, ideas and
concepts whereas the creative artists may look at the same object and/or
phenomenon from so many different angles, rather get into the soul and body of
their characters, which a comprehensive picture is provided by them. Note, however,
that such a picture is at times quite far from reality.
In literature, the nonverbal behaviour modes depicted
by authors may illumine the content or be itself the content of the literary
work. The texts provide records of nonverbal communication of past as well as
of the present. They may be in codified ritual texts, in didactic works, in
religious discourses, or in literary or folk episodes handed down from
generation to generation. These provide a clue to the belief system of the
societies, provide the world view of the society whose behaviour it regulates
or had regulated. Textual analysis gives us rare as well as frequent practices,
indicates the significance of nonverbal communication across several social and
spatio-temporal levels. The past is linked with the present in the textual
analysis. The present is more clearly revealed in the past and its
understanding. Textual analysis requires several tools - semantic analysis,
morphotion and interpretation of the act described in the text and establishment
of linkage between items across texts. Assessment of correctness of
interpretation requires several measures such as identification of roots of
words, morphological patterns, syntactic comparison and establishment of
patterns. The most important function of analysis of nonverbal behaviour as
found in texts is the understanding of current behaviour that is narrated.
Textual analysis opens up a mine of information. In
literary texts, such as novels, story is carried on and established by what the
characters say (linguistic behaviour) and by a description of the nonverbal act
indulged in by the characters. Punctuation marks are but only one device which
give focus to some paralinguistic features. Other nonverbal communicative acts
are revealed in terms of proxemic behaviour, expressions via eye and face,
kinesics, use of implied meanings and so on. A large part of the author's
narrative, without any one being aware of it, is aimed at the description of
nonverbal communicative acts of the characters. Thus, because of infinite
possibilities for human stories and acts, and because of insightful
observations and artistry of the authors, literary texts also become a mine of
information for those who propose to study nonverbal communicative acts.
The paralinguistic characteristics are conveyed by the
authors in two ways - through the use of punctuation marks using both
conventional ones and those specifically created ones by the authors
themselves. The punctuation marks are of a limited quantity. Not many have been
really added to the set available, and in Indian languages they were largely
adaptations from European languages. Repetition of a punctuation mark, reversal
of its placements (in contrast to normal practice), omission of a punctuation
mark where it would be generally expected to be used, some peculiar devices
either specially defined or brought from a stock of symbols used elsewhere for
other purpose but now notices in this area. Another device resorted to, to give
an aura of the paralinguistic characteristics, is their description sometimes
through metaphorical transfer, sometimes through foregrounding processes
(foregrounding refers to the stimulus which is not culturally expected in a
social situation; when foregrounding of something takes place, it provokes
special attention; foregrounding is generally an intentional distortion of the
linguistic), many a time by impregnating an ordinary word with potent meanings.
Poyotos (1977) suggests that it is the depiction of the
linguistic-paralinguistic-kinetic structure of the people involved in the story
that conveys a feeling of authenticity and becomes a vehicle to transfer what
the author has created to the mind of the reader. Nonverbal communication, in
the hands of authors, performs six functions, according to Poyotos. Nonverbal
communication brings about physical realism, distorting realism,
individualizing realism, psychological realism, interactive realism and
documentary realism in literary texts. Physical realism conveys the sensorial
perception of people's behaviour. Physical realism is differentiated from
psychological realism. In psychological realism, the narration of the author
delves into the subtle inner reactions, which may be both body and purely
mind-based. In distorting realism, the literary, or artistic, expressionistic
rendering of physico-psychological reality is 'meant to ridicule, to offer a
caricature of reality, or, truly to show what the eyes cannot see'.
Individualizing realism is shown in 'the conscious effort to differentiate the
characters as to their physical and psychological characteristics, by means of
their verbal repertoires and, in the best cases, by their nonverbal ones as
well'. Poyotos sees interactive realism employed by authors as 'a thoughtful
depiction of the mechanism of conversation mainly in face to face encounters'.
The documentary realism is historical realism and is a consequence of physical
realism as regards depiction of nonverbal behaviour, occupational activities,
general task-performing activities, and activities conditioned by clothes,
hairdo, furniture, etc., are part of this realism.
Poyotos also identifies four ways by which the authors
usually transmit the nonverbal behaviours in the narrative text. One way is by
describing the behaviour and explaining its meanings. This is plain and has
been exploited for a long time. Although this method id plain, it, in no way,
diminishes the story telling so long as the artistry and content of the story
are superb and associated with some greatly influential thoughts. Also note
that this plain way of resenting nonverbal behaviours may be dictated by the
current practices in storytelling and could also be a stylistic marker of
individual authors. Another process of transmitting nonverbal behaviour is by
describing the behaviour without explaining the meaning. This is generally
meant for a contemporary audience familiar with the meanings of the nonverbal
behaviour described. Also note that in contemporary contexts, an obtuse
nonverbal behaviour when described, but without its meanings explained, becomes
a technique of narration, leaving meor to the personal abilities and
sensitivities of readers to retrieve the meanings. A third way is by explaining
the meaning without describing the nonverbal behaviour. This meaning may or may
not be fully understood by the reader in the same manner it is meant by the
author. Another method of presenting nonverbal behaviour in the narrative text
is 'by providing a verbal expression always concurrent with the nonverbal one,
which is important, but not referred to at all'.
Poyotos also finds that the nonverbal reper toires of
the characters play four definite and important functions in narrative
technique. These are initial definition of the character, progressive
definitions, subsequent identification and recurrent identification of
characters. Initial definition of the character is done by means of one or more
idiosyncratic linguistic, paralinguistic and/or kinesic features. These
features include use of verbal expletives, personal choice of words, a
particular tone of voice in certain situations, a gesture, a socially but
individually conditioned way of greeting others, other manners and mannerisms,
a typical posture which we can identify as a recurrent behaviour, etc.
Progressive definition of characters through nonverbal behaviour is by means of
adding gradually new features as the story proceeds. 'A feature adds to another
feature previously observed, complements it, builds up the physical as well as
the psychological or cultural portrait, and assists the reader in the
progressive total appreciation of the narration'. Subsequent identification of
characters through nonverbal behaviour is by means of repetition for the first
time of a feature or features. Such a repetition immediately not only brings
back the4 image but also does it at a point in the story when the readers may
confuse between characters or may have forgotten the characters' external
personalities. Repetition may focus upon verbal expletives, gestures, peculiar
tones of voice, etc. Finally, the recurrent identification of characters
through nonverbal behaviour is by means of a known feature repeated as many
times as necessary at varying intervals in the narrations.
Thus, in a narrative text, the depiction of nonverbal
behaviour has several functions to perform - it carries the burden of the
story; it complements what the characters say; without such a complementation a
comprehensive locale and content cannot be built for the story to proceed
further and be comprehended by the readers. The depiction of nonverbal
behaviour also provides various types of realism to the story, while providing
at the same time various means at the disposal of the author - various
processes to define the characters and to retain and recall such definitions to
meet the demands of the story as well as the artistry. Both textual analysis
and the analysis of literary works provide us with insightful identification of
the types, function and defining characteristics of nonverbal communicative
acts. Empirically-oriented experimental investigations of nonverbal
communicative acts can draw from this mine of information so as to fashion the
acts for controlled experimental studies.
