Cover not available

In:Perspectives on Pantomime
Edited by Przemysław Żywiczyński, Johan Blomberg and Monika Boruta-Żywiczyńska
[Advances in Interaction Studies 12] 2024
► pp. 188–216

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload Book EPUB
authorization required

Chapter 8
Symbolic distancing in three-year-old children’s object-use pantomime

 | University of Alberta
 | University of Alberta
 | University of Alberta
Published online: 15 February 2024
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ais.12.08mar
Abstract
Children’s early pantomime of how to use objects is thought to demonstrate “symbolic distancing,” ostensibly providing an opportunity to observe the development of symbolic reference between the ages of three- and six-years. This chapter argues, in contrast, that the modes of representation used by three-year-olds may be better explained by item, task, and communicative factors revealing children’s functional knowledge of objects and social knowledge of communicative conventions rather than symbolic development. Detailed analysis of the children’s manual mode of representation in conjunction with their speech challenges assumptions about which forms are viewed as more or less pantomimic. Interpretation of iconicity may be a function of human adult convention; we discuss the implications for our understanding of the role of iconic gestures depicting object-use in communicative situations.
Article outline
  • Symbolic distancing in three-year-old children’s pantomime
  • “Pantomiming” how to use an object
  • Is this pantomime?
  • Symbol development and symbolic distancing
  • Symbolic status of pantomime forms
  • Method
    • Participants
    • Procedure
      • Sammy’s birthday task
    • Coding
  • Results
    • Gesture type by child, cue and speech
    • Gesture type by object
  • Discussion
  • Pantomime? The effects of cue and speech
  • Mode of representation and primary vs. secondary iconicity
  • Alternatives to symbolic distancing
  • Conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (72)
References
Acredolo, L. P., & Goodwyn, S. (1988). Symbolic gesturing in normal infants. Child Development, 59(2), 450–466. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Arbib, M. A. (2012). How the brain got language: The mirror system hypothesis. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bates, E., Benigni, L., Bretherton, I., Camaioni, L., & Volterra, V. (1979). The emergence of symbols: Cognition and communication in infancy. Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Behne, T., Carpenter, M., & Tomasello, M. (2014). Young children create iconic gestures to inform others. Developmental Psychology, 50(8), 2049–2060. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bellagamba, F., & Tomasello, M. (1999). Re-enacting intended acts: Comparing 12- and 18-month-olds. Infant Behavior & Development, 22(2), 277–282. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bigham, S., & Bourchier-Sutton, A. (2007). The decontextualization of form and function in the development of pretence. The British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 25(3), 335–351. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boyatzis, C. J., & Watson, M. W. (1993). Preschool children’s symbolic representation of objects through gestures. Child Development, 64(3), 729–735. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brentari, D., Coppola, M., Mazzoni, L., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2012). When does a system become phonological? Handshape production in gesturers, signers, and homesigners. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 30(1), 1–31. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brentari, D., Di Renzo, A., Keane, J., & Volterra, V. (2015). Cognitive, cultural, and linguistic sources of a handshape distinction expressing agentivity. Topics in Cognitive Science, 7(1), 95–123. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brown, S., Mittermaier, E., Kher, T., & Arnold, P. (2019). How pantomime works: Implications for theories of language origin. Frontiers in Communication, 4, 9. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Buxbaum, L. J., Kyle, K. M., & Menon, R. (2005). On beyond mirror neurons: internal representations subserving imitation and recognition of skilled object-related actions in humans. Cognitive Brain Research, 25(1), 226–239. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Buxbaum, L. J., Shapiro, A. D., & Coslett, H. B. (2014). Critical brain regions for tool-related and imitative actions: a componential analysis. Brain: A Journal of Neurology, 137(pt 7), 1971–1985. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Capirci, O., Caselli, M. C., & Volterra, V. (2022). Interaction among modalities and within development. In Gesture in language: Development across the lifespan (pp. 113–133). De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Capirci, O., Cristilli, C., de Angelis, V., & Graziano, M. (2011). Learning to use gesture in narratives: Developmental trends in formal and semantic gesture competence. In G. Stam & M. Ishino (Eds.), Integrating Gestures (pp. 187–200). Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carlson, S. M., Davis, A. C., & Leach, J. G. (2005). Less Is more: Executive function and symbolic representation in preschool children.” Psychological Science, 16(8), 609–616. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Caselli, M. C., Rinaldi, P., Stefanini, S., & Volterra, V. (2012). Early action and gesture “vocabulary” and its relation with word comprehension and production. Child Development, 83(2), 526–542. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
DeLoache, J. S. (1991). Symbolic functioning in very young children: Understanding of pictures and models. Child Development, 62(4), 736–752. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2004). Becoming symbol-minded. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(2), 66–70. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dingemanse, M., Blasi, D. E., Lupyan, G., Christiansen, M. H., & Monaghan, P. (2015). Arbitrariness, iconicity, and systematicity in language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19(10), 603–615. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Edmiston, P., Perlman, M., & Lupyan, G. (2018). Repeated imitation makes human vocalizations more word-like. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 285(1874). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Elder, J. L., & Pederson, D. R. (1978). Preschool children’s use of objects in symbolic play. Child Development, 49(2), 500. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
England, M., & Nicoladis, E. (2018). Functional fixedness and body-part-as-object production in pantomime. Acta Psychologica, 190, 174–187. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldin-Meadow, S., McNeill, D., & Singleton, J. (1996). Silence is liberating: Removing the handcuffs on grammatical expression in the manual modality. Psychological Review, 103(1), 34–55. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goodglass, H., & Kaplan, E. (1963). Disturbance of gesture and pantomime in aphasia. Brain: A Journal of Neurology, 86, 703–720. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goodwyn, S. W., & Acredolo, L. P. (1993). Symbolic gesture versus word: is there a modality advantage for onset of symbol use? Child Development, 64(3), 688–701. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goodwyn, S. W., Acredolo, L. P., & Brown, C. A. (2000). Impact of symbolic gesturing on early language development. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 24(2), 81–103. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gullberg, M. (1998). Gesture as a communication strategy in second language discourse. Lund University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hockett, C. F. (1958). A course in modern linguistics. MacMillan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hopkins, E. J., Smith, E. D., Weisberg, D. S., & Lillard, A. S. (2016). The development of substitute object pretense: The differential importance of form and function. Journal of Cognition and, 17(2), 197–220. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hwang, S.-O., Tomita, N., Morgan, H., Ergin, R., İlkbaşaran, D., Seegers, S., Lepic, R., & Padden, C. (2017). Of the body and the hands: patterned iconicity for semantic categories. Language and Cognition, 9(4), 573–602. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Iverson, J. M., Capirci, O., Volterra, V., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2008). Learning to talk in a gesture-rich world: Early communication in Italian vs. American children. First Language, 28(2), 164–181. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jackowitz, E. R., & Watson, M. W. (1980). Development of object transformations in early pretend play. Developmental Psychology, 16(6), 543–549. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johnston, J. C., Durieux-Smith, A., & Bloom, K. (2005). Teaching gestural signs to infants to advance child development: A review of the evidence. First Language, 25(2), 235–251. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kaplan, E. F. (1968). Gestural representation of implement usage: An organismic-developmental study [PhD]. Clark University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kirk, E., Howlett, N., Pine, K. J., & Fletcher, B. C. (2013). To sign or not to sign? The impact of encouraging infants to gesture on infant language and maternal mind-mindedness. Child Development, 84(2), 574–590. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Klima, E., & Bellugi, U. (1979). The signs of language. Harvard.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Labuschagne, L. G., Cox, T.-J., Brown, K. & Scarf, D. (2017). Too cool? Symbolic but not iconic stimuli impair 4-year-old children’s performance on the delay-of-gratification choice paradigm. Behavioural Processes, 135, 36–39. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levy, E. & McNeill, D. (2015). Narrative development in young children: Gesture, imagery, and cohesion. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Marentette, P., Furman, R., Suvanto, M. E., & Nicoladis, E. (2020). Pantomime (not silent gesture) in multimodal communication: Evidence from children’s narratives. Frontiers in Psychology, 11(November), 575952. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Marentette, P., Pettenati, P., Bello, A., & Volterra, V. (2016). Gesture and symbolic representation in Italian and English-speaking Canadian 2-year-olds. Child Development, 87(3), 944–961. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McNeill, D. (1992). Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2012). How language began: Gesture and speech in human evolution. CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2016). Why we gesture: The surprising role of hand movements in communication. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mineiro, A., Báez-Montero, I. C., Moita, M., Galhano-Rodrigues, I., & Castro-Caldas, A. (2021). Disentangling pantomime from early sign in a new sign language: Window into language evolution research. Frontiers in Psychology, 12(December), 1130. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mitchell, R. W., & Clark, H. (2015). Experimenter’s pantomimes influence children’s use of body part as object and imaginary object pantomimes: A replication. Journal of Cognition and Development, 16(5), 703–718. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mizuguchi, T., & Sugai, K. (2002). Object related knowledge and the production of gestures with imagined objects by preschool children. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 94, 71–79. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moita, M., Abreu, A. M., & Mineiro, A. (2022). Tracking the evolution of iconic signs to understand the emergence of a phonological system. [Manuscript submitted for publication]. Instituto de Ciências da Saúde, Universidade Católica Portuguesa.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Müller, C. (2014). Gestural modes of representation as techniques of depiction. In C. Müller, A. Cienki, E. Fricke, S. H. Ladewig, D. McNeill, & J. Bressem (Eds.), Body-Language-Communication: An International Handbook on Multimodality in Human Interaction (Vol. 2, pp. 1687–1702). de Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Namy, L. L. (2001). What’s in a name when it isn’t a word? 17-month-olds’ mapping of nonverbal symbols to object categories. Infancy, 2(1), 73–86. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
O’Reilly, A. W. (1995). Using representations: Comprehension and production of actions with imagined objects. Child Development, 66(4), 999–1010. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ortega, G., & Özyürek, A. (2019). Systematic mappings between semantic categories and types of iconic representations in the manual modality: A normed database of silent gesture. Behavior Research Methods, 52(1), 51–67. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2020). Types of iconicity and combinatorial strategies distinguish semantic categories in silent gesture across cultures. Language and Cognition, 12(1), 84–113. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Overton, W. F., & Jackson, J. P. (1973). The representation of imagined objects in action sequences: A developmental study. Child Development, 44(2), 309–314. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Padden, C. A., Meir, I., Hwang, S.-O., Lepic, R., Seegers, S., & Sampson, T. (2013). Patterned iconicity in sign language lexicons. Gesture, 13(3), 287–308. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Perniss, P., Thompson, R. L., & Vigliocco, G. (2010). Iconicity as a general property of language: Evidence from spoken and signed languages. Frontiers in Psychology, 1, 227. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Piaget, J. (1962). Plays, dreams, and imitation in childhood. Norton.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schouwstra, M., Swart, H., & Thompson, B. (2019). Interpreting silent gesture: Cognitive biases and rational inference in emerging language systems. Cognitive Science, 43(7), 1–27. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sonesson, G. (2007). From the meaning of embodiment to the embodiment of meaning: A study in phenomenological semiotics. In T. Ziemke, J. Zlatev, & R. M. Frank (Eds.), Body, Language, and Mind, Vol. 1. Embodiment. (pp. 85–128). De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2010). From mimicry to mime by way of mimesis: Reflections on a general theory of iconicity. Sign Systems Studies, 38(1/4), 18–66. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stokoe, W. C. (1960). Sign language structure: An outline of the visual communication systems of the American deaf. Dept. of Anthropology and Linguistics, University of Buffalo.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Striano, T., Tomasello, M., & Rochat, P. (2001). Social and object support for early symbolic play. Developmental Science, 4(4), 442–455. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tomasello, M., Striano, T., & Rochat, P. (1999). Do young children use objects as symbols? The British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 17, 563–584. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Troseth, G. L., & DeLoache, J. S. (1998). The medium can obscure the message: Young children’s understanding of video. Child Development, 69(4), 950–965. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vallotton, C. D. (2011). Sentences and conversations before speech? Gestures of preverbal children reveal cognitive and social skills that do not wait for words. In G. Stam & M. Ishino (Eds.), Integrating gestures: The interdisciplinary nature of gesture (pp. 105–120). Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vallotton, C. D., & Ayoub, C. C. (2010). Symbols build communication and thought: The role of gestures and words in the development of engagement skills and social-emotional concepts during toddlerhood. Social Development, 19(3), 601–626. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
van Nispen, K., van de Sandt-Koenderman, W. M. E., & Krahmer, E. (2017). Production and comprehension of pantomimes used to depict objects. Frontiers in Psychology, 8(July), 1095. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wacewicz, S., & Żywiczyński, P. (2015). Language evolution: Why Hockett’s design features are a non-starter. Biosemiotics, 8(1), 29–46. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Weidinger, N., Lindner, K., Hogrefe, K., Ziegler, W., & Goldenberg, G. (2017). Getting a grasp on children’s representational capacities in pantomime of object use. Journal of Cognition and Development, 18(2), 246–269. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Werner, H., & Kaplan, B. (1963). Symbol formation: An organismic-developmental approach to language and the expression of thought. Wiley.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zlatev, J., Żywiczyński, P., & Wacewicz, S. (2020). Pantomime as the original human-specific communicative system. Journal of Language Evolution, 5(2), 156–174. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Żywiczyński, P., Wacewicz, S., & Lister, C. (2021). Pantomimic fossils in modern human communication. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 376(1824), 20200204. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Arbib, Michael
2024. Pantomime within and beyond the evolution of language. In Perspectives on Pantomime [Advances in Interaction Studies, 12], ► pp. 16 ff. DOI logo
Mineiro, Ana & Mara Moita
2024. The pantomime roots of Sao Tome and Principe Sign Language. In Perspectives on Pantomime [Advances in Interaction Studies, 12], ► pp. 159 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue