Gestures can facilitate comprehension and specific gestural forms/timings are associated with negation, including the ambiguities arising from negation+quantification in English. Analyses of L1/L2 English comprehension of ambiguous sentences among 66 L2 learners and 10 NS of English revealed moderately accurate interpretation, no proficiency effects, and no/limited effects of inclusion of gesture in sentence presentation.
Gestures can play a facilitative role in the interpretation of structural ambiguities (Guellaï et al., 2014; Prieto et al., 2013; Tubau et al. 2015) and are associated with expression of negation, with research on Open Hand Prone gestures (Kendon, 2004), head shakes (e.g. Kendon, 2002; Calbris, 2011), and their interaction and synchronization (Harrison, 2014; Harrison & Larrivée, 2016). The current comprehension study examines a context of negation in which the presence of quantification yields scopal ambiguities and asks to what extent gestural forms and timings help second language (L2) users of English comprehend intended interpretations. Under one interpretation of (1), some magnolias will bloom and some will not (wide-scope negation). Under an alternative interpretation, none will bloom (narrow-scope negation). (1) All the magnolias won't bloom (Syrett et al., 2014) Brown & Kamiya (2019) described a relationship between speech and gesture in such contexts, with a preponderance of head gestures and semantically congruent head shakes, alignment of gestures with negators, and lengthening of gesture strokes associated with narrow-scope negation in native English production. 58 university-level L2 English speakers (27 low-intermediate CEFR-A2/B1; 31 high-intermediate CEFR-B2/C1),10 NS of English and 8 L2 English speakers with training were presented with two versions of ambiguous sentences produced with scripted gestures following the patterns above. Contrasting audio-only versus audio+video sentence presentation formats, analyses revealed moderately accurate levels of interpretation, no effects of proficiency and no effects of presentation type. Results will be discussed in relation to research highlighting the importance of gesture in L2 communication (e.g. Kelly, et al., 2009; Macedonia, et al, 2011; Matsumoto & Dobbs, 2017; Repetto et al, 2017; Tellier 2008) but also findings of no or even inhibitory effects of inclusion of gesture, particularly in studies of L2 assessment (e.g. Gruba, 2004; Ockey; 2007; Suvorov, 2009).
