Art. the Idea of Gesture as a Universal Language

5/21/2018 Art. the Idea of Gesture as a Universal Language

1/15

The Idea of Gesture as a Universal Language in the XVIIth and XVIIIth CenturiesAuthor(s): James R. KnowlsonSource: Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. 26, No. 4 (Oct. - Dec., 1965), pp. 495-508Published by: University of Pennsylvania PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2708496.

Accessed: 24/06/2014 19:28

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

University of Pennsylvania Pressis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toJournal of the History of Ideas.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 157.92.4.12 on Tue, 24 Jun 2014 19:28:09 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=upennhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/2708496?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/2708496?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=upenn


2/15

THE

IDEA OF

GESTURE AS A UNIVERSAL

LANGUAGE

IN

THE

XVIITH

AND

XVIIITH

CENTURIES

BY

JAMES

R. KNOWLSON

The idea that someone

unable

to

speak

or

understand another

person's

language

might

nonetheless communicatewith him

by

the

use

of

gesture

is one that has occurred

fairly

often from

classical

times to the

present day.

Personal

experience

has

usually

been

enough

to show that

gestures

may

sometimessucceed

when

words

have

failed.

On the other

hand,

one has

only

to think of the

misunderstandings

and

frustrationsthat can

result

from

efforts to

expressby

means of

gesture

anything

in the

least

complex

or

abstract

to

realize

very

clearly

the limitations

of

this

mode of communication.

It

is

scarcely

surprising,

then,

that those scholars who

have

ac-

claimed the

language

of

gesture

and commended t

to mankind as the

only

truly

universal

anguage

should

have

drawn

their

inspiration

ess

from

their

own

(or

someone

else's)

direct

experience

than from the

more

highly

developed

formsof

gesture

used

by

the mime

artist,

the

orator,

or the deaf man.

Lucian

recounted,

for

example,

in the dia-

logue

Of

Pantomime,l

how a

Prince

of

Pontus,

when

promised

a

gift

by

Nero,

requested

that

he

should be

granted

the

services

of

a well-

known

mimer,

who could

replace

the

various

interpreters

that he

neededto

employ

in

order o communicatewith

the

notablesof

neigh-

boring

ands.

At

the

beginning

of

the

XVIIth

century,

Giovanni

Boni-

facio,

in

l'Arte de'

Cenni,2

revealed

the

astonishingly

wide

range

of

ideas that couldbe

expressed

by

the orator's

gestures,

and

suggested

that these

gestures

could

in

fact

provide

a

highly

efficient

orm of

uni-

versal

language.

As

recently

as

1953

indeed,

Sir

Richard

Paget pro-

posed

that a

sign-language:

...

might

be

taught

as a form of

play

to all

children,

to

develop

their

powers

of

observation

and

expression.

f

this were

done

in all

countries

by

means

of

instructional

films,

there

would be

a

very simple

international

languageby

which the differentraces

of

mankind, ncluding

he

deaf,might

understand

one

another.3

1

The

Works

of

Lucian

of

Samosata,

trans.

by

H.

W.

and

F. G.

Fowler,

4

vols.

(Oxford,

1905),

II,

256. Classical

pantomine

was discussedon a number

of occasions

in

the

eighteenth

century,

referencesometimes

being

made to

Lucian's

story.

See,

for

example,

he Abbe du

Bos'

Reflexionscritiques

sur la

Peinture et

la Poesie

[1st.

ed.

1719]

6th

ed.

(Paris, 1755),

3

vols.,

III, 282,

and Thomas Reid's

Essays

on the

Intellectual Powers

of

Man in

The

Works

of

Thomas Reid

D.D.,

ed.

Sir William

Hamilton

(Edinburgh,

1846),

Essay

VI, 5,

Sec.

9,

449-50.

2

G. Bonifacio,L'Artede' Cennicon la quale formandosi avellavisibile,si tratta

della

muta

eloquenza,

he

non

e

altro che

un

facondo

silentio

(Vicenza,1616).

3

Preface

(xvi)

to

K.

W.

Hodgson,

The

Deaf

and

Their

Problems.A

Study

in

Special

Education

(London,

1953).

See also Nature

(Jan. 16, 1943), CLI,

80.

495

This content downloaded from 157.92.4.12 on Tue, 24 Jun 2014 19:28:09 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/15

496

JAMES

R.

KNOWLSON

Students of

the

universal

language

movement

have so

far

concen-

trated

their attention

only upon

schemes of

universal

writing,4

and,

to the

best of

our

knowledge,

have

ignored

entirely

the

suggestion

that gesture might provide such a language. It is clearly impossible

in

a short

article to

trace the entire

history

of

this

particular

idea.

Our intention is therefore to

examine here its

emergence

in

the

XVIIth

century

and to

show

particularly

how,

in

the

XVIIth and

XVIIIth

centuries,

it was related

to

the

development

of

gesture

as

a

method

of

teaching

the

deaf.

The notion that

gesture

could

provide

an

admirable

universal

language

for

mankind

was

inspired

first,

it would

seem, by

the

re-

markable

variety

and

clarity

of the

gestures taught

and used in Ren-

aissance

rhetoric.

It is

in

two

of the

best-known

manuals of rhetorical

delivery published

in

the first half of

the XVIIth

century-Giovanni

Bonifacio's l'Arte

de'

Cenni

and

John

Bulwer's

Chirologia:

or

the

Naturall

Language

of

the Hand

5-that we find

the

idea

most

clearly

expressed.

Referring

to

the barriers to

understanding

that have

been

raised

between

peoples

by

the

diversity

of

tongues,

Bonifacio

wrote:

E veramente l nostroparlare6 tanto vario, e diverso,e tante sorti di lin-

guaggi

si

ritrovano

al

mondo,

che

con

grande

incommodo

spesse

volte

non

intendiamo

a

favella

de'

nostri

vicini,

non

che

degli

stranieri,

e

de'

lontani,

il che

e

avenuto

perche

tralasciando

gli

huomini

questa

visibile

natural

favella

sono andati

inventando varii

artificiosi

modi di

favellare,

che

se

il

nostro

parlare

fosse

naturale,

tutti

gli

huomini con

un

solo

idioma

parle-

rebbono.6

Hence,

he

suggested,

a

language

of

gesture,

made

up

of that vast

repertoire of rhetorical signs used by the orator,7 if universally

adopted,

could

break down the

barriers raised at

Babel.

For

the

English physician,

John

Bulwer,

also,

the hand:

4

Histories

of

the universal

anguage

movement

such

as

L.

Couturat

and

L.

Leau,

Histoire

de la

Langue

Universelle

Paris,

1903),

A.

Guerard,

A

short

History

of

the

International

Language

Movement

(London, 1922),

M.

Pei,

One

Language

or

the

World

(New

York,

1958),

M.

Monnerot-Dumaine,

recis

d'interlinguistique

Paris,

1960),

P.

Burney,

Les

Langues

Internationales

(Paris, 1962),

neglect

the

idea

of

gesture as the universallanguage.P. E. Stojan in the Bibliografiode internacia

linguo

(Geneva, 1929),

has a

list

of

gestural languages

for the

use

of

the

deaf.

A brief

list of recent

articleson universal

anguage

schemes

n the XVIIth

century

(again

not

touching

on

this

particularaspect)

will be found

in

the

writer's

earlier

article,

J.H.I.,

XXIV

(April-June

1963),

269.

5

J.

Bulwer,

Chirologia:

or the

Naturall

Languageof

the

Hand.

Composed

of

the

Speaking

Motions,

and

Discoursing

Gestures

thereof.

Whereunto is added

Chi-

ronomia: or the

Art

of

Manuall Rhetoricke

etc.

by

J.

B.

Gent

Philochirosophus

(London,1644).

6

G.

Bonifacio,op.

cit.,

11-12.

7

On

Bulwer see

K.

Hodgson,op.

cit.,

95-97 and

H.

J.

Norman,

John

Bulwer,

The

Chirosopher,

roceedings

of

the

Royal

Society

of

Medicine

(May,

1943),

589-

602.

What Bulwer's work

reveals

of

early XVIIth-century acting

technique

s dis-

cussed

n B. L.

Joseph's

book Elizabethan

Acting

(London,1951).




4/15

GESTURE

AS A

UNIVERSAL

LANGUAGE 497

.

.

speakes

all

languages,

and as

universall

character

of

Reason

is

generally

understood

and

knowne

by

all

Nations,

among

the

formall

differences

of

their

Tongue.

And

being

the

onely

speech

that is naturall

to

Man,

it

may

well be called the Tongueand Generall anguageof HumaneNature,which,

without

teaching,

men

in all

regions

of the

habitable world doe at the

first

sight

most

easily

understand.8

Gestural

signs, moreover,

Bulwer

maintained,

were

infinitely superior

to

spoken

words:

they

were,

for

instance,

more

striking

in

effect and

speedier

in

execution.

More

important

than

this, however,

was,

he

believed,

the

fact

that

the

language

of

signs

differed

from all

spoken

tongues

(even

from

Hebrew)

in

being

a

natural

language.

It

could

therefore

be

universally

understood

without

being

learned or trans-

lated.

The

language

of

gesture appeared

then to

Bulwer

as

the

natural

language

of

the

beasts,

of

Adam,

and of mankind as

a whole. It was

that

primitive

tongue

which:

..

had the

happinesse

o

escape

the

curse at

the

confusion

of

Babel:

so

it

hath

since been

sanctified and

made

a

holy language

by

the

expressions

of

our

Saviours

Hands.9

For this reason above all, Bulwer believed that gesture was the ob-

vious

language

to be

adopted by

mankind

as

a common

tongue.

The

example

of the

deaf and dumb confirmed

Bulwer

in

his

belief

that the hand

could serve

as

an excellent substitute

for

the

tongue,

as

well

as

act

as an

accompaniment

to it. He

had been

much

im-

pressed,

he

wrote,

by:

.

..

that

wonder

of

necessity

that Nature

worketh in

men

that

are

born

deafe and

dumbe;

who

can

argue

and

dispute

rhetorically

by

signes,

and

with a kind of mute and logistiqueeloquenceovercome heir amaz'doppo-

nents;

wherein

some

are

so

ready

and

excellent,

they

seem to

want

nothing

to

have their

meanings

perfectly

understood.10

And

so,

after

attempting

to

adapt

the manual

signs

of

the

orator

for

use

among

the

deaf,

he

concluded in

a

later work 1 that such

an

adaptation

was

totally

unnecessary,

since

they already possessed

their

own

perfectly

adequate system

of

signs.

He went

on indeed

to reassure

the

deaf

that:

...

though you

cannot

expressyour

mindes

in

those verball

contrivancesof

man's

invention;

yet you

want

not

speech,

who

have

your

whole

Body;

for

a

Tongue,having

a

language

more naturall

and

significant

which

is common

to

you

with

us,

to

wit

gesture,

the

generall

and

universall

language

of

Humane

nature,

which

when

we

would

have

our

Speech

to

have

life

and

efficacy

we

joyne

in

commission

with our

wordes,

and when we

should

speak

with more

store

and

gravity,

we renounce

words and

use

Nods and other

Natural

signs

alone.12

8

J.

Bulwer,

op. cit.,

3.

9

Ibid.,

7.

10

Ibid.,

5.

11

J.

Bulwer, Philocophus

or the

Deafe

and

DumbeMan's Friend

by

J.

B.,

sur-

named the

Chirosopher

London,

1648).

12

Ibid.,

Dedication.




5/15

498

JAMES R.

KNOWLSON

The

example

of the

deaf man's

signs

was then of

some

importance

already

in the

XVIIth

century

(and,

we shall

see,

was to

become

more

important

still

in

the late XVIIIth

century).

It

is

worth

then

considering or a momentwhat the status of this form of gesturehad

been

up

to that time.

Throughout

the Middle

Ages,

it had been

widely

believed

that

the deaf and dumb

were

quite incapable

of

benefiting

from

instruc-

tion of

any

kind.13Hence

few

men

were bold

or

foolish

enough

to

attempt

what

appeared

o be an

impossible

task. Dumbness was

con-

sidered

more

or

less

synonymous

with deafness. The deaf were

dumb,

not because

they

were

unable to

hear

speech-sounds,

but because

they wereafflictedwith a disease that affectedtheir organsof speech

as well as their

organs

of

hearing.

And

they

could not be

taught,

partly

because

knowledge

was

acquired

argely through

conventional

language,

but

also

because,

in

many cases,

the

deaf and dumb

ap-

peared

closer to

the

brutes

in

intelligence

than

they

did

to

normal

(i.e.

speaking)

human

beings.

As a result

of

this

attitude,

the

earliest

reports

that

deaf-mutes had

been

taught

to

understand

what

was

spoken

or written

down and

to utter

intelligible

speech-sounds,

were

treated as ill-foundedrumors,as miracle-cures(since deafness and

dumbness,

being divinely

inflicted,

could

only

be

cured

by

divine

in-

tervention),

or as

clear

proof

that

the

deaf

person

concernedcould

not

truly

have been

deaf

and

dumb at all.

Yet,

though

the deaf had been

regarded

for

many

centuries

as

incapable

of

speech,

it had

long

been

known

that

they

could com-

municate,

to

some extent

at

least,

with

those around them

by

means

of

a

number

of

(chiefly

manual)

gestures

that

were

simple

and

easy

to understand.Plato, for example,in the Cratylusreferredto those

significant

movementsof

the

head,

hand and

body

that

were

made

by

the

dumb,

and

Saint

Augustine

in

the De

Quantitate

Anima

spoke

of

a

deaf

person

who

could understandothers

and

express

himself

by

means of

gestures.14

One

recalls also the

burlesque

use to

which

ges-

tures

were

put

by

Panurge

in

Rabelais'

Pantagruel.14aFinally,

Des-

cartes

mentioned

n

the

fifth

part

of the

Discours

de

la Methodethat:

...

les

hommes

qui,

etant nes

sourds

et

muets,

sont

prives

des

organes

qui

servent aux

autres

pour

parler,

autant ou

plus

que

les

betes,

ont coitume

d'inventer

d'eux-memes,

quelques

signes, par

lesquels

ils

se font entendrea

ceux

qui,

etant

ordinairement

vec

eux,

ont

loisir

d'apprendre

eur

langue.15

13

K.

Hodgson

in The

Deaf

and

Their

Problems, Chap. 7,

gives

an

interesting

account

of

the

plight

of

the

deaf-mute n the Middle

Ages

and

in the

XVIth

and

XVIIth

centuries.

14

Quoted

n

K.

Hodgson,

op.

cit.,

72-73.

14aRabelais,

Oeuvres

Completes,

Bib.

de la Pleiade

(Paris, 1959), Pantagruel,

Chap.

XIX,

254-258;

also

ibid.,

Tiers

Livre, Chap.

XVII, 387-389,

and

Gargantua,

Chap.

XXXV,

104-106.

15

R.

Descartes,

Discours

de la

Methode,

ed. E.

Gilson

(Paris, 1930),

Ve

partie,

57-58.




6/15

GESTUREAS A UNIVERSAL

LANGUAGE

499

Gestural

signs

were

indispensable

to

the deaf

person,

since

they

allowed

him

to

communicatehis

physical

needs and basic desires to

other membersof the

family

group.Equally,

of

course,

the

usefulness

of

these

signs

was

recognizedby

those

upon

whom

the

welfare of

the

deaf-mute

depended,

and

so a

gestural language

of a kind existed

and

was

able to

evolve

naturally

within

the cadre

of

the deaf

person's

family.

Yet

gesture

appeared

suitable for

communicationat

a

primitive

level

only,

and

when

there

was

development,

t

occurred,

as

it

were,

in

isolation.

For,

outside

the

family

circle,

signs

appeared

nconven-

ient,

strange,

and

clumsy

to

use;

often

stigmatized by

association

with an

apparent

diocy, they

were

(and

still

are,

of

course)

socially

unacceptable.

Moreover,

since

there was no institution

or stable

com-

munity

to

perpetuate

any newly

invented

signs,

there could be

little

general

development

of

the

language:

frequently,

the afflicted

amily

would

build

up

its

own conventional

signs only

for them to

be

lost

on

the deaf

person's

death.

The

static

nature

of

medieval

family

life

also

prevented

any

more

extensive

form of

development

rom

taking

place.

More

important

still was the

fact

that

signs

could not

com-

pensate

for

hearing

in

matters

of

religion. Indeed,

the deaf

were

re-

garded

throughout

the Middle

Ages

as cut

off from the word

of

God,

since .

. .

faith

cometh

by

hearing,

and

hearing by

the

word

of

God.

16

A

typical

view

of

gesture,

written

in

fact

by

a

practicing

teacher of the

deaf at the

end

of

the

XVIIth

century,

but

represent-

ing

an

attitude that

had

prevailed

for

many

centuries

before,

was

expressed

by

Johann

Conrad

Amman.

How lame and defective is that Speach (sic) which is performedby Signs

and

Gestures?How

little are

they capable

to

receive

of those

things

which

concern

heir

eternal

Salvation.l7

The

discovery

in

the late

XVIth and

early

XVIIth

century

that

deaf-mutes could

be

taught

to associate

the

written characters

of

conventional

language

or

the movements of the

lips, tongue,

and

throat

directly

with

objects

and

ideas,

and that

they

could

learn

to

produce

recognizable

speech-sounds

meant that

for

over

a

century

the teaching of the deaf, when it occurred at all, was to become

equated

with

the

teaching

of conventional

speech.

So

much

was

this

so

that

success

was

judged

at

first,

not

by any

assessment

of the

intellectual

progress

of

a

deaf

pupil,

but

by

the

ease with which

he

could

read

the

motions

of

speech

on

the

face,

and

by

the

fidelity

with

which

he

could

reproduce

onventional

speech-sounds.l8

16

Romans,

X,

17.

17

J.

C.

Amman,

Surdus

Loquens

seu

Methodus

Qua,

Qui

Surdus

natus

est, loqui

discerepossit (Amsterdam,1692), Preface.The Englishtranslation rom whichthe

question

s

taken,

was

made

by

Daniel Foot and was

published

n

1694

under

the

title The

Talking

Deaf

Man

etc.

18

A

number

of

factors

account for

this

emphasisupon

the

teaching

of

conven-




7/15

500

JAMES

R. KNOWLSON

In

spite

of

this

emphasis upon

normal

speech,

the

language

of

gesture

played

almost

inevitably

an

important

part

in

the methods

of almost

all

the

early

teachers of the deaf.

In

the

XVIth

century,

the

Spanish

monk,

Pedro Ponce de

Leon,

though aiming

ultimately

at

teaching

his

pupils

to

speak, apparently

retained the

signs

that

they

had

built

up

together,

for

use whenever

writing

was at all in-

convenient.l9

John

Wallis

(1616-1703),

the

first

successful

English

teacher

of the

deaf, recognized

the need

for

gesture

as a

means of

bridging

he

gap

which

exists

at first

between

teacher

and

pupil.

It

will

be

convenient

ll

along

to

have

Pen, Ink,

and

Paper ready

at

hand, o writedown n Wordswhatyou signify o him [thedeafpupil]by

Signes:

and

causeHimto Write

..

whathe

signifies y

Signes.

Which

way

(of

signifying

heir

mind

by

Signes)

Deaf

persons

are often

very

good

at.

And we must

endeavour

o

learnTheir

anguage

if

I

may

so

call

it)

in

order o teach hem

Ours:

By shewing,

what

Words

nswer

o

their

Signes.20

For these

early

teachers

of

the

deaf,

however,

the

language

of

gesture

had

no

importanceper

se: it

represented

nothing

more

than

a

convenient, though

an

essential, step

towards

communicating

by

the more normalmethods of speechand writing.Hence the idea that

the

gestures

of the deaf

man

should be

adopted universally by

those

who were able

to

speak

would

probably

have

appeared

o

them

more

than a little

absurd.

Yet,

as

we

have

seen,

there were

those

who

put

forward this

idea

in

all

seriousness.

It

should

now

be

apparent

that

this

divergence

of

views

on the

status

of

gesture

up

to the

end of

the XVIIth

century may

be

re-

duced to

disagreement

on two

fundamental,

but

related,

issues.

First,

whether the signs of the untutored deaf signifiednaturally, by in-

stitution,

or

by

a

mixture of

both;

and

secondly,

whether he

language

of

gesture

was,

by

its

very

nature,

restricted

to

the communication

of a

few

limited,

concrete deas.

Some

twenty years

before

Bulwer's

Chirologia,

n

the first

book

devoted

specifically

o

the

problem

of

teaching

the

deaf,2'

Juan Pablo

Bonet had

drawn

attention

to the

unique position

of

gesture

as

a

tional language.First, and most obviously,of course,was the desire to re-integrate

the

deaf into

society by teaching

them to

speak.

Secondly,

by

means

of

written

language,

the deaf

son of a

nobleman

(the

usual

pupil

of the

early

teachers

of

the

deaf)

could retainthe

rights pertaining

o his

inheritance

and

successfully

administer

an

estate.

Finally,

the

written

characters

of

conventional

anguage

seemed

to

offer

to

the

deaf

person

an

instrumentof

thought

that could stand

in

place

of

the

spoken

word

and that

gestures

did not

provide.

19

See

K.

Hodgson,

op.

cit.,

82-84.

20

A Letter

of Dr. John Wallis

(Geom.

Prof.

Oxon,

and

F.R.S.)

to

Mr. Thomas

Beverly;

Concerning

his

Methodfor

Instructing

Persons

Deaf and

Dumb,

Philo-

sophical

Transactions

f

the Royal

Society,

XX,

No. 245

(Oct.

1698),

359.

21

J. P.

Bonet,

Reduction de

las

Letras

y

arte

para

ensenar a

ablar los mudos

(Madrid,1620).




8/15

GESTUREAS

A

UNIVERSAL LANGUAGE 501

natural

language.

Thus,

the

main recommendationof the manual

alphabet

that he described

was,

he

claimed,

that it had close

affinities

with

this natural

language

of action.

It

was,

he wrote:

...

so well

adapted

o

nature

hat it would eemas if thisartificial

anguage

had

been

derived

rom

he

language

f

nature,

orthat from

his,

sincevisi-

ble actionsare nature's

anguage.

And

this

is

supported y

the fact that

if

deaf-mutes

meet,

hough

hey

havenever eenone another

before, hey

un-

derstand

ach

other

by

the use

of the same

signs.22

Although

Bonet noted

that,

since

gestures signified

naturally,

they

could

be

easily

understood

by

all deaf

persons,

he

did not

go

on,

like

Bulwer,

to

suggest

that

gesture

might

be

adopted

by

every-

one

as a

universal

language. Probably

Bonet would

not have

agreed

with Bulwer's

view

that

gesture

could

convey

everything

that

the

spoken

word

could

express.

For

Bulwer

appears

to

have believed

(misguidedly,

of

course,)

that

the natural

signs

of

the deaf

man

needed

no

improvement

in

order to

convey

a

wide

range

of

ideas;

rather would

they

lose much

of their

clarity

and

universal

intelligi-

bility

if

tampered

with

in an

unnecessary

attempt

to

improve

them.

And

so

he

wrote,

addressing

he

deaf:

This

language

ou

speak

so

purely

hat I

who

was the

first hat

made

t

my

Darling

Study

to

interpret

he

naturall

richnesse

f our

discoursing

gestures

..

am

fully

satisfied hat

you

want

nothing

o be

perfectly

under-

stood,

your

mother

ongueadministering

ufficient tterance

pon

all

occa-

sions.23

Yet

to

the

majority

of

XVIIth-century

teachers and

writers on

the

teaching

of

the

deaf,

gesture

(except

in

its most

rudimentary

form) requiredagreement ust as much as the spokenlanguagesdid:

hence

the

frequent emphasis

upon

the fact

that

the

language

of

the

deaf must

be

learned.

Similarly

those

theorists,

such

as

Francis Bacon

and

John

Wilkins,24

who

discussed the

question

of

signs, regarded

only

those

spontaneous

and

expressivegestures

that

convey

emotions

of

joy, anger,

and

fear

as

signifying

without

agreement.

The

gestures

of

the

deaf and

dumb

were

placed

among

those non-emblematic

igns

requiring

convention.

Viewed

in

this

light,

gesture

seemed

in

no

way

unique.And, while eminentlyuseful as a preliminary tage in teach-

ing

the

deaf

to

speak,

read,

and

write

conventional

anguage,

as an

independent

medium

of

communication,

t

appeared

much

too

limited

in

range

and

too

clumsy

in

use

to be

suitable

for

more

general

adop-

tion.

22

For

reasons

of

convenience

he

quotation

of Bonet

is

taken

from

the

English

translation

by

H.

N.

Dixon,

Simplification

of

the Letters

of

the

Alphabet

and

Method

of

teaching

Deaf-Mutes

to

Speak

(Harrogate,1890),

150; Spanish

1st ed.

(1620),

123-4. 23

J.

Bulwer, Philocophus,

Dedication.

24

See The

Philosophical

Works

of

Francis

Bacon,

edd. Ellis and

Spedding

with

an

Introduction

by

John M. Robertson

(London, 1905), 521ff.,

and

John

Wilkins,

Mercury,

or

the

Secret and

Swift Messenger

(London,

1641).




9/15

502

JAMES

R.

KNOWLSON

It

was

not

until

the

final

quarter

of

the XVIIIth

century

that

any

significant

change

in attitude towards

gesture

became

possible,

and

that,

largely

as a resultof the Abbede

l'Epee's

work24an

developing

a

system

of what he describedas

signes

methodiques,

he idea that

gesture might

supply

a universal

language

became

worthy

of

more

serious consideration.The claim of

universality

is

expressed

quite

clearly

in

the title of the

Abbe de

l'Epee's

first

book

on

the

teaching

of

the

deaf,

published

at

Paris in

1776.

The

full

title reads as

follows:

Institution des Sourds

et

Muets,

par

la

voie

des

signes methodiques;

Ouvragequi

contient le

Projet

d'une

Langue

Universelle,

par

l'entre-

mise

des

Signes naturels, assujettis

&

une

Methode.

The

grounds

on

which the Abbe's

claims were based are described

at

greater

ength

in

the

work

itself:

On

a

souventdesire

une

Langueuniverselle,

vec

le

secours

de

laquelle

les hommes

e

toutes es

nations

pourraient

'entendrees uns

les

autres. I

me

semble

qu'ily

a

longtemps

u'elle

xiste,

et

qu'elle

st

entendue

artout.

Celan'est

pas

etonnant:

'est

une

langue

naturelle.

e

parle

de

la

langue

des

signes.

Mais

elle n'a

point

ete

jusqu'a

present

d'un

grand

usage,

parcequ'on

l'atoujoursetenue ansson etatbrut, ans a perfectionner,nl'astreignant

a

des

regles.25

The

language

eulogized

here

was,

of

course, evolved,

first,

purely

as

an

instrument for

teaching

the deaf.

Here de

l'Epee's

originality

was

to

think

in

terms

of the

deaf

pupil's

over-all intellectual

develop-

ment rather

than

to concentratehis

entire

attention

upon

teaching

conventional

speech-sounds.

In

close

association with his

pupils,

therefore,he evolved a language of manual signs that consisted of

gestures

used

naturally

and

spontaneouslyby

the

deaf,

together

with

others

developed

from

these natural

signs

or

agreed

upon

by

teacher

and

pupil.

In

this

way

he

was able

to build

up

a

highly developed

language

of methodical

signs

that

was

part

natural

and

part

conven-

tional. He thus

clearly

considered

he mixture of nature and conven-

tion as one of the

greatest

virtues

of

methodical

igns. Consequently

his claim that

they

would

provide

an

excellent universal

language

hinged largelyupon this dual nature.For it was, de l'Epee stressed,

at one

and

the same time

a

natural

and a

highly

developed anguage.

Those writers

in

the

XVIIth

century

who

had made

a

claim for

the

universality

of

gesture

had done

so,

we

may

recall,

because

they

considered t

to

be the one

natural

language

that was

readily

under-

stood without

previous

knowledge.

In

the same

way,

since

de

l'Epee

retained natural

signs

as the basis

upon

which he

constructed

his

24aThere is no recent study of the Abbe de 1'Epee.See FerdinandBerthier,

l'Abbe

de

l'Epee,

sa

vie,

son

apostolat,

ses

travaux,

sa

lutte

et

ses

succes

(Paris,

1852);

Eugene

Dubief,

l'Abbe

de

i'Epee

et

l'Education

des

Sourds-Muets

(Paris,

s.d.).

25Abbe

de

l'Eppe,

Institution

des

Sourds

et

Muets,

135.




10/1

GESTURE AS

A

UNIVERSAL

LANGUAGE

503

improved

sign-system,

he believed

that he

could

still

claim it

to

be

a natural

language.

At

the same

time,

because the

language

had

been

subjected

to

strict

methodization and

development,

the

improved

language

of

gesture

could more

properly

and

advantageously

be com-

pared

with

existing

spoken languages.

The success

of

de

l'Epee's sign language,

both as

a

medium

of

communication

with the deaf and as

a

potential

universal

language,

clearly depended

upon

the method

by

means

of

which

the

natural

language

was to

be

improved.

The

first

and

most

obvious

problem

he

encountered

in

developing

the

language

of

gesture

was

that of

representing

abstract ideas

in

terms of

physical

movements.

For,

if

the

language

were to be

enlarged by

the more or less

haphazard

in-

vention of

a

large

number of

arbitrary signs,

it would

quickly

become

too

complex

to

be

easily

learned

or

recalled.

The

solution

which

de

l'Epee

found to this

problem

was to

analyze

all

complex

and abstract

ideas into

simpler

and more concrete

parts,

which

might

then be ex-

pressed

in

terms of

physical gesture.2a

In

this

way,

he

believed,

all

ideas

might

be

conveyed

by

various

combinations

of

gestural

root-

signs,

all of

which

would,

he

maintained,

retain

a

natural

analogy

with the

object

or

idea

they represented.

For,

... c'est

la

reunion de

ces

differens

signes,

toujours

analogues

a

la

Nature

en

premiere

ou

seconde

instance,

et

decouverts

l'un

apres

l'autre,

en con-

sultant cette

meme

Nature,

a

proportion

que

le besoin

l'exigeait,qui

a forme

notre methode

complette,

sans

avoir

exige

d'autretravail de

notre

part,

que

'application

de

quelques

momens

a

chaque

operation

particuliere.

Avec des

signes

purement

arbitraires,

nous n'aurions

amais

pu

nous faire

entendre;

d'ailleurs,

nos

Sourds

et

Muets

ne

les auraient

pas retenus,

et

nous

nous

y

serions

trompes

nous-memesa

chaque

nstant.Ii n'enest

pas

de memede la

Nature,

on

ne

l'oublie

point,

et

il

est

impossible

de

s'y meprendre.26

Analysis

was thus the

keystone

of de

l'Epee's

method

of

develop-

ment. It

would,

he

claimed,

simplify

the

language

so

much

that

it

would

possess

the

simplicity

of arithmetical

symbols

rather

than

the

complexity

of

the written

Chinese characters.

La

difference

qu'il

y

a

entre

nos

signes

et les caracteres

Chinois c'est

que

ceux-cin'ontpas de liaison naturelle avec les chosesqu'ilsdoiventsignifier;

nos

signes,

au

contraire,

ont

toujours

pris

dans la

nature,

ou

en

la

saisissant

a la

volee

quand

elle se

presente

d'elle-meme,

ou en

y

ramenant

par

le

secours de

lanalyse.27

Analysis

would also

remove,

he

claimed,

all

vagueness

and

lack of

precision

from

the

representation

of

ideas and

even

from

the ideas

themselves. For this

reason,

also,

the

language

of

gesture

could be

25a

De

1'Epee's

olution has

obvious affinitieswith

John

Locke's

theory

of

ideas

as

expressed

n his

An

Essay

concerning

Humane

Understanding

London,

1690).

26

Ibid.,

Seconde

partie,

47-48.

27

Ibid.,

34.




11/1

504

JAMES

R.

KNOWLSON

regarded

as

superior

to

existing

languages.

It

was this

apparent

vir-

tue of the

language

of

signs

that

was to strike most

forcibly

the Abbe

Condillac.28

In

certain

respects

de

l'Epee's sign-languagemay

be

regarded

as

the

visual

equivalent

of some of the earlier

projects

and schemes

of

a

written

universal

language,

though

it is

unlikely

that the

teacher

of the

deaf was

acquainted

with

any

of these universal

language

schemes.

In

the

emphasis

which is

placed upon

keeping

a

natural

analogy

between

an

object

or

idea

and the

sign

that

represents t,

the

language

of

gesture may

best

be

compared

with those

'emblematic

symbols'

which Leibniz at one

period

considered would

constitute

the best

possible

universal character.

Similarly,

the

root-signs

into

which

de

l'Epee analyzed

complex

ideas

may

be

regarded

as

equiva-

lent

to

the

'simple

elements'of the

ideal,

philosophical

anguage

also

envisaged

by

Leibniz.29

Here the resemblances nd.

For

the

root-signs

of

the

gestural

anguage

are obtained

by

analyzing

abstract

deas

into

elements

which

have

affinities

with material

things

and

which

may

therefore

be

rendered

n

terms of

physical

movements.

The

analysis

is thus turnedto a practicalrather than to

a

philosophicalend.

An

example

will

perhaps

make

this

clearer. The words

I

believe

are

expressed

in

de

l'Epee's

sign language

by

means of

four

elements

each

of which is

representedby

an

appropriate

gesture.

These ele-

ments

are:

first,

I

say yes

with

my mind ; secondly,

I

say

yes

with

my heart ;

thirdly,

I

say

yes

with

my

mouth ;

and

finally,

I

have

not

seen and

I

still

cannot

see

with

my

eyes.

The

example

serves

to

demonstrate

how much

the

signs representing

abstract ideas

depend

upon analogies with material things and situations. It shows also

that

though,

used

separately,

the

root-signs

are

simple

enough,

the

combinations

required

to

express

one abstract idea become

unduly

lengthy

and

complicated.

Considered

as a

medium for

instructing

the

deaf,

de

l'Epee's

language

of

signs

had tremendoussuccess

in

the

years

following

the

publication

of

the

Institution

des

Sourds et

Muets

in

1776.

So

much

so that

by

the middle of

the

next

decade,

as a

result of the

success of

his public demonstrations, he interest of royalty and scholars,and

the

continuation

of

his

work

in

other

countries

by

teachers

first

in-

structed

by

himself,

the Abbe de

l'Epee

had seen

his

teaching

tech-

niques

widely

adopted

throughout Europe.

Yet the

freely

acknowl-

28

See Cours

d'Etudes

pour

l'Instruction

du Prince

de

Parme,

Grammaire,

n

the

Oeuvres

Philosophiques

e

Condillac,

Vol. 33 of the

Corpus

General

des

Philosophes

frangais,

3 vols.

(Paris,

1946-51),

ed.

Georges

e

Roy,

I,

429-30.

29The

standard work

on

Leibniz's

ideas on

a

universal

character remains L.

Couturat'sLa

Logique

de

Leibniz

d'aprl

des documents nedits

(Paris,

1901).

See

also, however,J.

Cohen,

On the

Project

of a Universal

Character,

Mind,

63

(1954);

R.

Kauppi,

Uber

die

Leibnizsche

Logik.

Acta

PhilosophicaFennica,

Fasc.

XII

(Helsinki,

1960);

and

Madeleine

David,

Leibniz

et

le

'Tableau de Cebes'

(Nouveaux

Essais,

I,

IV,

Chap.

III, 20)

ou le

probleme

du

langage

par

images,

Revue

Philosophique

1961),

39-50.




12/1

GESTURE

AS

A UNIVERSAL LANGUAGE

505

edged

successof

de

l'Epee's

methodical

signs

as

a

means of

educating

the

deaf did not mean

that

his

secondary

claim

that

the

signs

should

be

adopteduniversallyby

speaking

human

beings

was

considered

with

equal seriousness.Indeed, it is clear that this aspect of de l'Epee's

writing

met with

little

support.

Contemporary

ccounts

of

the

Abbe's

work,

for

example,

and

comptes

rendus

of

his books often confinetheir

attention

either

to a mere reiteration

of

the

author's

claim,

or

simply

do

not refer to

it at

all.

Such

a

reception

s

scarcely

surprising

n

view of the

lack of

any

general

nterest at

that time in

the

question

of

an

artificial

universal

language

30

and

the

rise of

an

instituted

language,

namely French,

to

the position of international language of Europe.31 t was also, of

course,quite

possible

to

ignore

de

l'Epee's

claim

in this

way,

since

its

validity

was

quite

extraneous

o

the merits of the

sign

language

as

an

instrument for

the instruction of the

deaf.

Moreover,

f

it had

been

taken

seriously,

problems

would

clearly

have arisen

of an order

quite

different

from

those

already

surmounted

by

de

l'Epee

in

the

course

of his

practical

teaching

of

the

deaf.

Many

of

these

problems

the

Abbe either

did

not

foresee

or

failed

to

recognize

as

problems

at

all.

After de l'Epee's death in 1789, his claim that methodicalsigns

offered he best

form

of

universal

anguage

was

repeatedby

his

former

pupil,

the

Abbe Roch-AmbroiseCucurronde

Sicard,

who

assumed

the direction

of

what,

two

years later,

was

to

become

the Institution

Nationale

des

Sourds

et Muets.

Realizing,

however,

that

if

such

a

language

were

to

stand

any

chance

of

being

universally

adopted,

these

gestural signs

would need to

be

recorded,

Sicard set

to work

to

provide

a

Dictionary

of

Signs.

This

dictionary

appeared

n

1808

under the title Theorie des Signes

pour

l'instruction des Sourds-

Muets. The

work

consistedof

descriptions

of the

gestures

used

by

the

deaf

person

and his

teacher

instead

of

the words

of

conventional

speech.

The

descriptions

were

arranged

not

according

o

the

alpha-

betical order

of

these

words,

but

were

classified

in families in

the

manner

Sicard

describes

here.

Je divisaistous les mots

qui

devaient

en

former

a

nomenclature

n

autantde partiesqu'onreconnaltd'elements istinctsdans

le

discours; e

0

There

were, nonetheless,

a

number

of

individual scholars

interested at this

time

in the

possibility

of

formulating

a

new,

artificial,

universal

anguage: e.g.

G.

Kalmar,

whose

anguageschemes,published

n

the

1770s,

are

discussed n

Madeleine

David's article

Un

temoin des

espoirs

du

dix-huitieme

iecle:

Kalmar et sa

langue

philosophique (1772),

Revue

Historique,

CCXV

(1956).

The relation

between

schemes

of

universal

anguageprojected

n

the 1760sand

1770s,

he

generalgrammar

movement,

and

the researches

f

Court

de

Gebelin

and Charles

de Brosses

into the

natureof the primitive anguagehave not yet been examined n print.

31

Documentationon

the

universality

of

French

may

be

found

in

F.

Brunot,

Histoire

de la

langue frangaise

des

origines

a

1900,

VIII,

2e

partie,

Le

frangais

hors

de

France

au

XVIIIe siecle

(Paris, 1935),

passim.




13/1

506

JAMES R.

KNOWLSON

divisais ensuite les

mots,

et

chaque

espece

de

mots en autant de

families

dont

chaque

primitif

etait de

chef;

enfin

je

suivais l'ordredans

lequel

tous

les

mots,

s'ils

eussent

6te

inventes,

auraient ete

classes.

La

premiere

serie

etait celle des objetsphysiques, a seconde,celle des adjectifs,la troisieme,

celle

des noms abstractifs etc.

Chaque

nom,

chaque

adjectif,

chaque verbe,

outre

la

definition

que j'en

donnais

etait

accompagne

d'une

exposition

courte

du nombre

et de

la

forme des

signes

qu'il

fallait faire

pour

chaque

mot.

Cette marche etant

parfaitement analytique,

etait la seule

qui

pouvait

remplir

mon

but.32

The

dictionary provided

then

a

classified series

of

descriptions

of

gestures,

covering

a

wider

range

of ideas

than

those of

the Abbe de

1'Epee, and including also signs to convey grammatical relations. It

was this

improved

language

of

gesture,

Sicard

claimed

in

the

Cours

d'Instruction

d'un

Sourd-Muet

de

Naissance

and

again

in the dic-

tionary

itself:

qui

est vraiment

'ouvrage ustement

attendu

depuis

longtemps,

des

philoso-

phes

. . .

qui

pourra

realiser les

espoirs

de ceux

qui desirent, depuis long-

temps,

un

moyen general

de

communication,

ndependant

de

toute

langue

articulee;

dont

le savant

Leibnitz

avait

congu

e

projet

si hardi.33

Sicard's claim was voiced at a time when the question of an arti-

ficial,

universal

language

(or

pasigraphie

as

it

was

then

called)

had

become once

again

one

of the chief

interests of

leading

French

think-

ers.84

Condorcet, Garat, Lancelin,

and

Laromiguiere

all

expressed

a

desire

for the institution

of such

a

language,

while

Destutt de

Tracy,

Roederer,

and

de Gerando considered

the

problem

as

important

and

worthy

of

serious

discussion.

In

the

mid-1790's

a number

of schemes

of

pasigraphy

were submitted

to

the second

class

of

the

Institut Na-

tional ( Sciences Morales et Politiques ),3 and Sicard himself was

an ardent

supporter

of

one

such scheme.36

The deaf

also had

by

this

time

become

a favorite

object

of

study

for

philosophers

of

the

'ecole

82

Sicard,

Theoriedes

Signes

etc.

2

vols.

(Paris,

1808),

I,

4-5.

88

Sicard,

Cours

d'Instructiond'un

Sourd-Muet

de

Naissance

(Paris,

an

VIII),

496.

84

J.

Simon,

the historian

of

the

second class

of

the

Institut

National,

wrote that:

..

la

pasigraphie

emblait

a

la

plupart

des

philosophes

une d6couverte

de

premier

ordre.C'etaitun des cotes de la fameusequestiondes signes, si populaire

a

la fin

du

XVIIIe

siecle

et

dans

les

premieres

annees

de

celui-ci.

Une

Academie

sous

le

Directoire

(Paris,

1885),

219-220.

Simon's

opening

statement

s

not

accurate,

hough

his

assessment

of

the

philosophers'

nterest

in

the

subject

s

true

enough.

The

writer

intends to

examine the French

Ideologues'

nterest

in universal

anguage

n

a

later

article.

35

Schemes

submitted

to

the second

class were

by Joseph

de

Maimieux,

Zalkind-

Hourwitz,

Fournaux,

and the Abbe

Montmignon.

See

the

secretary

Champagne's

Histoire

abregee

des

travaux

de

la

Classe,

Memoires

de

l'lnstitut

National.

Sci-

ences

Morales

et

Politiques,

III

(Paris,

an

IX),

ii.

36This was the

Pasigraphie

ou

premiers

e6mentsdu nouvel art-scienced'6crire

et

d'imprimer

n

une

langue

de

maniere

a etre

lu et entendudans toute autre

langue

sans

traduction

of

Joseph

de

Maimieux,

published

at Paris

in

French

and

German

editions n

1797.An

introductory

etter

to

this

work

is

by

Sicard.




14/1

GESTURE

AS A

UNIVERSAL

LANGUAGE

507

sensualiste,'

who,

with the

example

of

Diderot

and

Condillac before

them,

were anxious

to learn all that

they

could from the deaf man

about

the

development

of

man's various

faculties and the

generation

of his ideas.37In view of these

interests,

it is scarcely surprising that

Sicard's

suggestion

should have received

rather more

serious

consider-

ation than

the same idea had

done

when

it

had been

expressed

earlier

by

the Abbe

de

l'Epee. However,

of

those

philosophers

who

considered

the

possibility

of

gesture

supplying

the universal

language, only

Pierre

Laromiguiere

recommended it as

an

admirable solution

to

the

problem

of

Babel.

Thus, concerning

the

possibility

of

inventing

a

universal

language,

he

wrote,

in

language

reminiscent

of

the Abbe de

1'Epee,

to whose work he later referred:

Savans,

ignorans,

out

le

monde

a

comprend,

out le monde

a

parle.

Que

'un

de nous

soit

transporte

aux

extremitesdu

globe,

au milieu d'une

horde

sauvage:

croyez-vous

qu'il

ne saura

pas

exprimer

es besoins

les

plus

pres-

sans de

la

vie?

Croyez-vous qu'il

se

meprenne

sur les

signes

d'un

refus

barbare,

ou d'une ntention

genereuse

et

compatissante?

1 ne

s'agit

done

pas

d'inventer

une

langue

nouvelle,

de la

faire:

elle

existe: c'est la

nature

qui

l'a faite.38

De

Gerando also

approached

the

signes methodiques

of Sicard

with

considerable enthusiasm for

the

idea that

they

offered

a

prac-

ticable solution

to

the

problem presented by

the confusion

of

tongues.

C'est

1?

que

nous venons chercher

avec

empressement,

vec

avidite,

cette

langue

appelee

naturelle;

cette

langue

annoncee

comme si

feconde,

si

belle,

si

expressive,

si

fidele,

si

exacte;

cette

langue

destinee

a devenir

la

langue

universelle,

ou

plutot

qui

deja

en

possede par

elle-meme

le

privilege;

cette

langue, objet perpetuel de l'enthousiasmede l'Abbe de 1'Epeeet de ses

disciples.9

After

examining closely

the

signs

worked

out

by

de

l'Epee

and

further

developed by

Sicard,

he

was

forced,

however,

to

conclude

that

the

language possessed

a number

of

serious

defects

that made

it

quite

unsuitable

for universal

adoption.

Since

many

of de Gerando's

criticisms still

apply today,

it is

perhaps

worth

concluding

this

study

by repeating

the

principal

objections,

which

he first voiced

in

his

prize-winning Des Signes et de l'Art de Penser (published in 1800),

and later

developed

in

his

special study

on

the education

of

the

deaf.

The

descriptions

of

signs

in Sicard's

dictionary

were,

de Gerando

believed,

too

complex

to be

adopted

universally;

they were,

he

wrote:

37

Joseph

Marie de

G6rando

wrote,

for

example,

in

Des

Signes

et de l'Art

de

Penser,

4

vols.

(Paris,

1800),

that

the deaf

. . .

nous

offrentdonc

un

terme

de

com-

paraison

tres-favorable

pour

juger

de

ce

que

l'homme doit

a

l'usage

des

langues,

pour

saisir dans ses

principes

a

g6neration

de

nos

idees, pour apprecier

avec

exacti-

tude

l'infuence des

signes.

(IV, 453).

38

P.

Laromiguiere,

emons

e

Philosophie,

4th ed.

(Paris, 1826),

III,

113.

89

J.

M.

de

Gerando,

De

l'Education des

Sourds-Muets

de

Naissance,

2

vols.

(Paris,

1827), I,

509.




15/1

508

JAMES

R.

KNOWLSON

Souvent

ngenieuses,

ouvent

laires,plus

ou

moins

exactes,

maisdes

de-

scriptions

qui

sont

generalement

'une

extreme

etendue,

composees

'un

grand

nombre e

details,

qui

doiventa ces

details

memece

qu'elles

ont de

fideleet de pittoresque, ui exigentune pantomime resque oujours ort

d6veloppee,

t

qui

demandent

n

temps

assez

long

pour

etre

fidelement

execut6es;

ous

y trouvons,

n un

mot,

une

suite

d'explications,

l'aide

de

tableaux

ensibles, xprimes

ar

une

longue

uite

de

gestes.40

In

use,

these

highly complex

successions

of

signs

tended

to

be abbre-

viated.

However,

n

this

way,

as

they

became more

and

more

laconic,

de

Gerando

argued, they

lost

whatever

analogies

with material

ob-

jects they

had

ever

possessed.Moreover,

n

order to

convey

abstrac-

tions,

metaphor

had to be used in a

confusing

and

unphilosophical

manner.

And

so,

he wrote:

C'est

ainsi

que,

par

une

degradation

ontinue t

insensible,

e

langage

mimique,

'un

ableau

ivant,anime, omplet

ont

l

se

composait l'origine,

se transforme

n

une

analogie

uccessivement

lus imparfaite,

lus

vague,

pour

se terminer

nfindans

une

pure

convention.41

Thus,

though

not without its

virtues,42

he

language

that

Laromi-

guiere considereduniversally intelligible because natural turns out

to be

necessarily

he

product

of

agreement.

Two final

objections

were

made

by

de

Gerando,

both of

which

argued against

the universal

adoption

of

an

already

highly imperfect

language.

First he

pointed

out

that there

existed no

form

of

script

in

which

gestural

signs

could

be

written

down.43

econdly,

he

recognized

hat there

was

no reason

why signs

which

were

interpreted

n one

way

in one

country

should

not, owing

to

varying

social

habits,

be

understood

to

mean

some-

thing quite different n another.

De

Gerando's

ejection

of

gesture

as a

universal

anguage

did

not,

of

course,

prevent

teachers of the deaf

like

Bebian,

author

of the

Mimographie

(Paris,

1825),

from

continuing

to

press

de

l'Epee

and

Sicard'sclaim.

Nor,

as we

saw at the

beginning

of

this

article,

is

the

idea

quite

dead

today.

And,

though

it

is

theoretically,

of

course,

quite

feasible,

it

seems at

least several

times less

likely

that

man,

accustomed to

communicating

by

the

spoken word,

will

revert

to

a

silent form of communication, han that all men will agreeto adopt

the

same

written

language-in

the

present

writer's

view,

an

already

highly

unlikely

occurrence.

University

of

Glasgow.

40

Ibid., I,

517.

41

Ibid.,

I,

564.

42

One of its

chief

virtues, according

o

de

Gerando,

was that

in order

to

explain

conventional

words

by

signs,

strict

definitions

had

to be

given,

thereby

encouraging

clear habits of

thought. Thus,

he

wrote: . .

le

sourd-muet . .

apprend

es

mots

par la grammaire, t la grammairepar la metaphysique;on fait raisonner on esprit

avant

de

chercher

guider

sa

main,

et

la

langue

est

pour

lui

le

resultat de la

science.

Des

Signes

et de

'Art

de

Penser,

IV,

473.

48

It

is

interesting

o

note that Sir Richard

Paget

saw

a similar

omission

as

one

of

the

major

drawbacks o

the

institution

of his

sign

language.

See

Nature,

CLI

(Jan.

16,

1943),

80.



Art. the Idea of Gesture as a Universal Language

Documents

Transcript of Art. the Idea of Gesture as a Universal Language