Life and career
David McNeill is a professor of the University of Chicago in Illinois, and a writer.Education
McNeill studied for and was awarded a Bachelor of Arts in 1953 and a Doctor of Philosophy in 1962, both in psychology, at the University of California, Berkeley. He went on to study at the Center for Cognitive Studies, Harvard University in 1963.Academic positions held
*Harvard University, Research Fellow, Center for Cognitive Studies (1963–1965) * University of Michigan, Assistant to associate professor of psychology (1965–1969) *Harvard University, Visiting associate professor of psychology (1967–1969) *University of Chicago, Professor of Psychology and Linguistics (1969–2001) * Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, Member (1973–1975) *University of Chicago, Professor of Psychology and Linguistics Emeritus (2001–) *Netherlands Institute for Advanced Study, Wassenaar, Fellow (1983–1984) *Duke University, Department of Anthropology, Visiting Professor (1984) *University of Chicago, chair, Department of Psychology (1991–1997) *Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen, Visitor (1998–1999)Honors and awards
As well as being a member of Phi Beta Kappa and Sigma Xi and holding several academic fellowships including aResearch
McNeill specializes inResearch on the psychology of language and gesture
Central idea
The "growth point" is a key theoretical concept in McNeill's approach toGrowth Points and multi-modality
McNeill argues that thought is multimodal: both vocal-linguistic and manual-gestural, and the resulting semiotic opposition fuels change. In terms of semiotics, as a kind of sign, a gesture is "global" (in that the meanings of the "parts"—the hand shapes, space, direction, articulation–-depend in a top-down fashion on the meaning of the whole) and "synthetic" (in that several meanings are bundled into one gesture). Gestures, when they combine, do not form whatMinimal units
Speech and gesture, taken together, comprise minimal units of human linguistic cognition. Following Lev Vygotsky in defining a "unit" as the smallest package that retains the quality of being a whole, in this case the whole of a gesture-language unity, McNeill calls the minimal psychological unit a Growth Point because it is meant to be the initial pulse of thinking-for-(and while)-speaking, out of which a dynamic process of organization emerges. The linguistic component of speech categorizes the visual and actional imagery of the gesture; the imagery of the gesture grounds the linguistic categories in a visual spatial frame.Connections to phenomenology
McNeill employs the concept of "material carriers", a phrase used by Vygotsky to refer to the embodiment of meaning in enactments or material experiences to further develop the concepts of Mead's Loop and the GP. A material carrier enhances the symbolization's representational power. The concept implies that the gesture, "the actual motion of the gesture itself", is a dimension of meaning. This enhancement is possible if the gesture "is" the very image; not an "expression" or "representation" of it, but "it". From this viewpoint, a gesture is an image in its most developed: that is, its most materially, naturally embodied form. The absence of a gesture is the converse, an image in its least material form. The material carrier concept thus helps explain how an imagery-language dialectic can take place in absence of gesture. When no gesture occurs, there is still global-synthetic imagery in a dialectic with linguistic categorization, but we experience it at the "lowest level of materialization". It is not an alteration of the dialectic of its essentials-–the simultaneous rendering of meaning in opposite semiotic modes-–but a bleached version of it. McNeill furthers this conception of the material carrier by turning to Maurice Merleau-Ponty for insight into the duality of gesture and language. Gesture, the instantaneous, global, nonconventional component, is "not an external accompaniment" of speech, which is the sequential, analytic, combinatoric component; it is not a "representation" of meaning, but instead meaning "inhabits" it. Merleau-Ponty links gesture and existential significance: For McNeill, the GP is a mechanism geared to this "existential significance" of speech, this "taking up a position in the world". Gesture, as part of the GP, is inhabited by the same "living meaning" that inhabits the word (and beyond, the whole of a discourse). A deeper answer to the query, therefore-–when we see a gesture, what are we seeing?--is that we see part of the speaker's current cognitive being, "her very mental existence", at the moment it occurs. This too is part of the origin of language by Mead's Loop (and explains the gestural leakage of lies. By performing the gesture, a core idea is brought into concrete existence and becomes part of the speaker's own existence at that moment. A gesture is not a representation, or is not only such: it is a form of being. From a first-person perspective, the gesture is part of the immediate existence of the speaker. Gestures (and words, etc., as well) are themselves thinking in one of its many forms, not only expressions of thought, "but thought, i.e., cognitive being, itself". To the speaker, gesture and speech are not only "messages" or communications, but are a way of cognitively existing, of cognitively being, at the moment of speaking. To make a gesture, from this perspective, is to bring thought into existence on a concrete plane, just as writing out a word can have a similar effect. The greater the felt departure of the thought from the immediate context, the more likely is its materialization in a gesture, because of this contribution to being. Conversely, when "newsworthiness" is minimal materialization diminishes and in some cases disappears, even though a GP is active; in these cases gestures may cease while (empty) speech continues, or vice versa, speech ceases and a vague gesture takes place. Thus, gestures are more or less elaborated and GPs more or less materialized depending on the importance of material realization to the "existence" of the thought.Language origin and Mead’s Loop
In terms of the origin of language, the GP "predicts" (of the remote past) that whatever evolved led to a GP system of semiotic oppositions. This provides an empirical test of all theories on theNatural selection
Mead's Loop and the mirror neuron "twist" would be naturally selected in scenarios where sensing one's own actions as social is advantageous. For example, in imparting information to infants, where it gives the adult the sense of being an instructor as opposed to being just a doer with an onlooker, as is the case with chimpanzees. Entire cultural practices of childrearing depend upon this sense. Self-awareness as an agent is necessary for this advantage to take hold. For Mead's Loop to have been selected the adult must be sensitive to her own gestures as social actions. The link between the GP and self-aware agency also appears in children's language development, which can be linked to the origin of language in a version of the long-dismissed "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny" hypothesis of recapitulation theory. McNeill considers that when something emerges in current-day ontogenesis only at a certain stage of development, the original natural selection of the feature (if there was any) might have taken place in a similar psychological milieu in phylogenesis. This opens a window onto the mindset of the creature in which the Mead's Loop "twist" was evolving. As a mode of reasoning, it exploits the fact that children's intellectual status is not fixed but changing. Thus, McNeill argues, we look for new states that seem pegged to steps in the ontogenesis of GPs and Mead's Loop underlying them, and consider these steps as possible signals from ancient phylogenesis. Evidence shows that self-aware agency could be such a signal. The GP emerges around age 3 or 4 years, which is also about when children first become aware of themselves as agents, since before that age the speech and gestures of children have “...the character of 'sharing' experiences ''with'' the other rather than of 'communicating' messages ''to'' the Other", as put by Heinz Werner and Bernard Kaplan in their 1963 book, ''Symbol Formation''. The theory of mind (which is really awareness of other perspectives) also emerges about this time, and likewise depends on self-aware agency.Reception
McNeill's books have received coverage in a number of academic journals and in the general press. A 1991 article in the ''Selected publications
Books written
* (Paperback) * (Hardcover) * (Paperback). * (Paperback) * (Hardcover) * (Hardcover) * (Hardcover)Books edited
* (Hardcover, paperback )Reviews of McNeill's work
* * * * * * * * * * *Footnotes
External links