Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
INTRODUCTION The field of communication is a broad one comprising different modes and different approaches. Verbal Languages, Dance, Art, and Music are examples of different modes of communication; English, Modern Dance, Painting, and Jazz Music are examples of different approaches. However, regardless of how wide and varied the field of communication is, all the modes have one common goal: expressing and deciphering ideas. Communication is a layered procedure often times using one or more modes to achieve its aim. For example, an advertisement in a magazine might use a photograph and a slogan as means of delivering an idea. In this case the communication process relies on two modes: visual and verbal; the intended result being the comprehension of a complex message. Even though the past decades have seen verbal language in the predominate position of use, the movement towards globalization and the rapid advancements being made in technology are placing emphasis on other modes of communication such as visual and kinesic. The focus of this move toward other modes of communication is to aid in making the message clearer. In an attempt to ‘globalize’ our ideas and messages we use different modes of clarification because not all the inhabitants in our ‘global village’ understand and speak the same language. Consequently, a more diversified approach to communication needs to come into play; hence multimodality has become an essential concern. Just as Howard Gardner (in 1993) used his idea of Multiple Intelligences to steer education into a ground-breaking direction which allowed educators to understand that there is more than one way to obtain knowledge (intelligence), a similar premise has emerged in the field of language and communication; it is referred to as multimodality 1 (the use of more than one mode of communication simultaneously). Multimodality helps present a clearer more universal message thus enhancing both expression and translation. Coincidently, the emergence of multimodality corresponds with linguistic analysts and researchers facing the limitations of linguistic grammars: “Consequently one is forced to look at new semiotic grammars that are sensitive to the characters and contours of specific modalities and responsive to their interplay in texts…” (Macken-Horarik, 2004, p. 5). The emergence of new semiotic grammars has been discussed in the works of Gunther Kress and Theo van Leeuwen and more specifically in their book titled Reading Images: the Grammar of Visual Design (1996). Kress and van Leeuwen focus on the idea of analyzing multimodal texts using terminology that would be compatible with any of the modes of communication. For example, while analyzing a drawing containing text, the analyst would draw upon semiotic terminology, which comprises all modes of communication, not just a grammar for verbal language which would leave the nonverbal unanalyzed. In further explanation of their work, Kress and van Leeuwen discuss how ‘visual lexis’ expresses aesthetic and pragmatic descriptions. They refer to grammar generally being studied in isolation from meaning. However, this is not the case in their study. They choose to see grammar forms as “resources for encoding interpretations of experience and forms of social (inter)action” (Kress and van Leeuwen, 1996, p.1). Kress and van Leeuwen were influenced by the work of M.A K. Halliday. In his book, Introduction to Functional Grammar, Halliday has done extensive research on grammar and states, “A language, then, is a system for making meaning: a semantic system, with other systems for encoding the meanings it produces.” In other words, it is meaning which determines structure. (Halliday, 1985, p 17). If so, then any communicative form 2 could be considered a language. Accordingly, a language will also have a form of grammar. Grammar generally implies the semantic and syntactical meaning of the written language. Nevertheless, spoken language also has a ‘grammar’. This grammar is more concerned with the message rather than the specifics of how the message is delivered. Studies done within this area of communication are considered as pragmatic studies. Pragmatics is the relation of signs to their users and interpreters (Horn and Ward, 2004, p. xi0), or as Stalnaker mentions in his article Semantics, pragmatics [is] “the study of linguistic acts and the context in which they are performed” (Stalnaker, 1972, p. 383). H.P. Grice played an essential role in the development of a systematic framework for pragmatics (Horn and Ward, 2004, p. xi). Grice formulated the principle of cooperation in speech acts (Grice, 1957). Within this principle he set up ‘maxims’ which govern the rules of oral communication. These maxims are followed by any person engaging in conversation. In view of the fact that there are new ways to study and evaluate communication, and researchers in linguistics and communication have pondered new territory such as grammars for visual designs, it seems relevant to ‘move down the track’ to instigate a ‘grammar’ for kinesics (specifically dance). The focus of this paper is on the aspect of dance as a language particularly because dance contains and expresses meaning. It highlights the reason why dance can be considered a language and has a grammar. In addition, it critically evaluates two descriptions of dance as a language, one by Anne Hutchinson and the other by Judith Lynne Hanna. 3 LITERATURE REVIEW Grammar in Language One can look at the world of language from different perspectives: that of a linguist, a grammarian, a visual designer, or a lay man. In an article tilted A Linguist to the Lay Audience, Raven McDavid says, “Everyone has opinions, even prejudices, on some of the details of language he uses….Differences in the acceptability of particular details, or whole varieties, of language are recognized in almost every society” (McDavid, 1985, p. 280). This is not surprising to hear nor difficult to understand and accept. We need only take a look at some of the different methods, forms, and theories of language and communication to realize the truth in the suggestion of difference. Halliday, for example, refers to grammar as being theory-based and natural. He says that there is no theory-free description of grammar and grammar is a natural relationship between wording and meaning. He also says “Grammar is really lexis and lexis is really grammar”. He refers to grammar and lexis as complementary perspectives. However, he does not define language as a code. He explains that even though at time he has used this word code to refer to language, he does not perceive language as “meanings waiting around to be encoded”. He states, “The meaning is created in language” (1985, p. xii). He describes grammar from a functional rather than a formal perspective because he believes it is a better description of how language works. He believes that language has evolved to gratify human requirements; the manner in which language is structured with regard to these requirements is functional and not random. Functional grammar, he explains, is a grammar that is ‘natural’ and can be clarified by reference to the manner in which the language is used. Thus, the structure emerges from the functions that language serves. 4 Halliday also explains that the fundamental components of meaning in language are functional components. These components, referred to as metafunctions, are expressions of the two most general and universal purposes (which underlie all languages): ‘ideational’ or reflective (being able to understand the environment) and ‘interpersonal’ or active (to act on the others in the environment). Combined with the above mentioned metafunctions is the ‘textual’ (creating relevance to context) metafunction, which “breathes relevance into the other two”. In addition, Halliday describes functional grammar as being a grammar which interprets all the parts of a language (such as phrases, clauses, lexicon, etc.) as organic configurations of functions. In other words, “each part is interpreted with respect to the whole.” (Halliday, 1985, p. xiii). Finally, Halliday explains that in functional grammar, language is construed as a structure of meanings which go together with forms that can express these meanings. In other words, instead of asking the formal grammar question “what do these forms mean?” one would ask, “How are these meanings expressed?” (Halliday, 1985, p. xiv). Language, as stated previously, is a form of communication. This form has a written and an oral structure. A lot has been covered in the field of written language and studies in the field of oral communication have very quickly caught up. With the invention of the tape recorder, collecting and studying data on oral communication has become easier and more exact. One interesting study in this area of language and communication is by H. P. Grice. Grice developed a theory based on the premise that a speaker may express an idea through an utterance that is quite different from what the sentence means in its standard written form. For example, take the sentence ‘My foot is killing me’; it does not mean what it does in its written form. It means ‘my foot is hurting me’, or ‘I am in pain because 5 of my foot’. However the syntactic meaning of the first sentence is: ‘My foot is murdering me, or causing my death’. The meaning of this utterance is more important than the grammatical structure of the sentence. Grice (and his followers) worked on developing a structure for the study and analysis of spoken texts. The primary theory is referred to as Implicature. Grice began with a common premise which is that every speaker (when involved in a conversation) follows principles of cooperation. What this means is to: “contribute to what is required by the accepted purpose of the conversation” (Grice 1975). Based on this premise Grice then established four maxims which explicate how to be cooperative: 1. Maxim of Quality: do not say what you believe to be false or unjustified. 2. Maxim of Quantity: give as much information as is required 3. Maxim of Relation: be relevant 4. Maxim of Manner: avoid obscurity and ambiguity (Grice, 1975 pp. 26-30) The following example clarifies Grice’s premise of cooperation: Tom is helping his mom change the baby’s diaper. He hands his mom one diaper (quantity), he hands her a clean one (quality), he hands her a diaper rather than the baby cream (relevance) and he does not take all day to do so (manner). Grice spoke of exceptions to the rule of cooperation like when a speaker so obviously fails to obey the maxims that the listener must assume the speaker means something different. For example, a speaker saying “What a nice day!” in the middle of a storm. He called these flouting the maxims. The Maxim of Quality is often flouted in metaphors and irony (Grice, 1975, pp. 26-30). Grice states that in any spoken communiqué, the aforementioned principle of cooperation and maxims are observed. If we consider 6 grammar to be a set of rules to follow in order to properly communicate in any given language, this would imply that Grice’s maxims are a form of grammar. Grammar in Other Modalities If we have forms of grammar for written language and spoken language, then it would not be surprising if other modes of communication also had grammars. One modality which has been the subject of many studies is visual communication. In Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design (1996), Gunther Kress and Theo van Leeuwen discuss the relevance of a grammar for other communicative modalities other than language. They describe the manner in which people, places and things depicted in visual design combine together to make visual statements rather than simply vocabulary. They focus on the fact that visual communication is becoming more and more crucial in the field of public communication. What was once considered the field of specialists only (visual design) is now more predominant in the public domain (Kress and van Leeuwen 1996, pp.1-3). More and more people are developing the sense that structure and analysis are needed to ‘speak and comprehend’ the language of the visual. “Inevitably this [need] will lead to new, and more rules, and to more formal, normative teaching. Not being ‘visually literate’ will begin to attract social sanctions and “Visual literacy’ will begin to be a matter of survival, especially in the workplace” (Kress and van Leeuwen, 1996, p. 3). Just as functional grammar begins with the question of meaning, the grammar of visual design begins with the understanding of meaning. The recognition and awareness of the message when communicated visually comes from the function of the visual and the awareness and perception of the viewer. Kress and van Leeuwen also make the point that 7 visual grammar is not universal. The grammar of visual design is a culturally specific one (Kress and van Leeuwen, 1996, p. 3). Just as different cultures have different verbal languages, they also have different spatial perspectives as well. Another viewpoint of grammar comes from Ann Hutchison in her book, Labanotation: The System of Analyzing and Recording Movement (Hutchinson, 1970). Claiming that movement has a grammar and syntax, she says: “Dance is a language of expressive gestures through which non-verbal communication can be achieved. Like verbal language, it has basic parts of speech” (Hutchinson, 1970, p.17). Hutchinson classifies the basic elements of movements into three categories: nouns (Table 1), adverbs (Table 2) and verbs (Table 3). She states that though there are adjectives, they occur so rarely that they are better not mentioned (Hutchinson, 1970, p.17). Hutchinson’s idea about adjectives and their occurrence can be disputed because movements themselves are adjectives in dance. For example: An arm (a body part, a noun) Moves in a circle (a circling arm, an adjective) It moves slowly (dynamics, an adverb) It is in motion (an action, a verb) The verbal language equivalent becomes: The circling arm is moving slowly. Some might argue that the movement itself should be considered a noun as well, but this makes the relevance of the movement with respect to the body more difficult to understand. When the body part is the noun, the movement gives more meaning to it. Similar to the function of an adjective in verbal languages. Green, might in and of itself 8 be used as a noun in particular cases but when used with the word tree it gives ‘tree’ more meaning. Hence in the above example, a circle can be a noun but when used as a movement that is done by the ‘arm’, it is an adjective. Below are the Tables which show Hutchinson’s divisions. Table 1: Hutchinson’s Description of Nouns in Dance Language NOUNS The individual parts of the body which move A partner or other person to whom movement is related Parts of the room to which the performer must proceed or toward which gestures are directed Objects or properties which are carried or handled Table 2: Hutchison’s Description of Adverbs in Dance Language ADVERBS Timing: Sudden or Sustained, or any specific time value Dynamics: Use of energy flow, Flow of movement, Inner attitude Degree of Action: Degree of rotation, Distance covered, etc… Manner of Performance: Physical Modification: initiation of the action, part of the body leading, guidances, sequential actions 2. Spatial Modification: deviations in paths, variations in positions 1. 9 Table 3: Hutchinson’s Description of Verbs in Dance Language VERBS An Action Absence of action: stillness Contraction Extension Rotation Spatial Actions Direction Motion Toward Mode of Progression Motion Path Away Supporting Jumping In Other: Balance Loss of Balance; Falling Results of Actions Relationship To person, object etc Visual Design To space, to a spot To body Shape made by body Linear design, trace forms Hutchinson compares dance to a traditional schema of grammar. She takes the grammar divisions and shows what in dance is the equivalent of this term or division. Nouns being things like ‘a person to whom the movement is related’ or a verb being ‘an action’. However, she does not make any reference to meaning. Hutchison has provided a simple classification of formal resources without any link to meaning. This is equivalent to a set of word classes and sub-categories of word classes in verbal language. The main area of 10 communication and purpose of language is to express and clarify meaning. Hutchinson however, does not take that into consideration in her explanation of dance as a language. Another researcher who has done extensive work in the field of non-verbal communication is Judith Lynne Hanna. Paying particular attention to dance, she has worked primarily on the basis of dance being a communicative tool. Gathering information about dance and comparing it to aspects of language she has been able to build a solid foundation for dance as an entity of human behavior and thus a tool for interaction. Hanna explains that dance may be used for many communicative situations such as: 1. 2. 3. 4. Providing information necessary to preserve cultural patterns. Providing information necessary to help attain goals. Providing information necessary to help in adapting to a new environment. Providing information to help in integration or change. (Hanna, 1979, p. 26) The information provided could be relevant to a person, a group or a society at large. Dance may also support or refute the intended meaning by using repetition, augmentation, illustration, linguistic, paralinguistic, or other non-verbal communication forms (Hanna, 1979, p. 26) (see the table below). Table 4: Definition and Examples of Dance Communication Styles/Techniques Repetition Augmentation Illustration Linguistic Paralinguistic Other Non-Verbal Communication Forms A movement (phrase) can be repeated. This will emphasize the main idea. A movement (phrase) can exaggerate or highlight the main idea. A movement (phrase) can depict the idea. A replica of the thought or idea being expressed. Verbal language or linguistic forms of communication can be added to the kinesic language to further exemplify the idea. The voice or use of voice could be added to the kinesic communication to further exemplify the idea. Example Visuals, Props, Music can all be used to add to the movement. These will help in clarifying the idea. 11 Regardless of the style of dance used, it is important to note that within a given culture there are varying degrees of comprehension. Issues such as age, sex, occupation, political belief can allow for margins of difference in understanding symbols of movement. This idea once again highlights the point that not all people ‘see’ and comprehend things the same way. In fig.1 (p.13) we can see variations levels of understanding. Some of the dance ‘behavior’ has a shared or common meaning with the spectator and some is intended to be interactive in that it attempts to evoke a response from the spectator. However both the dancer and the spectator possess the dance information. They both belong to the dance culture. Ray Birdwhistell explains in his Kinesics and Context: Essays on Body Motion, “humans move and belong to movement communities just as they speak and belong to speech communities….there are kinesic [body motion] languages and dialects which are learned by cultural members just as speech is learned” (1970, 39-40). We cannot expect the cultural outsider to have the same information as the dancer or the spectator, just as in speech communities we do not expect people from outside the community to understand what is being conveyed, particularly if they do not understand the language. 12 Dance Culture Fig. 1 Cultural Outsider DANCE INFORMATION Dancer Spectator In addition, a beginning dance student may know less than the dance initiate who in turn knows less than the dance expert (Hanna, 1996, p. 26). Fig. 2 (p. 14) illustrates this point. We can see how the cultural outsider has no connection to the dance information, and the dance expert has all the information. The dance initiate and the non-initiate have varying degrees of information which are relatively less that the dance expert and somewhat more than the cultural outsider. In other cases some of the meaning is aimed toward a few and some is unintentional or has a latent meaning. Again this is shown in Fig. 2. In such cases we can say the meaning is transcendent (i.e. the meaning has gone beyond the dance). These are the effects that are carried over to the cultural outsider. 13 Dance Culture Fig. 2 Noninitiate DANCE INFORMA TION Cultural Outsider Dance Expert Dance Initiate Taking the communication potential found in dance a step further, Hanna used a set of design features of language (Hockett and Ascher 1964) and analyzed the similarities which exist in dance. Both forms of communication require the same mental capacity and ability for conceptualization, imagination and recollection. The comparison between the verbal form and the non-verbal one would be clearer if we think of dance more as poetry than prose (Hanna, 1996, p 86). The following table shows the list of features used, marks the similarities (X) and explains the differences. As for the similarities both have: directional reception which means that the signal/message can be heard (or seen) by any person within earshot or view; interchangeability which means that the sender and receiver may be the same person; arbitrariness which means that there is no essential or natural relationship between the sign and its referent; discreteness which is the ability for 14 all the communication essentials to be broken down into finite sets of elements that can contrast with one another (i.e. phonemes); displacement which is the ability to make reference to some thing which is not in the ‘here and now’; productivity which means that any message which has not previously been sent can be understood with the use of previously learned and recognized elements of communication; duality of patterning means that both have a system of physical action and a system of meaning (the use of both of these can produce an infinite number of meaningful structures); cultural transmission; ambiguity; affectivity; all three of these deal with expressions of internal states of being -whether they are true or false- as well as referential relationships with the social, cultural and physical worlds; and finally both have a range of sizes of potential communicating participants. It is worth noting that productivity involves grammars. These are theoretical and in dance it is what the performers know about the innate form of communication and how competent they are in a linguistic/dance movement (Hanna, 1996, p. 86). This is often referred to as the langue of movement. Table 5: Hanna’s comparison of Design features of Language and Dance Features Language Dance Directional reception X X Interchangeability X X Arbitrariness X X Discreteness X X Displacement X X Productivity X X Duality X X 15 Cultural transmission X X Ambiguity X X Affectivity X X Range of sizes of potential communicating participants Channel X X Time and Space Vocal /auditory channels Predominate Temporal dimension Motor/visual-kinesthetic channels predominate Time and space dimensions Feedback Speaker can hear self Dancer cannot see self Involvement Total involvement in communication act is not necessary Minimal units of phoneme and morpheme agreed upon by linguists Greater ease in communication Detailed syntax governing sequences exists for many languages Fuller involvement required in dance Minimal units Complex logical structures Syntax Lack or agreement about minimal units Greater difficulty in communication Syntax exist for few dances In addition to the similarities which Hanna summarized, there are seven dissimilarities between dance and verbal language. 1. The motor/visual –kinesthetic channels are predominate in dance; whereas vocal/auditory channels are predominate in language. 2. Language exists in a temporal dimension whereas dance involves temporal as well as three other dimensions in space. 3. Speakers have the ability to have greater feedback because they can hear themselves speak whereas dancers cannot see themselves dance. 16 4. Involvement in the act of speaking is such that the speaker may be doing something else while speaking however in dance the dancer is more involved in the communication act and therefore must focus only on it. 5. Dance has more difficulty in expressing more complex logical structures than verbal language does. 6. There are differences in the study of dance and language. Linguists agree on the minimal units of verbal language, such agreements do not exist in dance. 7. Syntax: The detailed syntax which governs language has yet to be worked out for dance. It is worthy to note that the reason such detailed work has not been carried out in dance is not because of any intrinsic phenomena in dance, but rather due to a relative lack in studies (Hanna, 1996, pp. 86-88). DISCUSSION Dance contains and expresses meaning. It has structure, codes and several other basic foundations of language. However, dance is lacking a formal syntax. Dancers find it easy to communicate with one another due to the common knowledge they obtain through their experience and studies in the field, and not due to simply being exposed to dance. This does not mean that exposure may not help in comprehension, but it cannot help in mastering the langue of dance. For example, take a woman who immerses herself in a culture where she does not speak the language, after a period of exposure to the language she will develop a sense of comprehension and ability to communicate in the new language; but she will not master the grammar of the language. Pragmatics refers to this as acculturation. A non-dancer may develop a sense of comprehension of dance by being 17 exposed to it, but he/she will not master the language of dance. In order for dance to be an easily accessible language mode it must have a more universal structure and syntax. And currently this does not exist. Hutchinson made a bold attempt at defining a structure by classifying movement features into formal grammar units. However, her main objective was to construct a system of notation. In her attempt, (which she built upon from the earlier works of Rudolph Laban) she neglected the most important area in communication which is meaning. This contrasts with the studies of Halliday and Grice. Halliday stresses the fact that language structures emerge from the functions that they serve, hence meaning is fundamental. Grice stresses the fact that the meaning of any utterance is more essential than its grammatical structure. Hutchinson, however, focused primarily on developing a system of signs and symbols which could help in notating movement, in other words an alphabet of movement. Hutchinson also neglected to categorize movements themselves even though movements are the lexemes of dance; the basic units of meaning. Without movement and meaning dance ceases to be communicative and therefore not a language. Hanna, on the other hand, focused primarily on meaning and left syntax to be covered in other studies. Hanna’s primary focus was to clarify and highlight how dance is a natural human communicative behavior. If we use a combination of Hutchinson and Hanna’s work and add to it the needed syntax features, a dance grammar can be designed. As a starting point, dance movements must be categorized as part of the syntax and meaning must be integral in formulating these categories. An area of inception could be the quality of gesticulation of a movement, for example: flexion/extension; contract/release; sharp/flow; angular/circular; etc. Individual movements could then be placed in each category. This could be a basis for lexical 18 structure. Movements could be grouped together into types for example, the above list of gesticulation are contrasts (each is the opposite of the other). This could be a starting point for developing the syntagmatic and paradigmatic axes of dance. Such a development could answer questions such as: What kind of movements can be substituted for each other (syntax), and in what order do the movements occur (paradigm) so that they convey a meaning? Another area of inception could be to use a model similar to the one developed by Grice for speech. Based on implication, movements situations could be arranged to fit within categories. These categories would help to define the pragmatics of dance. In the pragmatic domain of communication we see that semantics and syntax are interdependent. The same concept could exist in dance when we focus on its communicative properties. According to Charles Morris, dance is considered meaningful behavior in three domains: pragmatics, semantics, and syntactics (Morris, 1955). However, not enough studies have been done to substantiate dance syntax. Hanna mentions six modes of transmitting meaning which can be utilized in dance: 1. Concretization: imitation or replica 2. Icon: representation of original 3. Stylization: arbitrary gestures which are the result of convention 4. Metonym: motional perception of one thing for another 5. Metaphor: one idea expressing another, analogy 6. Actualization: a dancer dancing in terms of self (Hanna, 1979, pp. 41-42) Because meaning can depend on context as well, Hanna mentions eight spheres which she believes encompass all meaning in the movement field. These spheres are: 19 1. Event: situation 2. Body: the total human body in action 3. Whole Performance: the total spatial pattern 4. Discursive Performance: sequences of the unfolding movement phrases 5. Specific Movement: the actual movement 6. Intermesh with other Medium: the linkage of movement with other communication media such as song, music, poetry, readings, costumes and props 7. Vehicle for other Medium: dance as a means of expression for another medium such as the background in a poetry reading 8. Presence: the charisma or magic of the performance (Hanna, 1979, p. 44) Hanna states that these devices are signs which may function as signals to convey meaning and existence in any thing, event, or condition having to do with the present, past or future, particularly when they are directly related to the action they signify (Hanna, 1979, p. 44). For example in an Indian Rain Dance, the dancer may use concretization (ex. imitating rain) to encode the meaning of the motor expression being used in the dance. This is what is meant by the syntax of dance, yet this syntax is still deficient because the rules dictating how the movements and structures may be combined are not clear. So far, based on the studies of Rudolph Laban (1940) and Anne Hutchinson (1954,1970) there are four categories of dance movement (see table 6). Hanna suggests that with more studies these categories may be modified or supplemented (Hanna, 1979, p. 45). These categories can be investigated further and may be a starting point for developing a formal, more accessible syntax for dance movement. 20 Table 6: Dance Movement Data Categories and Subdivisions SPACE RHYTHM DYNAMICS USE OF BODY Direction Tempo Space Posture Level Duration Flow Locomotion Amplitude Accent Locomotion Gesture Focus Meter Projectional Quality _______________ Grouping ______________ ______________ _______________ Shape ______________ _______________ _______________ Finally, another area of focus could be the design features of language which were established by Hockett and Ascher. Hanna made reference to them and compared the use of dance to the use of verbal language. The similarities found could help in establishing syntax for dance. Particularly in the area of productivity because this involves grammar. Productivity in dance, according to Hanna, is what dancers know about the form of dance being used and to what degree are they capable of using it. Several of the above mentioned concepts can be expanded and developed into syntax of dance. Dance has potential to attain the ultimate goal of communication: delivering the message Conclusion Languages across the world have similarities in structure and form. These similarities allow them to be related to and help in the function of communication. When we think of a grammar of a language we think of so much more than its rules and regulations; we think of a common structure which makes language both accessible and reasonable to the users. Does this apply to any form of communication, or is it exclusively a language concern? We see that the idea of communication begins with a common purpose and 21 awareness of a situation. This ought to be the case for any structure in all modes of communication. Kress and Van Leeuwen (1996) postulated a grammar for visual design which relies on a common awareness and understanding. Grammars for other areas like dance have only been implied and still the implication revolves around common areas of understanding and function. With body awareness and visual design becoming more and more predominate in the world we live in, we need to have an approach which will allow us to be more fluent in both usage and comprehension of alternative methods of communication. Globalization has broadened the horizon of education. We must develop innovative methods and techniques which will both enrich and empower the new generation to meet the challenges of tomorrow. If we do not develop our methods and configurations of communication such a goal may be harder to achieve. We need to look at the multimodality of communication. Kinesic modes ought to be included as a part of the schema. Currently, it is only logistics which keeps us from referring to them as language. 22 References Birdwhistell, R.L. (1970) Kinesics and Context: Essays on Body Motion Communication Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press Gardner, H. (1993) Multiple Intelligences: The Theory in Practice New York: Basic Books Grice, H. P. (1957) ‘Meaning’ Philosophical Review, vol. 66, pp. 377-388 Grice, H. P. (1975) ‘Logic and Conversation’ Syntax and Semantics, 3: Speech Acts ed P. Cole and J. Morgan. New York: Academic Press. Reprinted in H. P. Grice, ed Studies in the Way of Words Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press. (1989) pp. 22-40 Halliday, M. A. K. ( 1985) An Introduction to Functional Grammar. 2nd ed. London: Arnold Press Hanna, J. L. (1979) To Dance is Human: A Theory of Nonverbal Communication Chicago: Chicago University Press. Hockett, C. F. and R. Ascher (1964) ‘The Human Revolution’ Current Anthropology, vol. 5 no. 3 pp.135-168 Horn, L.R. and G. Ward (2004) The Handbook of Pragmatics. United Kingdom: Blackwell Publishers Hutchison, A. (1970) Labanotation: The System of Analyzing and Recording Movement USA: Theatre Arts Books Kress, G. (2000) ‘Multimodality’ Multiliteracies: Literacy Learning and the Design of Social Futures. eds. Bill Cope & Mary Kalantzis. London: Routledge Kress, G. and T. van Leeuwen (1996) Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design. London: Routledge Laban, R. (1966) Choreutics. London: MacDonald and Evans Ltd McDavid, R. I. Jr. (1985) ‘A Linguist to the Lay Audience’. The English Language Today, ed Sidney Greenbaum. Oxford: Paragon Morris, C. (1955) Signs, Language and Behavior. New York: Braziller Stalnaker, R. C. (1972) ‘Semantics’ Semantics of Natural Language. eds. Donald Davidson and Gilbert Harman. Dordrecht: Reidel. Pp. 380-397 23