 I'm ready. Hi, Sofia. Welcome, everybody. It's my pleasure to host our own Noriko Iwasaki and Keiko Yoshiyoka's talk about the use of mimetics and gesture amongst speakers of Japanese as a second language. And I know that another course is finishing early, so they come in. So don't get distracted if suddenly a lot of people walk in. So thank you very much. And I'm really excited to hear about mimetics and gesture. OK, thank you. Thank you, Mandana. OK, so do you all know what mimetics are? There are some different names to refer to the same type of words. So in English, typically it's called onomatopoeia. But onomatopoeia is associated with those words that refer to sound. But Japanese mimetics, as well as so-called idiophones and expressives, can refer to many other things. And other words of sensation. And so it is said that the mimetics evoke vivid at the scene image. And the native speakers have the intuition about that sound mimetic relationship. It's not arbitrary, but they have some relations. And DiFlos said that the meaning of mimetics is different from meaning of other words. It's an expressive mode of meaning. So just wanted to demonstrate the type of images that we associate with some of the mimetic words. There are a few mimetics words. This is a poster of an event that I'm going to participate in January. But so there are one, two, three, four, five, six words here and the seventh word there. And so each word is written in such a way that the kind of images each word evokes. So this is, for example, heartthrobbing or shock, shocking, and so forth. So that's how native speakers think of mimetics, something that evokes image and feeling. But I just want to introduce the place of mimetics in Japanese in linguistics, in Japanese language. So in Japanese, there are four types of lexicon. And we have native Japanese words. And native Japanese words are most restricted in terms of phonotactics. And the long words is more freer. They can use type of sound that are not used in other words. But these words, sign of Japanese words, the mimetics are somewhere in between. So there are some sounds such as bilayer stop, voiceless put sound, can be the initial, can appear at the word initial position, which is not the case with native Japanese words at all. So there's some restriction to it. But it's different from native Japanese words or long words. And within the mimetics, they are typically divided into three types of mimetics, depending on what they refer to. So phonomimes are the ones that refer to sound. But phonomimes refer to more visual, tactile, or other sensation. And mana is also often described by phonomimes. And also psychomimes that refer to psychological state, pain and also emotion. So as you see, that's very different from what do you think of as when you hear onomatopoeia, then you don't think of these type of words probably. And so they also have this structure, more phonological structures. And basically, there are two types of roots to mimetics, Japanese mimetics. One is CV, constant verb, and just one syllable. The other one has a, what other root is two moras, two syllables. It has two syllables. And that can be, there are variations in which by colon, I mean that they can be lengthened. So when it's lengthened, it is associated with longer sound, longer actions. It has meaning to this length. And also if it's re-duplicate, it's a probably repetitive action and so forth. So the form of the word does have meaning. And this very typical part of Japanese mimetics, moric nasal is tend to have, I mean, that suggests the direction of motion, the quality of sound changes, lingering effects that they call it. Or the germinate is often, so these notations often used to transcribe, romanize Japanese mimetics. So moric nasal and also germinate. And germinate suggests that the action is carried out vigorously, very quickly and so forth. And I'll give you some example, because if looking at this does not tell you much. But for example, bak, so it can be, so I borrowed the definition from Kakehi Edo's dictionary. It's a very comprehensive dictionary of Japanese mimetics. So bak refers to the mana, so aims refers to the mana. Mana of something occurring or being done suddenly and with vigor. So it doesn't continue. It's a very quick action of some kind. But ban, on the other hand, refers to sound, single loud sound, so actually this voice sound is associated with the loudness and the heaviness and the big size and caused by explosion or with some lingering sound, resonant sound. And, but on the other hand, so that root is CV. V and bar is a root. And on the other hand, there's lots of also roots with the two syllables, or we call in Japanese, maybe it's better to call them two moras, but goro. So this is a short rambling sound or the mana rolling briefly, just briefly, because it's short. And goro, on the other hand, so although, you know, more like nasal and Germanic, I think, are supposed to have different meaning. This dictionary, they didn't bother to try to distinguish between these two, but if you are a Japanese speaker, you might sense a bit of a difference between goro and goro. So it's a more lingering goro in case of goro. And here, and also in terms of the grammatical class, they are more quite versatile. So for example, because I gave an example of goro and goro, I have koro koro as an example. So koro koro is an adverb, and so it rolled koro koro. I didn't even bother to translate it. But anyway, so what that means is that, so k means it's a voiceless consonant, meaning it's a light thing that is rolling. It's not goro koro, so it's a light thing, and it's a smooth rolling, repetitive rolling, so that's koro koro. But you notice, maybe I mentioned a little bit, so koron da is a verb, korobu. So in Japanese, sometimes they talk about how some of the verbs might have stems originated from mimetics, because they look similar, don't they? And koro koro and koron da are Japanese verb for referred to rolling. And sometimes it can be adjectable now, koro koro no kodomo, but these uses might not be so common nowadays, but koro koro no kodomo, or koro koro shita kodomo. So it can be a verb, shita suru is a light verb, and so mimetic can be easily changed into a mimetic verb by adding a light verb. So it's very versatile in terms of grammatical class. So it's a very interesting class of words. And in terms of semantics of mimetics, so I already mentioned that it has expressive mode of meanings, they're quite different from other types of words. And so Kita proposes that actually there's two dimensions of meaning, and one is an effective, imagistic dimension in which mimetics belong to, mimetic meanings belong to, and all the other words in meaning of all the other words in analytic dimension. And so they, and he provided some evidence, although some of the evidence was kind of questioned by some other researchers, but one of the evidence that he gave was the tight coupling of mimetics and parallel linguistic phenomena, such as expressive prosody. And so what we are going to look at is the coupling of mimetics and gesture. So one of the evidence, one piece of evidence that Kita provided to say that mimetics has a, meanings of mimetics is in a very different dimension, imagistic and effective. So Kita, in Kita's study, although he didn't have many participants, but he found that almost all the mimetics accompanied by stroke, that is a meaningful phrase of gesture. And as he found that compared to verbs, mimetics were 94% of the time accompanied by iconic gesture. So the questions that arise, for example, whether L2 speakers, I mean, those people who use Japanese as second language would also use gesture when they use mimetics. And does it depend on the proficiency, Japanese language proficiency or not, is another question. But before we go on, so this is another piece of evidence, but maybe we'll skip it because I have lots of slides. But anyway. And before I talk about the second language acquisition of mimetics, I want to note that it's recognized that these words are very important for second language learners as well. So educators talk about how vital these class of words are in Japanese. And we have a large inventory of these words. So one of the dictionaries that I have has 4,500 mimetics listed in the dictionary, for example, and there's lots of mimetics-specific dictionaries as well. So these are important classes of words. And in terms of the first language acquisition, research on first language acquisition, it is known that the three-year-old learn meaning of novel action by experiment. They found that if the words have some symbolic elements, meaning the kind of elements that are contained in mimetics, then the children can learn these novel words more quickly, more easily. And in terms of the research or natural development of infant's language, they found that the children tend to use creative, innovative mimetic words first. And then later on, they would start using lexicalized, more established mimetic words. And on the other hand, in terms of the semantic domains of mimetic words, young children tend to start using mimetics that refer to sound. And then later on, they use other mimetics of other semantic domains. So that's what has been found among little children, three-year-old infants. And how about second language learners? So there's lots of anecdotes about how second language learners have difficulty with these mimetic words. I mean, I see some people who have learned Japanese as a second language here. But so there are more anecdotes, but recently there are some experimental studies as well. But in my study, so I didn't study the acquisition itself, but what I did was that I presented audio stimuli of the Japanese mimetic words to English speakers who haven't studied Japanese at all before and asked them to guess the meaning of these words by rating it on the semantic dimensions. Like if they are the words referring to manner of walking, is it big strides, small strides, or with a big louder sound or softer sounds, that sort of dimensions had to be rated by the participants. And also I use the other mimetic semantic domains that I studied were mimetics referring to manner of walking, mimetics referring to lafta, manner of lafta. But manner of lafta has something to do with the voice of lafta as well. But manner of lafta and also type of pain. But for each of these mimetic words, mimetics, those speakers who haven't studied Japanese, those English speakers who haven't studied Japanese at all before, have some ideas about what mimetics suggest. Like the vowel R is associated with a large big strides and the larger lafta, louder lafta and so forth. So that's something that they could know. But so from there you could, you might think that it's not, it's easy for L2 learners to acquire mimetics, happens in mimetics because they have some knowledge of sound symbolism already. However, some studies that are conducted have always shown that in fact it's quite difficult for second language learners to understand which mimetics to use for each context, I mean for a given context. So the other question, so far mimetics appear to be quite difficult for L2 speakers of Japanese. And another question is that, is it different from other words? And so as I mentioned that they, so Kita for example, considers, I mean claims that the meaning of mimetics is quite different from the semantics of the other words. And so it is often used with gesture, is one of the, one piece of evidence that he provided. And also what's interesting is that, so if it's effective and then it might be, the pattern might be similar to the acquisition of emotion words, so emotion words have been studied in second language acquisition. And they found that unlike the other words, something like personality affects the frequency of, I mean the use of these words, emotion words. For example, extra words use more emotion words according to Duval and Pavlenko. So maybe there's something similar to the use of mimetics as well. Okay, so I want to introduce a few previous studies including ours, so Yoshioka, my co-author, she unfortunately couldn't come today. Studied one Dutch speaker across four years and collected data at three point. He didn't use so many mimetics, but so at first when he was a, you know, elemental level speaker, he didn't use any, but then he, at the final point, he used seven mimetics, more homophones than phenomimes, more phonomimes like sound mimetics than phenomimes that refer to manner. And so he found that the gesture frequency increases with proficiency. And she actually quite cares about this finding because it's not, gesture is not, speakers, L2 speakers don't always use gestures compensate for the lack of their vocabulary analysis, what's one of the claims that she makes. But as he became more proficient, the skill to depict events iconically using both mimetics and gesture improved is what she found. And so, but one interesting question to ask is that we know that some languages have a lot of mimetics such as Korean and some African languages also. And but some languages like English do not have many mimetic like was. So does it affect their use of mimetics, Japanese mimetics as a second language? Okay, so I'll just keep, I mean, don't talk about this in detail, but so one of the studies I conducted is that, so I tried to see if L2 Japanese speakers whose L1 is typological similar, Korean, has advantage in using Japanese mimetic words or not. So, I looked at the corpus of, oh, sorry, oh, first of all, I wanted to introduce the similarity between the Korean mimetics and Japanese mimetics. So, although there are some differences, but there are some similarity in some mimetics, Korean mimetics was and Japanese mimetic was. And so, for example, and also, I also gave the same auditory and stimuli to both Korean native speakers, monolingua Korean speakers and monolingua Japanese speakers. And the kind of words that they produce, mimetic what they produce, were also quite similar. And some inventory, if you look at this, you can see that they have similar items in Korean and Japanese. And also, in terms of grammar too, Korean and Japanese are similar in that the mimetics are often used as adverbs in Korean and in Japanese. But in English, some symbolic words, the words that are similar to mimetics or words that are considered to be similar to mimetics are used as a verb most of the time and sometimes as a noun. So that's what has been reported. So I checked corpus to see if Koreans actually use more mimetics than more Japanese mimetics than Korean speakers use more than English speakers in the corpus of oral proficiency interviews. Then I found, actually, English speakers use more, more mimetics. And why? So all together, number of speakers who use mimetics were exactly the same, but the number of types and tokens were more, I mean, there are more mimetics used by English speakers. So we need to study them a little bit more, don't we? And also, I checked, I thought maybe I'll look at the same data again, we visited the data, see if at least Korean speakers might have used Japanese mimetics in a more varied, contextual context or something because they have mimetics that are similar in grammar as well. And as I mentioned earlier, Japanese mimetics are very versatile in terms of the way you can use it, adverb, verbs, or even nominals, I mean, adjectival nominals. But I didn't find that. So one of the speakers used more mimetics in more varied structural contexts and also strangely enough, the highly proficient Korean speakers did not use many mimetics at all. And so that's what I found. But the problem with the past studies that I just showed is that I said that the corpus included oral proficiency interviews. So each speaker had slightly different types of questions. And so they are not, they didn't talk about the same thing. So we don't know whether the smaller number of mimetics produced by Korean speakers was due to the type of topics that they were given. And also in case of Yoshioca, she did use the same, do you know Frog Story? It's a picture book without any word. She used that and she used it across three times. But then only one participant. So we don't know so much about whether. So this Dutch speaker used more phonememes. I mean, it sounds mimetics more than the other types of mimetics. But we don't know if that's the case with other speakers. So we think, I mean, it's important to to elicit the use of mimetics from large amount of L2 Japanese speakers and utilizing the same stimuli across all the participants. And I did one study in which I examined only motion description. And as many of you may, you know, Tony proposed this classification, classified the languages into, I mean, depending on how they, how languages describe, lexicalize the motion events. And English is one of those languages that are classified as satellite frame language. So in this language, path of motion is indicated by particles such as into and out. And verbs usually encode manner of motion. But in languages such, in verb frames languages, verbs usually encode path rather than manner. But this manner instead, in case of Japanese and Korean, is elaborated by using mimetics. So this is a typical examples, like so in English, motion translocational motion and the manner is described by the verb and the path by the particle. And but in case of Japanese, this is considered to be the typical way to describe manner of motion event. So manner is described by a junk phrase, rolling and then the path is described by the main verb. So I studied how English and Korean speakers described manner of motion events. And what I found is that there are some events that elicit a lot of mimetics. So that's one thing I found, regardless of the first language. So and but however, Korean speakers used even more mimetics. But what's interesting is that regardless of the first language, they also used mimetics as verbs despite the fact that the native speakers often use mimetics as an adverb to describe manner. But the type of semantics they seem to impose, Korean speakers and English speakers impose on these mimetic verbs seem to be related to their first language. For example, this is an English speaker. Korokoro korokoro shite de sono shita ni saka ga arimashita. So korokoro is used as a verb and it seems like it's a equivalent of English verb role, meaning that it refers to the translocational motion as well as the manner. But so maybe I will just proceed to the Korean case. So in this case, gorogoro shinagara o gorogoro shite, so they have the main verbs that refer to path, path verbs. So what, they are using the verbs like rolling as an adjunct phrase to refer to manner. So that is similar to the typological difference I found. Okay, so summary. So Korean speakers use more mimetics works, mimetic words than English speakers. And so that seemed to be related to their first language. So, and so this is a background. So now I'm going to talk about today's. It's already been. So let's see. So finding so far, you know the finding so far, so I'll skip it. So the current study is I mean, the use of mimic words and gesture by L2 Japanese speakers whose L1 is either English or Korean. The same participants who I examined for motion event description. And so importantly, I picked the kind of videos that for which Japanese speakers do use mimetics. And so to see the influence of first language and how they use gesture as well along with mimetics. Okay, so I have two sets of, we have two sets of such question. One is related to the frequency of mimetics and types of mimetics. Sound of mimetics or not. So phonemes or phenomines. And if that's related to their proficiency. And the other set of questions are related to gesture. So do they also use gesture when they do these L2 speakers? Also gesture when they use mimetics. And also, is it Korean speakers who use more gesture than if they have similar words in their first language? And also, I mean, is there any difference between the way they use gesture compared to the way native speakers of Japanese use gesture is the second question. And this is something that I was curious about. What kind of iconic gesture are we talking about if the word is referring to sound? If it's referring to manner of motion, sure you can iconically represent manner of motion by gesture. So that's what we wanted to look at too. Okay, so basically what I'm presenting today, I have different other types of instruments as well, but I'm reporting on the description of video clips. So maybe you know about this Sylvester. So maybe I can just skip in the video clip. And I don't think so. Well, I know it in and out. Okay, so, okay. So this is the event that elicited a lot of mimetics from both English speakers. And I mean, English speakers, not so many, but I made sure to buy a Japanese version of that. And okay, so, and so yes, native speakers of Japanese use a lot of mimetics, 17 out of 21 speakers. And although I have to mention, there's a variety of mimetics. So they say that this is a correct mimetic, but actually, which is supposed to be not about rolling, but about rotating. Kuru-kuru and Guru-kuru are also used by native speakers, I have to say. And also this motion also elicited a lot of mimetics or something like that. And earthquake, this is only 10 seconds, so that's, and for this, Japanese speakers would use bat, yosai-yosai or gata-gata, bam-bam. I thought yuraira would come up, but didn't come up, so there's something, what, you know, the variety of mimetics that speakers use were actually quite different. Maybe have something to do with generation too. These are college students who described the video clips and the hariken, yeah, so that's it. So for basa-za-ba-wa-wa, these are kind of mimetics they used and the Japanese speakers, I mean. L1 Japanese speakers. And we had, so please note I had more Korean speakers than English speakers and I made sure that they were residing in the country of origin because it didn't affect the context affected. And I checked their proficiency or proficiency interview. And so this is kind of only Korean speakers had very high level, very highly proficient speakers, but English speakers too had some of them advanced level. This refers to advanced meat is the levels that are defined by American Council of Foreign Language Teaching. And, but for gestures, we looked at the subsets in parenthesis, okay? So I just want to note that the students actually, they describe the same event in English as well, but in different orders. So sometimes one might describe the earthquake in English first, but then other students might, but the other students would describe it in other orders. Okay, so we looked at the type of mimetics and the decision, I mean. But actually we had three, we looked at, we also consider, so that some mimetics do refer to both the manner of motion and the sound at the same time, the example that I gave, pu, jumped pu, a bit about sound and also very straight, quick motion manner as well. So that was classified as both, okay? And for gesture, importantly, we picked on, we analyzed only subsets of the events. This is because we wanted to compare mimetics and verbs, whether how frequently gestures occurred, but verbs that describe the same event rather than any random verbs. So to do that, three events often describe using both mimetics and verbs, so rolling and earthquake and hurricane. So we checked the rate of stroke of gesture that accompanies mimetic expressions or verbs and the rate of either the mimetic expression or the verb being the first word in the, that synchronized with the gesture. So to give you an example, so this is, I promised anonymity to the participants, so you can't see the face, but. I mean, the other, so you saw the other and the gesture synchronized. In this case, goro-goro, manner of rolling. By synchronized, we mean the clause that contain mimetic and the gesture. And in this case, there's no mimetic, that's verb. So the verb is actually a very generic verb, move. So that's maybe something to do with the fact that they want to use mimetic in the gesture. Okay, so here's the results, so do they use, do English speakers use a lot of mimetics? Well, not so many, but they did use phonememes as well as phenomemes and also the type of mimetics that you had to both. And you see that maybe the intermediate bit type speakers might use the largest number of mimetics. Korean speakers, you already see here, there's no phonememes used by these speakers. These are intermediate low, novice high, intermediate low, intermediate mid, intermediate high. And if you look at more higher proficient speakers, we have to do something about this speaker. So what this means is that she, 29 tokens, but three types, meaning she used one mimetic 26 times. And pat, so it's like ramp up, jump up, like that, so. But so we had to exclude it. And so you see that all together only two phonememes, but lots of phonememes. And so, but if you look at, if we exclude this participant who used a lot of tokens of pat, then the mean was exactly the same, four, four by, so if that total number of mimetics tokens or divided by the number of participants, it's exactly the same. However, English speakers needed more encouragement. So actually in this narrative, the speakers first gave the description of what they saw. Now after that interviewer, sometimes you mean, could you clarify that a little bit or something like that later on after the first set of description. So there, eventually English speakers use, produce more mimetics, but at first, if you look at the mean of the first description only, it's true that Korean speakers did use more mimetics. And so if, when it comes to proficiency, as I briefly mentioned before, it's not necessarily the higher level speakers who use more mimetics, but it's the middle range. And it's more pronounced, this trend is more pronounced for Korean speakers. Superior speakers are very highly proficient speaker, but no mimetics whatsoever. And these advanced high level speakers didn't use many either, but intermediate level speakers use more mimetics. So to answer the first set of questions, if once we exclude the one participant, then the token means of English and Korean speakers are the same. But the Korean speakers did use more mimetics in the first description, so I think they are more inclined to use mimetics. But Korean speakers used phenomimes most of the time and very few phonomimes. While English speakers often use phonomimes as well. And so, yeah, I mentioned that higher proficiency speakers did not necessarily use more mimetics. So that's very different from other types of words, I think. And in terms of gesture, so this is coming from Qtas data. So these are mimetics accompanied by gesture and verbs accompanied by gesture. And among L2 speakers of Japanese too, whenever they use mimetics, their use of mimetics is accompanied by gesture most of the time indeed. What's different is that L2 speakers also use gesture for verbs as well, but not to the same extent as mimetics. So it's just wanted to see if there's any difference depending on the proficiency. And so the pattern is a bit similar to the use of mimetics. Those people who use more mimetics tend to use more gesture. So it's not surprising considering the fact that the mimetics is accompanied by gesture. So the same is true with Korean speakers, although there's some, this one person, so some of the means are not so meaningful because this is just one person, for example. And here, six, but okay. So we found that the last question about gesture is that how do these speakers describe the sound by gesture? So there were two types. They just, their gesture either depicted the action or the event that emitted the sound or just if it's a loud sound, then like this, so it's 200-metrical gesture moving away from center, so that's what they used. So yes, so these are the summary, so the mimetics are nearly always accompanied by gesture. So it's not lower proficiency speakers who use more gesture. So gesture accompanied verbs, gesture accompanied verbs more frequently, and we think that maybe they were trying to elaborate what they were saying by gesture. So the example that I gave you earlier, the verb was move rather than roll. And then the gesture was suggesting some rotation or rolling. Okay, so here's a summary of results. So in terms of frequency of use of mimetics and mimetic types, Korean speakers use more mimetics with that request for elaboration. And Korean speakers primarily used phenomimes, phenomimes, but English speakers use both types. Although the phonomimes are not so frequent. And interestingly, some of the lower proficiency English speakers only used phonomimes. And in terms of mimetics and gesture, both English speakers and Korean speakers used gesture when they used mimetics, and they synchronized with mimetics, they are gestured synchronized with mimetics. And both use of gesture and mimetics did not seem to depend on, there's no clear pattern related to their proficiency. If there is any, then higher level proficiency speakers for some reason did not use many mimetics, and not so many gesture, so much gesture either. And so we think one of the possibilities that Korean speakers with very high proficiency want to be really precise about their choice of mimetics. And that's probably for, but to be precise in describing, you know, this affective imagistic meaning is quite challenging, so maybe they were avoiding it. Or another possibility is that because Korean is used, Korean also, in Korean too, there are a lot of mimetics, and they know very well when to use mimetics, which register to use mimetics. So maybe it's possible that they want to be proper and avoiding mimetics. And what's interesting is that lower proficiency speakers use of phonemes is a bit similar to the pattern that is observed among children. So maybe they are learning this set of words from scratch in a way, rather than compared to Korean speakers who already have a large set of similar type, large set of words that are similar. And in terms of gesture, because this was one called speed gesture accompany mimetics. So maybe salient feature of mimetics is tend to be accompanied by gesture. And also maybe this is something that is probably, I wouldn't want to say universal, but it's something shared across speakers of different languages maybe. And finally, like the use of other expressive or affective vocabulary, L2 use of mimetics seems to depend on the individual. So there are no clear patterns. Okay, so that's it, thank you. Very much Noriko, questions. I was thinking of maybe the novelty of mimetics maybe for English speakers compared to Korean speakers. Since Korean seems to have the same types of words, but for English speakers it is kind of a new concept for them when they learn it. So do you think that can affect the use of mimetics? Yeah, definitely, that's an important point. And in fact, in some second language acquisition research, novelty does matter. So yeah, I didn't include it here, but I definitely think about that too. Because it's interesting to them. For Korean speakers, it's one of those that are very difficult to be very precise about, or maybe, but novelty, yeah, I think definitely. Yeah, I guess like anecdotally, I noticed that people who are in another language, they seem to have a favorite word, a favorite feature, and use it often once they learn how to use it properly. Yeah, but I also think that when they are intermediate level speakers, that's when they really try out these interesting type of vocabulary. And it's possible that high proficient speakers, again, want to be more precise and want to select the exact mimetic that is more suitable, the ones that are more suitable. Maybe that's why they are a bit more reserved. That's what I'm guessing, but novelty definitely matters. Yes, Peter? I have two questions. Yes. Did you check if the participants were interested or had any familiarity with Manga? Did I check it? My hypothesis being that if you were interested in Manga, then these would be something that you'd be keen on. Yeah, so actually, I didn't specifically check that, but one type of dataset, which I haven't quite analyzed, is the interviews. So after they did all this, I asked each participant about mimetics. Where they see mimetics and, you know, whether they like to use mimetics and such. So maybe they might have mentioned it if that's what they, I mean, they encountered mimetics often in Manga. So I have to check that, yeah. The second question is about teaching methods. Yeah. I mean, mimetics in Japanese are genre-dependent as well, it seems to me. And if you were taught Japanese using mainly written materials, particularly correct materials, you wouldn't be exposed to them very much. Actually, you will be. Let's say to conversational usage. Let this my hypothesis, whether it holds up from the right hand. Actually, novels, novels have lots of mimetics. Actually, novels, short stories. No, I was thinking like newspapers. No, newspapers, yeah, they don't, yeah. The sort of stuff that's typically fed to, to language law was typically fed to language. And the hypothesis would be that Korean, maybe in the teaching of Japanese to Koreans, because they get a lot more of that sort of stuff rather than conversational narratives and so on, where mimetics turn up more. Is that worth investigating? Yeah, yeah, maybe, yeah, so. But it's very difficult to go back to these participants. So that's one thing that is difficult, but yeah. But one thing that I note about the teaching materials, they don't contextualize mimetics so much. They often use and have a list of mimetics referring to pain. And when there's a situation, hospitalization, a dialogue or something. So that might not help L2 learn so much in terms of. I mean just anecdotally, I remember when I was learning, that we would never have anything, never you wouldn't find them in class. Or they would tell you, gata, gata, and you know, kura, kura and so on. But it wasn't until you actually went to Japan and started using them, you heard the context and so we actually used them. Yeah, so it's interesting to find whether being in Japan helps them to use these words or not, yeah, yeah, thank you. Yes, Hannah? Yeah, I had a question about, you made this point that English speakers, I think, needed some encouragement maybe to kind of elaborate on their descriptions. And I wondered if you had any thoughts about what role that played. And it sort of links actually to the teaching idea. So whether they almost feel that they're being encouraged to use certain descriptive things that they've learned. Or if you have a general feeling about that. Yeah, that's interesting because, so Korean speakers are also encouraged to elaborate more. But they didn't use so many mimetics when they were asked to elaborate. So they would say, so sometimes the interviewer said, what kind of noise? I mean as if it was, you know, it was almost as if she was trying to elicit mimetic, sound mimetic. But then the Korean speakers often said, very loud noise or something like that. And but more English speakers would say, like boom or something like that. And I don't know why that was the case. But yeah, but English speakers, when they are asked to elaborate, did come up with innovative mimetics, but not Korean speakers so much. Yes. I wonder if there were any future plans to look at the types of gestures that they used with the different mimetics. So we know from Keter and Azurex words that English and deafening speakers gesture differently about these kinds of motion events with those videos. And we know that people who gesture in their second language gesture somewhere between their first and second language. So I was wondering maybe with English speakers are they using more mimetics than Korean speakers? And they're also including more half and manner in their gesture or something like that. So it might be, not just the binary presence of the gesture, but the types of gesture. Yes, we are looking at the discretion of manner by gesture and so, and we were comparing this discretion of manner gesture with what was found by, I mean, compared with English native. That was gesture. Yeah, so, yeah, Go back and Brown has studied English Japanese bilinguals in the different, Japanese speakers who have learned English as a second language. So we are trying to see if what they found is applicable to those English speakers who have learned Japanese as a second language. And so, yeah, that's ongoing, but the data set is unfortunately not so large, but we are trying to see the type of, whether they describe past and manner. And also we are looking at whether what Keter, Keter said about some of the events like the swinging, swinging and the conflation of motion, motion events like rolling is observed by English speakers, if we learn Japanese as a second language. Yeah, we're looking at that. Yes. It'd be interesting to actually to have a comparison with Italian speakers, not in Japanese, because in Italian, you have way more. Yeah, it'd be interesting, isn't it? Massive amount of time to know. Yeah. You were saying Korean and English, but also Italian, I think it's interesting. Yeah, sounds interesting, yeah. Yes? I think one of the issues to get around to address the issue of individual variation is with the, you need to like determine, one of the questions is when they speak their L1 and then compare that to when they speak their L2. So it's a within and between subject comparison, because one of the problems you have is the numbers, right? If you have N1, it doesn't tell us anything about what they do at a specific stage. You need a larger data set to be able to make any generalizations or not. So, but I'm actually not so interested in, I mean, I think it's really varies among individuals. Well, this is, yeah, but to get across, I mean, when you're saying it depends on the individual in order to get over the individual level, you need a larger data set. Because the individual variation, yes, we know. Some people speak large, some people speak a little. I mean, there is a lot of individual variation, but it's the N that gets you out of that problem, right, of the use of certain kind of things. Right. The other one is, so when you did the experiment, the interlocutor was a confederate. So was it always the same? How many confederates did you have? For Japanese? For eliciting the data, yeah. Yeah, only one Japanese speaker. Yeah, so what that tells you is that you need to kind of control for her behavior. Because the question is, when did she ask the question? Yeah, so I asked her to wait to ask any elaboration, I mean, the clarification questions, until they sort of complete their description. So I did ask that. And did she always ask for an elaboration? Almost, but if it's already quite elaborate, she didn't. So you're biasing your sample? But I wanted to be natural too. If one has already provided very elaborate description, it's kind of, might make them a bit uncomfortable. And it's kind of, but anyway, yeah, so if it's already quite elaborate, then she didn't ask any further questions. Yeah, so you're biasing the sample? That's a problem. That's for sure, but... Well, if you have two chances to use something, or if you only have one, so if you have your superior people who are not even asked for more, then it's not surprising. Yeah, but you can always look at the first description only, and there are two, I mean, there's... Yeah, you can do that, so, yeah. So that's why the second one is problematic. The second one can be problematic, yeah, so, yeah, for the, when we talk about frequency... It's going to be elaborate, yeah, exactly. When we talk about, yeah, think about, you know, examine frequency, yes, that's why we, yeah. So when we are only interested in frequency, I think. But I thought in terms of, you know, accompaniment of gesture, I thought we can look at both second, first attempt and the second attempt. So that's, do you think that gesture would also be different? It's, if gesture that accompany the first description, and gesture that accompany the mimetics that L2 speakers used after they were asked to elaborate, do you think that's different? Maybe, possibly, yeah. One of the biggest questions is like, why are you looking at gesture, right? So one is, you know, the question you're asking, and this question is about, you know, do you gesture or not, but what does it mean, right? So the interesting part about this, what is the cognitive implication for it? Not just, so if you have a gesture or not, so why is this relevant? Why do you care about this? And why do we not? So is it in terms of learning that it helps or that it distracts? So is it cognitively being processed as a, with the sensory thing that should make it easier? Because there's an iconic. Yeah, that's the assumption, but yeah. Or is it the other way around, right? I think, yeah, but different possibilities, especially for second language speakers. Right, so then the hypothesis needs to predict systematically what it would do for the speakers of one or the other, and this is why the within speaker comparison is important to their L1s. So we, yeah. For example, when you have the English speaker, right, and the English speaker in the first attempt doesn't use one, and in the second attempt uses one, one of the things is, so one of the thick question is the compensatory nature of gesture. We know from the L2 studies or from the fluency studies that actually gesture is not compensatory. Right. Compensatorily used in terms of using more iconics. Yes, they gesture sometimes more, but they're not using more iconics, right? So what, from the data that you showed, the interesting part was that it was always just a manner gesture and not a manner path. That's true. For the English speakers, you would expect a manner path conflated one. So when it comes to the influence of the L1. Yeah. Actually, English speakers did not use so much conflation, manner of... Yeah, that's interesting, right? Yeah, yeah. There was lots of separate one. Uh-huh, that's what I saw. And also, only path. Goro goro. Goro goro korobimashita or something like that. So manner of conflation is something like this, going, rolling down. But Japanese speakers are said to do... Goro goro goro gatte ikimashita or something like that. And yeah, those English speakers did not use manner path conflation much. So that was interesting to us too. I mean, a number is small, but yes. So this is a conversation that could probably go on for hours between us. Is there anyone else, any more questions? With your interviews. Mm-hm. or do you have any data on what the motivation for learning Japanese for the students? I think so, but I have to... I was too busy looking at this, and I haven't read the transcript of the data so much, but I think so, I think I did. So, primarily from the institution? Yes, they are all universities. Well, not all, but mostly university students, yeah. Korean speakers are all university students. Here, the English speakers, mostly university students, yeah. And also on slide 19, you showed Japanese and Korean... Okay, so... But then there was an influence, because I don't know much about it. Influence of what? Influence of one language to the other. I think, yeah, yeah. So, in the case of... Yes, actually, I said that the Korean speakers used a lot of mimetics, just a lot of mimetics for rolling events, and in Korean, there's tegul, tegul, right? So, that's a bit like kurukuru. Don't you think? But, do you think? Do you think so? But anyway... I'm not a mimetic. But anyway, so that's one. The other thing that Korean speakers used a lot, this chuu... chuu... My pronunciation is not so good, obviously. All the way. Go up all... Chuu, chuu, okay. Yeah, okay. So, in Japanese, there's a similar element, zutto. So, Korean speakers used a lot of zutto. Zutto, zutto. Chuu, chuu. So, this meaning is similar, and you see that form is slightly similar, zutto, chuu. Ah, historical link. I don't know about historical link. Yeah, yeah. So, I think we better finish. We're six, seven minutes over the time. So, let us thank Noriko. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you very much.