Performing action has been found to have a greater impact on learning than observing action. Here we ask whether a particular type of action—the gestures that accompany talk—affect learning in a comparable way. We gave 158 6-year-old children instruction in a mental transformation task. Half the children were asked to produce a Move gesture relevant to the task; half were asked to produce a Point gesture. The children also observed the experimenter producing either a Move or Point gesture. Children who produced a Move gesture improved more than children who observed the Move gesture. Neither producing nor observing the Point gesture facilitated learning. Doing gesture promotes learning better than seeing gesture, as long as the gesture conveys information that could help solve the task.

Children with developmental language disorder (DLD; aka specific language impairment) are characterized based on deficits in language, especially morphosyntax, in the absence of other explanatory conditions. However, deficits in speech production, as well as fine and gross motor skill, have also been observed, implicating both the linguistic and motor systems. Situated at the intersection of these domains, and providing insight into both, is manual gesture. In the current work, we asked whether children with DLD showed phonological deficits in the production of novel gestures and whether gesture production at 4 years of age is related to language and motor outcomes two years later. Twenty-eight children (14 with DLD) participated in a two-year longitudinal novel gesture production study. At the first and final time points, language and fine motor skills were measured and gestures were analyzed for phonological feature accuracy, including handshape, path, and orientation. Results indicated that, while early deficits in phonological accuracy did not persist for children with DLD, all children struggled with orientation while handshape was the most accurate. Early handshape and orientation accuracy were also predictive of later language skill, but only for the children with DLD. Theoretical and clinical implications of these findings are discussed.

Purpose: Sign language, like spoken language, incorporates phonological and articulatory (or motor) processing components. Thus, the learning of novel signs, like novel spoken word forms, may be problematic for children with developmental language disorder (DLD). In the present work, we hypothesize that phonological and articulatory deficits in novel sign repetition and learning would differentiate preschool-age children with DLD from their typical peers. Method: Children with DLD ( n = 34; aged 4–5 years) and their age-matched typical peers ( n = 21) participated. Children were exposed to four novel signs, all iconic, but only two linked to a visual referent. Children imitatively produced these novel signs multiple times. We obtained measures of phonological accuracy and articulatory motion stability as well as of learning of the associated visual referent. Results: Children with DLD showed an increased number of phonological feature (i.e., handshape, path, and orientation of the hands) errors when compared with their typical peers. While articulatory variability did not overall differentiate children with DLD from typical peers, children with DLD showed instability in one novel sign that obligated bimanual oppositional movement. Semantic aspects of novel sign learning were unaffected in children with DLD. Conclusions: Deficits that have been documented in phonological organization of spoken words in children with DLD are also evident in the manual domain. Analyses of hand motion variability suggest that children with DLD do not show a generalized motor deficit, but one that is restricted to the implementation of coordinated and sequential hand motion.

No abstract