ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025
Sign language encodes event structure through neuromotor dynamics: motion, muscle, and meaning.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This study provides neuromotor evidence for the embodied kinematic encoding of grammatical event structure in sign language, using time-locked motion capture and surface electromyography (EMG) recordings from fluent Deaf ÖGS signers. Methods: Drawing on the Event Visibility Hypothesis, we examine how Austrian Sign Language (ÖGS) systematically distinguishes telic and atelic verbs through both visible kinematic parameters, as well as underlying muscle activation patterns. Results: We show that telic signs (those denoting bounded, goal-directed events) have shorter duration, later deceleration, lower movement variability, and distinct spectral activation in forearm and upper-arm muscles, as compared to atelic verb signs. Telic signs showed greater EMG co-contraction but lower cross-correlation than atelic verb signs, reflecting temporally precise antagonistic muscle coordination, and suggesting that grammatical contrasts in sign language are produced based on finely tuned motor control schemas. Discussion: These results directly address current challenges in embodiment research by demonstrating replicable, interpretable neuromotor correlates of linguistic structure in a visual-manual modality. By capturing how grammatical distinctions are produced by manual articulators, we contribute high-resolution empirical data and analysis methods toward understanding embodied language and linguistic motor control. In addition, our results support the linguistic interpretation that telic verb signs are morphologically marked in a way that atelic verb signs are not.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.