Skip to main content

Before the First Word: The Alaska Summit Through Gestures and Staging

  • Kachel Bild en:
Field notes from a linguist for a general audience (Aug 16, 1:24 pm)
 
 
On 15 August at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage, Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin met for their first face-to-face since before Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The summit ended without a ceasefire, but the opening sequence was rich in communicative signals.

Why this moment mattered

Before the first sentence was spoken, the encounter told a story. Arrival order, pacing, gaze, and touch all set expectations for what would follow. In nonverbal research, three lenses are helpful here:
  • Chronemics (timing): who arrives when, who pauses, who initiates.
  • Kinesics (body movement): posture, gait, emblematic gestures (like a thumbs‑up), and applause.
  • Haptics (touch): whether and how people touch during greetings.
Together, these elements scaffold the verbal message: friendship and businesslike cooperation under the spotlight of a geopolitical conflict.

Arrivals set the tempo (chronemics)

The split-screen view lingered on both airplane doors, creating a suspenseful, almost dialogic rhythm: door against door. Trump’s aircraft appeared first. This juxtaposition of the two doors signals co-presence (a joint appearance) and heightens the tension surrounding the question of who will open their door first.

 
planes Putin–Trump
 
Why that matters: In status negotiations, temporality performs silent political work. Door against door: the image promises parity, but the timing negotiates status.

Descending the staircases: first displays (kinesics)

First, the door of Putin’s plane opens, signaling readiness to start the encounter, but he does not appear immediately.

open door Putin.     fist bump Trump

First, the door of Putin’s plane opens—a signal of readiness for the encounter—yet he himself does not immediately appear. Then Trump emerges from his aircraft, marking his arrival with the characteristic fist salute toward the crowd, a conspicuous display of self-confidence. Only afterward does Putin step out, descending the staircase at a measured pace, while Trump is already moving toward the red carpet. Step by step, a proxemic trajectory unfolds: two bodies oriented toward a shared center.

approaching

 
Research lens: Early posture and gait prime audience inferences about energy, certainty, and availability.  Large gestures such as Trump’s fist salute function as signals that mark and amplify the moment of appearance.

Engaging at a distance: applause meets thumbs‑up

Still several meters apart, the men begin interacting. Trump faces down the carpet toward Putin and claps—a public, affiliative acknowledgment that also acts as a turn‑taking cue: I see you; step into this moment. Putin responds with a bimanual thumbs‑up, a high‑salience emblem of approval. The two gestures are complementary: applause functions as an affiliative display toward the other, while a thumbs-up serves as ratification of the other.
 
applause  thumbs up
 
Research lens: Emblems carry comparatively stable meanings across contexts. Bimanualization increases amplitude and signal strength, often chosen for television.
 

Indicating a handshake: invitation and uptake

Before they close the distance, Trump extends an open right hand—a projected handshake that functions like an invitation. Putin raises his right hand to chest height—pre‑shape for contact—visibly accepting the offer before arrival.
 
 
reaching out  accept
 
This two‑step choreography (“offer”/“uptake”) publicly commits both to affiliative touch seconds before it happens.
 
accept invitation
 
Research lens: Gesture projections forecast imminent actions and let observers anticipate alignment (Kendon’s visible action as utterance).

The handshake – and what touch does (haptics)

The handshake unfolds in stages (timed from first contact to release at ≈11 seconds on the broadcast feed):
  1. Contact while walking. As Putin continues moving forward, the shift from locomotion to stillness produces a momentary imbalance, an apparent pull that seems to draw him toward Trump. The handshake, in this framing, is not only a gesture of greeting but also a hinge between movement and pause, mobility and anchoring. What looks like a simple greeting is thus also a proxemic adjustment, binding movement and posture into a single coordinated act.

         pulling

  2. Upper-arm touch by Putin. While the handshake is still ongoing, Putin places his left hand on Trump’s right upper arm. This additional touch functions as an intensification of the gesture and at the same time suggests a subtle framing or steering of the interaction.

    first touch1

  3. Reciprocal taps by Trump. Trump mirrors with two light taps to Putin’s upper arm, converting a one‑sided escalation into a mutual touch dialogue.

    second touch

  4. Forearm/hand pats and shared laughter. Touch migrates distally (forearm, then the dorsum of the hand) as both laugh and talk—signals of ease and joint framing.

         third touch   gesture  tap  laughing

How to read it: While touch often functions as a marker of dominance in the political sphere, the reciprocal alternation here complicates such a reading. Each partner escalates and mirrors in turn, producing solidarity while maintaining status parity.

The photo‑op: performing the handshake

At the pedestal, they re‑enter a handshake primarily for the cameras—a meta‑gesture (“see us shake hands”). Trump adds a light pat to Putin's hand, a classic paternalizing accent that reads as seniority or guardianship depending on the viewer’s priors.
 
tapping   doing shaking
 
Research lens: Photo‑op greetings are ritualized reenactments (Goffman’s frame analysis), addressed not to the partner but to the ratified overhearer—the public.
 
 

What we can (and cannot) infer

  • We can say the greeting was engineered to communicate warmth and cooperation: early hand extension, mutual smiling, emblematic approval, prolonged contact, reciprocal arm-touches, and a shared vehicle all push in that direction.
  • We cannot read private intentions or outcomes from gestures alone. The same choreography can serve different strategic aims — for example, projecting goodwill while bargaining hard behind closed doors. The day still ended with no announced ceasefire.

Why this matters for audiences

Televised diplomacy is theatre as well as talk. Small embodied moves — when doors open, who steps first, how long hands stay clasped — are the “closed captions” for power and affiliation. Linguists and gesture researchers call these emblems, rituals, and proxemic choices, and they reliably shape how third-party viewers feel about the interaction — especially in the first 30 seconds before any policy language lands.
 

References

  • On how gestures project and coordinate action: Kendon, A. Gesture: Visible Action as Utterance. Cambridge University Press. 

  • On emblems and their conventional meanings: Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. The Repertoire of Nonverbal Behavior. Semiotica / Consulting Psychologists Press. 

  • On proxemics and spatial norms: Hall, E. T. The Hidden Dimension. Doubleday.

  • Accessible overview of haptics and chronemics: Knapp, M., Hall, J., & Horgan, T. Nonverbal Communication. Wadsworth/Cengage. 

  • On interactional mirroring: Chartrand, T., & Bargh, J. The Chameleon Effect: The Perception–Behavior Link and Social Interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (APA). 

  • On how public rituals are staged for audiences: Goffman, E. Frame Analysis. Harvard University Press. 

 
 

gesture in politics, Trump, Putin, Alaska summit, handshake, body langauge

  • Hits: 1266

Embodied sharpness: exploring the slicing gesture in political talk shows

In political discussions, words are not the only means of communication. Gestures emphasize viewpoints and enhance the rhetorical impact of speakers. The slicing gesture plays a significant role in this context. My current study examines its use in German political talk shows.

What is the slicing gesture?

The slicing gesture is a recurrent gesture in which the flat hand moves downward with its edge facing downward. This gesture conveys sharpness, determination, and clarity. By using it, speakers in political talk shows can define their arguments and reinforce their position in the discourse.

What functions does the slicing gesture fulfill?

According to my study, the slicing gesture serves various communicative functions:

Definition of a discourse object: It is used to define ideas or arguments.

Discursive function: It enhances the argumentative weight of a statement and increases its semantic precision.

Metapragmatic meaning: The gesture signals that the speaker aims to clearly define something.

Stance-taking: It helps express a personal stance or opinion.

Notably, the slicing gesture often occurs in sequences, meaning it is repeatedly performed. In such contexts, it acquires the metapragmatic meaning of “defining something sharply and clearly.”

 

Gestures with rhetorical impact

In political talk shows, communication is not only about arguments but also about impression management and self-presentation. The study demonstrates that politicians and experts use recurrent gestures to embody rhetorical qualities. In the case of the slicing gesture, these qualities include sharpness, determination, and engagement.

An interesting aspect is the bodily perception of these gestures. Performers experience the movement themselves, reinforcing the determination they aim to convey. Likewise, audiences can perceive this sharpness through observation.

Conclusion: More than just a manual movement

These findings illustrate that political communication relies not only on linguistic means but also on gestural expressions. The slicing gesture functions as a semiotic resource that allows speakers to structure arguments and visually and physically reinforce their rhetorical positioning.

Source:

Ladewig, Silva H. (2025). Embodied sharpness: exploring the slicing gesture in political talk shows, In: Frontiers in Psychology 15. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1494192

Trump, Putin, Alaska summit, handshake

  • Hits: 2073

The Ring Gesture: How Politicians Make a Point Gesturally

  • Teaser zum Blogbeitrag EN: In political communication, the ring gesture is one of the most widespread and oldest hand movements we know. It has been documented in European culture for about 2500 years
  • Kachel Bild en:
  • Blog Beitragsbild auf der linken Seite EN:
  • Blog Beitragsbild in der Mitte EN:

What is the ring gesture?

The ring gesture shows a specific hand shape where the thumb and index finger meet at the fingertips to form a (more or less) round shape—a ring. Sometimes it is also performed with the middle finger touching the thumb. The position of the remaining fingers can vary: they are either spread apart or bent.

Symbolism and use of the ring gesture

The ring gesture, often referred to as the "precision grip," is a fascinating manifestation of conventionalized body language used diversely in political and social contexts. Its form-meaning relationships are stable, and it can carry different connotations in various cultures.

While the gesture is recognized as a sign for "everything is okay" in some Northern European countries, it can be interpreted as a serious insult in other parts, such as Southern Europe. This shows how cultural differences affect the perception and interpretation of gestures.

In the political arena, the ring gesture is often used to symbolize precision and clarity in argumentation. The gesture is frequently moved up and down. The more emphatically an argument is made, the more often the gesture is repeated from top to bottom.

Example - Obama

Interestingly, Michael Lempert observed a significant change in Barack Obama's behavior during the first presidential debate. Obama staged himself not only verbally but also gesturally as a precise speaker. The ring gesture, referred to by Lempert as the "precision grip," served as a semiotic resource for Obama to not only make a precise point but also to present himself as "being sharp."

Conclusion

The ring gesture shows how deeply gestures are rooted in human communication and how they can transcend cultural and temporal boundaries. It serves as a fascinating example of how gestures are used in the political arena and beyond to shape discourses and influence debates. It is also an example of how, in certain communication contexts like debates, gestures with pragmatic functions are used more frequently than descriptive gestures.

Sources

About the ring gesture in general:

Müller, C., Ring-gestures across cultures and times: Dimensions of variation, in Body - Language - Communication. An International Handbook on Multimodality in Human Interaction., C. Cornelia Müller, A., Fricke, E., Ladewig, S. H., McNeill, D., Bressem, J., Editor. 2014, De Gruyter Mouton: Berlin/Boston. p. 1511-1522.

About the ring gesture in German:

Neumann, R., The conventionalization of the ring gesture in German discourse, in The semantics and pragmatics of everyday gestures, C. Müller and R. Posner, Editors. 2004, Weidler: Berlin. p. 217-223.

About the ring gesture in Barack Obama:

Lempert, M., Barack Obama, being sharp: Indexical order in the pragmatics of precision-grip gesture. Gesture, 2011. 11(3): p. 241-270.

gesture, ring gesture, gesture in politics, pragmatic gesture, recurrent gesture

  • Hits: 2257

What functions do gestures actually fulfil?

  • Teaser zum Blogbeitrag EN: Gestures are communicative movements of the body and include movements of the hands and arms, the head and even the eyes. Gestures are produced spontaneously and ad-hoc at the moment of speaking. They can be "freely invented" or already established and therefore conventionalised. Examples of the latter are so-called emblems, such as the upwardly stretched thumb or the victory gesture, but also recurrent gestures such as the gesture of holding away or the hand pointing upwards. Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
  • Kachel Bild en:
  • Blog Beitragsbild auf der linken Seite EN:
  • Blog Beitragsbild in der Mitte EN:

Description

Gestures can represent objects, actions, spatial relationships or abstract concepts. They create references to the extra-linguistic reality and are thus able to shape parts of the propositional content of multimodal utterances. This function is particularly prevalent in spontaneously created gestures that imitate the characteristics of the objects or actions depicted or represent spatial relationships and proportions. Spontaneously created gestures, such as the representation of an action, the tracing of a shape or spatial indications, form the majority of the gestures we use every day.

Expression

The expressive function of gestures refers to the physical expression of the speaker's emotions, feelings and attitudes. These are not only shown in the form of the gesture, such as a clenched fist, but especially in the way in which the gesture is performed, for example in an energetic, powerful movement.

Call

Gestures can fulfil an appellative function by addressing the interlocutor directly and demanding a reaction or action. This function manifests itself in gestures that function at an interactional level and often establish a reference to the addressee. Gestures with an appellative function can be used, among other things, to mark parts of an utterance and make them relevant for the addressee (discursive function). This is often found in gestures that emphasise parts of an utterance by moving up and down. However, gestures can also perform a communicative action themselves (performative function), for example when the open hand is used to request an answer or to assign someone a place. They thus interact with speech on a pragmatic level

The complexity of gestures is revealed in their ability to fulfil several of these functions simultaneously, whereby one of the functions usually dominates. This multifunctionality, combined with the close connection between gesture and speech, emphasises the complexity of human communication and the central role that gestures play in it.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

References:

An introduction to language and gesture can be found in:

Ladewig, Silva H. (2018). Gestures as part of language - Modern gesture research. In: Moike Jessen, Johan Bloomberg & Jörg Roche (eds.), Cognitive Linguistics. (Compendium DaF/DaZ, Vol. 2) Tübingen: Narr Verlag, 290-300.

Ladewig, Silva H. (2018) Gestures and their meaning. In: Moike Jessen, Johan Bloomberg & Jörg Roche (eds.), Cognitive Linguistics. (Compendium DaF/DaZ, Vol. 2) Tübingen: Narr Verlag, 300-31

https://www.lexikon-mla.de/lexikon/moderne-gestikforschung/

For the three functions mentioned, see:

Müller, C. (2013), Gestures as a medium of expression: The linguistic potential of gestures. In: C. Müller, A. Cienki, E. Fricke, S. H. Ladewig, D. McNeill & S. Teßendorf (eds.) Body - Language - Communication: An International Handbook on Multimodality in Human Interaction. Berlin, Boston: Mouton de Gruyter, 202-217. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110261318.202

Müller, C., Ladewig, S. H. & Bressem, J. (2013), Gesture and speech from a linguistic point of view. In: C. Müller, A. Cienki, E. Fricke, S. H. Ladewig, D. McNeill & S. Teßendorf (eds.) Body - Language - Communication. An International Handbook on Multimodality in Human Interaction. (Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Science 38.1.). Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, 55-81. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110261318.55

Müller, C. (1998), Redebegleitende Geste: Kulturgeschichte, Theorie, Sprachvergleich. Berlin: Arno Spitz.

On the upward-facing flat hand, see:

Cooperrider, K., Abner, N.& Goldin-Meadow, S. (2018). The Palm-Up Puzzle: Meanings and Origins of a Widespread Form in Gesture and Sign, Frontiers in Communication, 3(23). DOI: 10.3389/fcomm.2018.00023

Kendon, A. (2004), Gesture. Visible action as utterance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511807572

Müller, C. (2004), Forms and uses of the Palm Up Open Hand. A case of a gesture family? In: C. Müller & R. Posner (eds.) Semantics and Pragmatics of everyday gestures Berlin: Weidler, 234-256.

On the gesture of holding away see:

Bressem, J. & Wegener, C. (2021). Handling talk: A cross-linguistic perspective on discursive functions of gestures in German and Savosavo, Gesture, 20(2), 219-253. **https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.19041.bre

Bressem, J., Stein, N. & Wegener, C. (2015). Structuring and highlighting speech-Discursive functions of holding away gestures in Savosavo, G. Ferré et M. Tutton (ed.) Proceedings of GESPIN, 4, 49-54.

 

  • Hits: 1874

Dr. Silva Ladewig

Georg-August-University
Seminar für Deutsche Philologie
Käte-Hamburger-Weg 3
D-37073 Göttingen

Copyright © Silva H. Ladewig, 2024, alle Rechte vorbehalten.