Although you might not know what a “gesture” is (yet), most people reading this book probably have some experience with gestures. Waving, bowing, clapping, nodding, pantomiming, and pointing, are just some of the many gestures that you may have encountered. As humans, we use many conventionalized gestures that we learn throughout our lives and regularly produce gestures alongside language (Goldin-Meadow 2005). One way of examining the evolution of human gesture, and potentially human language, is to study gestural communication in other species. Researchers in great ape gestural communication tend to define a gesture as an intentional, mechanically ineffective movement of the limbs, head, or body that is used to communicate (Townsend et al. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12289" data-track="click" data-track-action="reference anchor" data-track-label="link" data-test="citation-ref" aria-label="Reference 2016">2016). All great apes use gestures to communicate (Call and Tomasello 2007), and there is growing evidence of gestural communication across the primate taxa (Macaca mulatta, M. nemestrina, M. arctoides, Maestripieri 2005; Macaca radiata, Gupta and Sinha 2016; Macaca Sylvanus, Hesler and Fischer 2007; Papio anubis, Bourjade et al. 2014).

Up Next in Gesture Research (Conclusion)

The focus on great ape gesture as a window into the evolution of human language has led to the formulation of research questions around inheritance or acquisition, as well as cognition. Tomasello and Byrne (and colleagues), have focussed intently on how gestures emerge during ontogeny, with the former arguing that they are ritualized and the latter that they are innate (Call and Tomasello 2007; Byrne et al. 2017). Surrounding this discussion is the assertion that gestures are intentional, i.e. they have the quality of aboutness (Brentano 1874), but despite our best collaborative efforts we still have not fully resolved the case for intentionality in non-human communication (Townsend et al. 2016). The question of intentionality has been central because it is the main way that we differentiate gesture from other body movements. I do not think that we have reached the end of this strong focus on intentionality (Graham et al. 2020), but I think many gesture researchers will agree with me when I write “that was fun, but let’s move on.” I do not mean that we should stop asking questions around intentionality, but that our field would benefit from a shift to consider the perspectives of our study species rather than strictly anthropocentric approaches.
When we take a socioecological perspective on great ape gestures, there are many research questions yet to examine. (How) do bonobos adjust their gestures according to their social relationships or their environment? Does that change depending on the type of social behaviour? (How) do bonobo gestures emerge and develop through ontogeny? Is there subtle inter-individual or inter-group variation in gesture types that are undetectable in current categorization, but that could be detected through programmes like DeepLabCut? Are all gestures simply request for individuals to change behaviour (which is the only type of meaning captured by current methods) or do bonobos also use protodeclarative gestures and gesture about other types of things that may not require a response? Do bonobos ask questions? Do bonobos ever misunderstand each other’s gestures?
Space to ask these questions is important, and is something that comes through strongly in early Wamba papers. Sitting and observing bonobos and letting their behaviour guide your research questions is an underrated approach, especially in contemporary science. At Wamba, like at many primate research sites, we sit together in the evenings and chat about what has happened during the day. This primate gossip session is not included in our methodologies, but from it often emerges new and exciting ideas. Neoliberal academia is a high-paced context where one is expected to be efficient and productive; you have to have a plan. But I am constantly reminded of the joy of not having a plan, or at least having one that is loose enough to allow for the entrance of unexpected ideas. Fundamental research, driven by curiosity, is underfunded but incredibly valuable (Courchamp et al. 2015), and while I probably will not step away from questions of language evolution, I am also intrigued by questions without apparent impact. It might not be immediately apparent “why” we should care to understand bonobo communication from their perspective, ignoring language for a moment, but it would not be surprising if this basic research led us down a fruitful path. Fifty years of research at Wamba has revealed much about bonobo behaviour, including how they use gestures, but we are far from understanding everything about bonobos. I am excited for the next 50 years at Wamba, and what more we can learn about bonobo gestures in that time, especially when we are given the space to consider what the world is like to them.