Talk:Anatomical terms of motion/Archive 1

Dorsiflexed hands
dorsiflexed hands as in the kind that cause RSI needs to be integrated someware. I'm making this note for any author interested to do that. Myself too much typing is something to be avoided. Nastajus 12:28, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

"Apposition" vs opposition
With reference to apposition being a motion associated with thumb grasping; this should read opposition. Apposition is a literary technique. For reference, consider the opponens pollicis muscle, involved in this motion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.186.96.55 (talk) 01:14, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Merging
A better-written and more scholarly article on the same topic exists at Human anatomical terms, but it also covers material Anatomical terms of location. In my opinion, the best parts of this article and Anatomical terms of location ought to be merged into Human anatomical terms. Sarah crane 22:34, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I disagree, simply because the study of flexors/extensors, etc also applies to other animals, all the way down to arthropods. -Emily Vogt, 01 Nov 2006

I also disagree. The organization of this article is complex, but nice; it would be more difficult if it did not stand alone. Also it goes beyond just humans. Myron 04:23, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

mention of internal/external rotation
I've only briefly scanned through the articles I could find on anatomical terms etc but I've not seen any mention of internal/external rotation (as referred to extensively in discussions on the lower limb in particular)
 * Thank you for your suggestion! When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the  link at the top. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to).  The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills.  New contributors are always welcome. --Arcadian 17:35, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I believe the sections should not be merged, because they are already quite information-dense. A merged article would become unreadable.

I was looking for specifics on kinesiology, which is how I wound up here. I am a teacher who focuses on learning styles at the beginning of each semester to help my developing freshman college students to figure out how to learn better. If I had been sent to the Anatomical terms of motion section, as I would be if Kinesiology is merged here, I would not find this helpful at all in instructing my students. As it is, my background allows me to adjust the information to my needs. Thank you for listening. --Bonnie Hsia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.65.46.36 (talk) 23:05, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

2007-02-1 Automated pywikipediabot message
--CopyToWiktionaryBot 08:40, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Merge?
The Anatomical terms of location page has been thoroughly re-worked, it might be worth looking at both pages to see about a merge, wikilinking or duplication of information. WLU 16:49, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Replace some images
The large image in the section on special motions could be replaced with these smaller image. Currently several motions have multiple images in a way that feels superfluous.

Some of these images are clearer than the photographies, especially the inversion/eversion of the foot and opposition images. -- CFCF  (talk · contribs · email) 08:01, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I am a bit of a visual learner myself, and feel that an image speaks a thousand words, particularly with Anatomy. For that reason, I've been trying to include multiple images of different types of motion in normal circumstances, as I feel it is much easier to understand anatomy with images attached. That said I have had to make do with some pretty poor images and agree we should only include images of high quality (the thong images come to mind almost immediately!). With your chopped-up images, I'll get to work immediately replacing them. --LT910001 (talk) 04:49, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

A few other classes of motion?
I was thinking of adding some material to the text of the article, but thought that I would discuss some points first. If what I say stimulates you to write something yourself, please do not let the fact that I have mentioned it first inhibit you from pre-empting; I do not have any text cut and dried.

1: The lede says that "Muscles drive all the movements in the human body..."; this is ultimately largely true, though there are a few exceptions such as osmotic effects, but even ignoring those exceptions, there are some important intermediate effects, such as inflation and elasticity. It seems to me that something of the type should be given appropriate attention. 2: What about some words such as de/inflation, invagination and evagination, extrusion, intrusion, peristalsis. 3: We have reciprocal movement as back-and-forth motion, but what about balanced alternation of movement, such as the swaying of each of the body as the other side moves forward in walking? Isn't that a form of reciprocation? Whatever we call it, it is important in nature, whether in bipeds and tetrapods. 4: This article seems to be concentrated on human biology, but there are some types of locomotion that do not occur here; the motion of Gastropoda for example. Does anyone know which lacunae deserve attention either here or in other articles? Comments please? JonRichfield (talk) 19:32, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi, you bring up excellent points.


 * 1) This should be corrected, and inflation and elasticity should be mentioned. (I've changed from all to many.)
 * 2) This article focuses on human anatomical terms of motion, and if we want to add any other non-human motions they should go under a Other animals section, at least so far. It is possible that this section can create a new article, but the human focus is to make the article coherent. I feel we should separate any non-human info, seeing as many are only looking for human-related info.
 * 3) Not knowledgeable on non-human anatomy, same answer as 2.
 * 4) Same.
 * -- CFCF  (talk · contribs · email) 20:54, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
 * The article begins "Muscles drive many movements of the human body, both voluntary and involuntary..." and the title should reflect this, working "human" in somewhere. Obviously it is not much use for birds, snakes & fish etc. Anatomical terms of location is very different, aiming to cover at least all vertebrates (I can't judge how fully). Johnbod (talk) 21:56, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing this out. I agree, this article ought to include information about animal anatomy. Could include a separate "Motion in animals" section. As this is a FL candidate please cite what you include in the article and if possible add some relevant images consistent with the existing style. --LT910001 (talk) 22:45, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I was thinking of just keeping the existing scope & changing the article title to reflect it. Opening up to animals would involve a lot of work; I think you'd have to pull out from the FL nomination until it was done. Johnbod (talk) 02:12, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Further images
I do not think the first two are high quality, but the third is a good example of circumduction.--Tom (LT) (talk) 01:03, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Addit:Have added another image below: --Tom (LT) (talk) 21:23, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

examples of external and internal rotation
I'd like any input from anyone who has some to give. I saw on the article page that there was a discrepancy. The lotus posture was given as an example of external rotation of the leg and yet pointing the feet to face each other was given as an example of internal rotation. I looked in my book Becoming A Supple Leopard and saw how external rotation does refer to pointing the feet to face each other in that book. Surely there is a discrepancy there. I am not familiar enough with body mechanics to say who is right or who is wrong, or even if there is a right and wrong in this case, so I would be happy to be told what's up. I am going to edit the page for now by removing the (referenced) part that disagreed with my book Becoming A Supple Leopard, placing it here, and backing up the example of lotus posture with information from my book. Let me know if I did good, too, please. "For example, pointing the feet to face each other, or when the arms are turned so that the palms face the back of the body, are examples of internal rotation. For example, rotation of the feet or arms in the opposite direction to that above is an example of external rotation. "

makeswell (talk) 04:27, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi, I'm one of the editors of this article. Your confusion here lies in "of the leg". The leg has different joints and "external rotation" describes what happens at a particular joint only. So when the leg is externally rotated at the hip, the thighs point away from the hip. The external rotation at the hip doesn't affect the position of the feet - the ankles are the relevant joint there. I hope that clarifies things. Thanks for your additions to the article, too. I removed them because of what I described -- external rotation at the hip of the leg doesn't necessarily mean the feet are in a certain position, as that depends on three joints (knee, hip, ankle). Cheers, --Tom (LT) (talk) 07:24, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

trohlear's intorsion
The table of cranial nerves page redirects here. As a suggestion, "intort" could have its own page, redirect to a page that contains the word intort, or be replaced by a word that is found in English dictionaries. Vokesk (talk) 15:40, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I have replied at Talk:Table of cranial nerves. --Tom (LT) (talk) 00:21, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Ankle distinction emphasis needed
I am having a heck of a time mentally grasping the distinction between pro-supi nation and in-e version. Here are the pictures the article uses for things that look pretty similar:

It would be nice if both pictures used the same foot to explain what I mean, a flipped image of one or the other might better illustrate it.

Basically:
 * Inversion looks a LOT like supination, both look to move the big toe toward the middle
 * Eversion looks a LOT like pronation, both look to move the big toe away from the middle

I mean, I know the concept that VERSION is about tilting while NATION is about rotation... and I can see a bit of the differences in the pictures, but there still seems to be a lot of overlap in the actions and I am wondering if there would be a way for this article to better explain the differences in the actions.

Like for example if it could explain muscles in common between the actions and muscles not in common. Or explain certain body building actions that target one action but not the other.

Especially since many actions that feet do are not blatently one or the other it is really hard to tell what is happening here.

A whole article dedicated to explaining the distinctions and importances of each motion would not be wasted, but even just expanding these sections to elaborate (or a new one focusing on the comparison) would be very helpful. Very confused by these.

It is a lot easier to grasp wrist motions. Not sure why... maybe different joint structures that are less square. I figure pronation and supination of the hand-forearm are the equivalent to pronation and supination of the foot-lowerLeg. Not sure what the equivalent of inversion and eversion of the ankle is in respect to the wrist... perhaps radial and ulnar deviation... hoping someone can answer that too.

It would also be good to explain the common-phrasing of certain terms in respect to proper anatomical terms. For example in http://www.methodistorthopedics.com/posterior-tibial-tendon-problems it mentions regarding the posterior tibial tendon:
 * helps turn the foot inward during walking

I did not know whether that meant inversion or supination. In looking up the muscle associated with that tendon, it says the contraction, it says that it produces inversion, so I figure it meant that. But to casual readers who do not read the muscle article, it is hard to know what expressions like -turn in the foot- mean. It might even be used to refer to both for all I know. I would like to know if we have articles about common-phrasing or slang in regard to these motion terms too. --Ranze (talk) 18:00, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Speech and gesture
First - Vocal speech involves anatomical reference points and terms indicating motion and generalised abstract dimensional location of the tongue and other oral articulators. (Sign language and studies of gesture likewise has a complex range of terms, and there are a wide range of other human activities using the anatomy with their own terminologies.) It would be good to at least point readers to such terminologies where anatomical labelling is critical rather than merely incidental or derived. There are a few gestural illustrations, but the whole article is depressingly medical :-)

For example, the section "Special motions of the jaw and teeth" includes a seemingly unusual use of protrusion/retrusion, plus occlusion. Occlusion as far as I am aware refers to contact, not clear from the definition "motion of the mandibula towards the maxilla making contact between the teeth".

Here are the terms used in phonetics / speech science, and necessary for people interested in speech, head and neck musculature, and a set of dimensions different to the others offered, even the "superficial and deep" pairing on the sister page "anatomical terms of location"

"Constriction / degrees of stricture". These equivalent terms/dimensions of location-motion cover both approximation and contact of two articulators used in speech, such as the upper and lower lips, or tongue and palate, etc. A stricture of complete closure in the oral cavity means a complete occlusion of the airway. A stricture of close approximation indicates anatomic proximity close enough to generate turbulent airflow and acoustic frication. A stricture of open approximation indicates anatomic proximity too wide to audibly constrict the airway. A vowel typically has a stricture of open approximation, so a vowel-consonant-vowel sequence involves motions from open approximation to something more constricted, and back again. The consonant could have complete occlusion, for example, and this could be at different locations between the larynx (a glottal stop) to the lips (a labial stop). In each case, the vocal tract is narrowed through voluntary muscular action to block it, with a range of mechanisms.

The oral tract is oriented from rostral to caudal, and is flexible during speech and swallowing, so that these degrees of approximation form a different dimension from those otherwise mentioned on these 2 pages.

Second - it would nice to have a pointer to an article about the kinematics and underlying control of motion in these dimensions of motion. The article on Kinesiology is not well linked.

and, of course, the article on Kinesiology itself is, as usual, focused on skeletal kinematics and control, missing out the muscular hydrostat of the tongue (and lips), where an entirely different model is required to deal with the range of motions and degrees of freedom involved, which also don't fit well to a simple Agonist/Antagonist model due to the lack of skeletal bracing and attachment.

At leasta link to this following page would be a real pleasure for me to see - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articulatory_phonetics

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.83.93.22 (talk) 14:37, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Plantar flexion decreases the angle?
"Plantar flexion is the movement which decreases the angle" Shouldn't this be "increases"?

If not, then the page on Soleus_Muscle should be changed because it says "The action of the calf muscles, including the soleus, is plantarflexion of the foot (that is, they increase the angle between the foot and the leg)." Ddunn801 (talk) 22:26, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure this is correct as written. Notice it says "the angle between the sole... and the BACK of the leg". I guess you could also say plantar flexion INCREASES the angle, measured at the front, but it's natural and customary to discuss flexion in terms of decreasing angles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.215.34.6 (talk) 01:55, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Why does "excycloduction" redirect here?
What does it mean? Not mentioned in article. 86.130.41.222 (talk) 15:35, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the delay... this refers to an eye movement - I have changed the redirect to point to the relevant part of that article. --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:14, 10 March 2017 (UTC)