scholarly journals Animal cognition and the evolution of human language: why we cannot focus solely on communication

2019 ◽  
Vol 375 (1789) ◽  
pp. 20190046 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. Tecumseh Fitch
Keyword(s):  
Communication Systems ◽  
Animal Communication ◽  
Language Evolution ◽  
Animal Cognition ◽  
Small Subset ◽  
Human Language ◽  
Human Communication ◽  
Theme Issue ◽  
Royal Road ◽  
Communicative Signals

Studies of animal communication are often assumed to provide the ‘royal road’ to understanding the evolution of human language. After all, language is the pre-eminent system of human communication: doesn't it make sense to search for its precursors in animal communication systems? From this viewpoint, if some characteristic feature of human language is lacking in systems of animal communication, it represents a crucial gap in evolution, and evidence for an evolutionary discontinuity. Here I argue that we should reverse this logic: because a defining feature of human language is its ability to flexibly represent and recombine concepts, precursors for many important components of language should be sought in animal cognition rather than animal communication. Animal communication systems typically only permit expression of a small subset of the concepts that can be represented and manipulated by that species. Thus, if a particular concept is not expressed in a species' communication system this is not evidence that it lacks that concept. I conclude that if we focus exclusively on communicative signals, we sell the comparative analysis of language evolution short. Therefore, animal cognition provides a crucial (and often neglected) source of evidence regarding the biology and evolution of human language. This article is part of the theme issue ‘What can animal communication teach us about human language?’

scholarly journals Reflections on Protolanguage: Evidence from Studies on Animal Communication

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 113
Author(s):  
Aziz Jaber ◽  
Osama Omari ◽  
Mujdey Abudalbuh
Keyword(s):  
Convergent Evolution ◽  
Communication Systems ◽  
Animal Communication ◽  
Language Evolution ◽  
Intermediate Stage ◽  
Necessary Condition ◽  
Human Language ◽  
Human Communication ◽  
Semantic Compositionality ◽  
Human Animal

The paper is a critique of the existence of protolanguage based on some personal reasoning given the findings of previous research. This paper focuses on the nature of semantic compositionality and its existence (and therefore manifestations) in animal communication systems as evidence of the existence of protolanguage. This compositional state that started to color human language has paved the way to hierarchical syntax and thus has helped in the emergence of a recursive, fully complex language. On the other hand, non-human animal communication systems, including those examined in this paper, have not managed to progress beyond the holophrastic state, and thus remained highly confined and unproductive. This is explicated by the observation that these systems do not employ discrete meaningful units that can be used recursively in different linguistic contexts, a necessary condition for a system of communication to be compositional. This is interesting in the study of language evolution as it could suggest that human language could not have evolved from a rudimentary, intermediate stage called protolanguage. Speculating about the existence of protolanguage subsumes convergent evolution (e.g. songbirds). The lack of semantic compositionality in non-human communication system suggests that convergent evolution is hard to prove, which puts the existence of protolanguage on the line. This thesis is, however, far from being established and requires a lot of further research to prove its validity.   Received: 21 September 2020 / Accepted: 3 November 2020 / Published: 17 January 2021

scholarly journals Construction grammar for monkeys?

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Pleyer ◽  
Stefan Hartmann
Keyword(s):  
Communication Systems ◽  
Animal Communication ◽  
Language Evolution ◽  
Construction Grammar ◽  
Alarm Calls ◽  
Human Language ◽  
Communication Research ◽  
Evolution Of Language ◽  
Linguistic Communication ◽  
Key Issues

Abstract In recent years, multiple researchers working on the evolution of language have put forward the idea that the theoretical framework of usage-based approaches and Construction Grammar is highly suitable for modelling the emergence of human language from pre-linguistic or proto-linguistic communication systems. This also raises the question of whether usage-based and constructionist approaches can be integrated with the analysis of animal communication systems. In this paper, we review possible avenues where usage-based, constructionist approaches can make contact with animal communication research, which in turn also has implications for theories of language evolution. To this end, we first give an overview of key assumptions of usage-based and constructionist approaches before reviewing some key issues in animal communication research through the lens of usage-based, constructionist approaches. Specifically, we will discuss how research on alarm calls, gestural communication and symbol-trained animals can be brought into contact with usage-based, constructionist theorizing. We argue that a constructionist view of animal communication can yield new perspectives on its relation to human language, which in turn has important implications regarding the evolution of language. Importantly, this theoretical approach also generates hypotheses that have the potential of complementing and extending results from the more formalist approaches that often underlie current animal communication research.

scholarly journals Scratching beneath the surface: intentionality in great ape signal production

2019 ◽  
Vol 375 (1789) ◽  
pp. 20180403 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kirsty E. Graham ◽  
Claudia Wilke ◽  
Nicole J. Lahiff ◽  
Katie E. Slocombe
Keyword(s):  
Communication Systems ◽  
Animal Communication ◽  
Research Effort ◽  
Great Ape ◽  
Cognitive Mechanisms ◽  
Theme Issue ◽  
Intentional Communication ◽  
Evolutionary Origins ◽  
Signal Production ◽  
Communicative Signals

Despite important similarities having been found between human and animal communication systems, surprisingly little research effort has focussed on whether the cognitive mechanisms underpinning these behaviours are also similar. In particular, it is highly debated whether signal production is the result of reflexive processes, or can be characterized as intentional. Here, we critically evaluate the criteria that are used to identify signals produced with different degrees of intentionality, and discuss recent attempts to apply these criteria to the vocal, gestural and multimodal communicative signals of great apes and more distantly related species. Finally, we outline the necessary research tools, such as physiologically validated measures of arousal, and empirical evidence that we believe would propel this debate forward and help unravel the evolutionary origins of human intentional communication. This article is part of the theme issue ‘What can animal communication teach us about human language?’

scholarly journals Construction Grammar for Monkeys? Animal communication and its implications for language evolution in the light of usage-based linguistic theory

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Pleyer ◽  
Stefan Hartmann
Keyword(s):  
Communication Systems ◽  
Animal Communication ◽  
Language Evolution ◽  
Construction Grammar ◽  
Alarm Calls ◽  
Human Language ◽  
Communication Research ◽  
Evolution Of Language ◽  
Linguistic Communication ◽  
Key Issues

In recent years, multiple researchers working on the evolution of language have put forward the idea that the theoretical framework of usage-based approaches and Construction Grammar is highly suitable for modelling the emergence of human language from pre-linguistic or proto-linguistic communication systems. This also raises the question of whether usage-based and constructionist approaches can be integrated with the analysis of animal communication systems. In this paper, we review possible avenues where usage-based, constructionist approaches can make contact with animal communication research, which in turn also has implications for theories of language evolution. To this end, we first give an overview of key assumptions of usage-based and constructionist approaches before reviewing some key issues in animal communication research through the lens of usage-based, constructionist approaches. Specifically, we will discuss how research on alarm calls, gestural communication and symbol-trained animals can be brought into contact with usage-based, constructionist theorizing. We argue that a constructionist view of animal communication can yield new perspectives on its relation to human language, which in turn has important implications regarding the evolution of language. Importantly, this theoretical approach also generates hypotheses that have the potential of complementing and extending results from the more formalist approaches that often underlie current animal communication research.

Language Evolution and Linguistic Norms

2019 ◽  
pp. 245-264 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nikola Kompa
Keyword(s):  
Communication Systems ◽  
Animal Communication ◽  
Language Evolution ◽  
Human Language ◽  
Symbolic Communication ◽  
Implicit Communication ◽  
Natural Signs ◽  
The Difference

How might language have evolved and which (types of) norms, if any, might have played a role in shaping it? This chapter addresses these two questions by first exploring differences between human language and animal communication systems; the difference between natural signs, signals, and non-natural signs (symbols) will be elaborated. The author claims that normativity enters the picture only at the level of symbols. The remainder of the chapter is devoted to the question of what kinds of norms might have played a role in the evolution of symbolic communication. The author argues, firstly, that a certain level of cooperation is needed if non-natural signs are to be interpretable at all; secondly, a type of prudential norm emerges as signs acquire stable meaning; thirdly, interpretation of implicit communication is governed by pragmatic norms, too.

scholarly journals Human language evolution: a view from theoretical linguistics on how syntax and the lexicon first came into being

Primates ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haruka Fujita ◽  
Koji Fujita
Keyword(s):  
Language Evolution ◽  
Animal Cognition ◽  
Action Planning ◽  
Theoretical Background ◽  
Human Language ◽  
Motor Action ◽  
Cognitive Capacities ◽  
Gradual Evolution ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Evolutionary Continuity

AbstractHuman language is a multi-componential function comprising several sub-functions each of which may have evolved in other species independently of language. Among them, two sub-functions, or modules, have been claimed to be truly unique to the humans, namely hierarchical syntax (known as “Merge” in linguistics) and the “lexicon.” This kind of species-specificity stands as a hindrance to our natural understanding of human language evolution. Here we challenge this issue and advance our hypotheses on how human syntax and lexicon may have evolved from pre-existing cognitive capacities in our ancestors and other species including but not limited to nonhuman primates. Specifically, we argue that Merge evolved from motor action planning, and that the human lexicon with the distinction between lexical and functional categories evolved from its predecessors found in animal cognition through a process we call “disintegration.” We build our arguments on recent developments in generative grammar but crucially depart from some of its core ideas by borrowing insights from other relevant disciplines. Most importantly, we maintain that every sub-function of human language keeps evolutionary continuity with other species’ cognitive capacities and reject a saltational emergence of language in favor of its gradual evolution. By doing so, we aim to offer a firm theoretical background on which a promising scenario of language evolution can be constructed.

scholarly journals Language evolution and climate: the case of desiccation and tone

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caleb Everett ◽  
Damián E. Blasí ◽  
Seán G. Roberts
Keyword(s):  
Human Behavior ◽  
Communication Systems ◽  
Animal Communication ◽  
Language Evolution ◽  
Global Distribution ◽  
Testable Hypothesis ◽  
Standard Assumption ◽  
Vocal Cords ◽  
New Approaches ◽  
Work First

Abstract We make the case that, contra standard assumption in linguistic theory, the sound systems of human languages are adapted to their environment. While not conclusive, this plausible case rests on several points discussed in this work: First, human behavior is generally adaptive and the assumption that this characteristic does not extend to linguistic structure is empirically unsubstantiated. Second, animal communication systems are well known to be adaptive within species across a variety of phyla and taxa. Third, research in laryngology demonstrates clearly that ambient desiccation impacts the performance of the human vocal cords. The latter point motivates a clear, testable hypothesis with respect to the synchronic global distribution of language types. Fourth, this hypothesis is supported in our own previous work, and here we discuss new approaches being developed to further explore the hypothesis. We conclude by suggesting that the time has come to more substantively examine the possibility that linguistic sound systems are adapted to their physical ecology.

Human uniqueness, learned symbols and recursive thought

2004 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 551-565 ◽  
Author(s):  
JAMES R. HURFORD
Keyword(s):  
Communication System ◽  
Communication Systems ◽  
Animal Communication ◽  
Human Language ◽  
Theoretical Claim ◽  
Human Uniqueness

Human language is qualitatively different from animal communication systems in at least two separate ways. Human languages contain tens of thousands of arbitrary learned symbols (mainly words). No other animal communication system involves learning the component symbolic elements afresh in each individual's lifetime, and certainly not in such vast numbers. Human language also has complex compositional syntax. The meanings of our sentences are composed from the meanings of the constituent parts (e.g. the words). This is obvious to us, but no other animal communication system (with honeybees as an odd but distracting exception) puts messages together in this way. A recent theoretical claim that the sole distinguishing feature of human language is recursion is discussed, and related to these features of learned symbols and compositional syntax. It is argued that recursive thought could have existed in prelinguistic hominids, and that the key step to language was the innovative disposition to learn massive numbers of arbitrary symbols

scholarly journals Nonhuman and Nonhuman-Human Communication: Some Issues and Questions

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Irene M. Pepperberg
Keyword(s):  
Communication Systems ◽  
Vocal Communication ◽  
Vocal Learning ◽  
Simple Object ◽  
Emotional States ◽  
Human Language ◽  
Human Communication ◽  
Psittacus Erithacus ◽  
Simple Matter ◽  
Number Of Species

Deciphering nonhuman communication – particularly nonhuman vocal communication – has been a longstanding human quest. We are, for example, fascinated by the songs of birds and whales, the grunts of apes, the barks of dogs, and the croaks of frogs; we wonder about their potential meaning and their relationship to human language. Do these utterances express little more than emotional states, or do they convey actual bits and bytes of concrete information? Humans’ numerous attempts to decipher nonhuman systems have, however, progressed slowly. We still wonder why only a small number of species are capable of vocal learning, a trait that, because it allows for innovation and adaptation, would seem to be a prerequisite for most language-like abilities. Humans have also attempted to teach nonhumans elements of our system, using both vocal and nonvocal systems. The rationale for such training is that the extent of success in instilling symbolic reference provides some evidence for, at the very least, the cognitive underpinnings of parallels between human and nonhuman communication systems. However, separating acquisition of reference from simple object-label association is not a simple matter, as reference begins with such associations, and the point at which true reference emerges is not always obvious. I begin by discussing these points and questions, predominantly from the viewpoint of someone studying avian abilities. I end by examining the question posed by Premack: do nonhumans that have achieved some level of symbolic reference then process information differently from those that have not? I suggest the answer is likely “yes,” giving examples from my research on Grey parrots (Psittacus erithacus).

scholarly journals Comparative perspectives on communication in human and nonhuman primates: Grounding meaning in broadly conserved processes of voice production, perception, affect and cognition

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Nielsen ◽  
Drew Rendall
Keyword(s):  
Structure Function ◽  
Communication Systems ◽  
Nonhuman Primates ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
Animal Communication ◽  
Human Communication ◽  
Voice Production ◽  
General Constraints ◽  
Affect And Cognition ◽  
Synthetic Approaches

Comparative perspectives on primate and human communication have been marked by two equally untenable extremes: either language is special, without significant evolutionary precedent, or it is not: it is continuous in most aspects with animal communication systems. In this article we outline fertile common ground and point towards synthetic approaches that can unify the study of human and animal communication. First, we suggest that humans have a large suite of perceptual biases that introduce a pressure for languages to be 'functionally deployable'. We suggest that human languages are shaped by this pressure, along with previously established pressures to be both learnable and compressible, and domain-general constraints like memory. Collectively, we suggest that non-arbitrary structure-function relationships are crucial for the deployment of language and communication systems more generally.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document