Hauser, Chomsky and Fitch (2002) The Faculty of Language
Vanya Kapitonov
University of Melbourne
April 2, 2015
The goal
discuss the perspectives for research in the evolution of the faculty oflanguage
• broad: FLB, i.e., the communicative system
• narrow: FLN, i.e., the computational system underlying FLB
FLB ≈ FLN + SM + CI
2 of 17
Central ideas
• recursion is the core of the computational system (FLN), and FLNis the distinguishing feature of human language
• this hypothesis is empirically testable
3 of 17
Three big puzzles
evolutionary How did humans get a system qualitatively differentfrom animals?
graduality Did the system evolve continuously or with saltations?
functional Was the system always used for communication, or wasit exapted?
8 of 17
Assumptions
• defining for any language is a systematic correspondence betweensound (SM) and meaning (CI)
• the correspondence is mediated through the so called narrowsyntax (‘internal representations’)
• crucially, any language is discretly infinite and exhibits recursion
• animal communication systems lack recursion
Thereforerecursion is the domain which is the ‘deepest challenge for acomparative evolutionary approach to language’
9 of 17
Assumptions
• defining for any language is a systematic correspondence betweensound (SM) and meaning (CI)
• the correspondence is mediated through the so called narrowsyntax (‘internal representations’)
• crucially, any language is discretly infinite and exhibits recursion
• animal communication systems lack recursion
Thereforerecursion is the domain which is the ‘deepest challenge for acomparative evolutionary approach to language’
9 of 17
Assumptions
• defining for any language is a systematic correspondence betweensound (SM) and meaning (CI)
• the correspondence is mediated through the so called narrowsyntax (‘internal representations’)
• crucially, any language is discretly infinite and exhibits recursion
• animal communication systems lack recursion
Thereforerecursion is the domain which is the ‘deepest challenge for acomparative evolutionary approach to language’
9 of 17
Assumptions
• defining for any language is a systematic correspondence betweensound (SM) and meaning (CI)
• the correspondence is mediated through the so called narrowsyntax (‘internal representations’)
• crucially, any language is discretly infinite and exhibits recursion
• animal communication systems lack recursion
Thereforerecursion is the domain which is the ‘deepest challenge for acomparative evolutionary approach to language’
9 of 17
Assumptions
• defining for any language is a systematic correspondence betweensound (SM) and meaning (CI)
• the correspondence is mediated through the so called narrowsyntax (‘internal representations’)
• crucially, any language is discretly infinite and exhibits recursion
• animal communication systems lack recursion
Thereforerecursion is the domain which is the ‘deepest challenge for acomparative evolutionary approach to language’
9 of 17
Three Hypotheses
1 FLB is strictly homologous to animal communication
2 FLB is a derived, uniquely human adaptation for language
3 only FLN is uniquely human
10 of 17
Three Hypotheses
1 FLB is strictly homologous to animal communication
2 FLB is a derived, uniquely human adaptation for language
3 only FLN is uniquely human
10 of 17
Three Hypotheses
1 FLB is strictly homologous to animal communication
2 FLB is a derived, uniquely human adaptation for language
3 only FLN is uniquely human
10 of 17
Three Hypotheses
1 FLB is strictly homologous to animal communication
2 FLB is a derived, uniquely human adaptation for language
3 only FLN is uniquely human F
10 of 17
Sensory-Motor systems of animals
Contrary to initial expectations, animals have many features incommon with humans:
• categorical perception and discrimination of phonemes
• descended larynx for non-speech reasons (preadaptation?)
• imitation: vocal in birds and multimodal in cetaceans
11 of 17
Conceptual-Intentional systems of animals
Evidence here is weaker:
• contradictory findings on the theory of mind in apes
• inconclusive data from vervet (and other) monkey calls◦ however, see work by Schlenker et al. (2014) on Campbell’s monkey
alarm calls
• calls are innate rather than learned, and contextually fixed
• the repertoire is incomparable with human vocabulary
12 of 17
Discrete infinity and constraints on learning
The acquisition puzzle:
• from a finite input
• from positive only input
• the child correctly acquires the target system for infinite generation
13 of 17
Discrete infinity and constraints on learning
Likewise with numbers: the kid “grasps the idea that the integer listis constructed on the basis of the successor function”.The apes, by contrast, do not (but rather learn each symbolindependently).Tamarins can learn finite-state, but not phrase-structure grammars.
14 of 17
Discrete infinity and constraints on learning
Likewise with numbers: the kid “grasps the idea that the integer listis constructed on the basis of the successor function”.The apes, by contrast, do not (but rather learn each symbolindependently).Tamarins can learn finite-state, but not phrase-structure grammars.
14 of 17
Discrete infinity and constraints on learning
Likewise with numbers: the kid “grasps the idea that the integer listis constructed on the basis of the successor function”.The apes, by contrast, do not (but rather learn each symbolindependently).Tamarins can learn finite-state, but not phrase-structure grammars.
14 of 17
The ultimate goal includes answering questions like
• what are the general principles of the faculty of language
• why there are exactly these principles, and not others
• and therefore, why we observe a certain class of languages and notother imaginable ones
15 of 17
Conclusion
• collaboration between linguists and biologists is desirable
• the hypothesis that FLB is shared and FLN is unique is testableand needs empirical investigation
• the comparative approach as the primary tool of that investigation
16 of 17
Top Related