Language Evolution and Computation Bibliography

The innovation of iconic gestures is essential to establishing the vocabularies of signed languages, but might iconicity also play a role in the origin of spoken words? Can people create novel vocalizations that are comprehensible to naïve listeners without prior convention? We launched a contest in which participants submitted non-linguistic vocalizations for 30 meanings spanning actions, humans, animals, inanimate objects, properties, quantifiers and demonstratives. The winner was determined by the ability of naïve listeners to infer the meanings of the vocalizations. We report a series of experiments and analyses that evaluated the vocalizations for: (1) comprehensibility to naïve listeners; (2) the degree to which they were iconic; (3) agreement between producers and listeners in iconicity; and (4) whether iconicity helps listeners learn the vocalizations as category labels. The results show contestants were able to create successful iconic vocalizations for most of the meanings, which were largely comprehensible to naïve listeners, and easier to learn as category labels. These findings demonstrate how iconic vocalizations can enable interlocutors to establish understanding in the absence of conventions. They suggest that, prior to the advent of full-blown spoken languages, people could have used iconic vocalizations to ground a spoken vocabulary with considerable semantic breadth.

Why are there different languages? A common explanation is that different languages arise from the gradual accumulation of random changes. Here, we argue that, beyond these random factors, linguistic differences, from sounds to grammars, may also reflect adaptations to different environments in which the languages are learned and used. The aspects of the environment that could shape language include the social, the physical, and the technological.

Human language is unparalleled in both its expressive capacity and its diversity. What accounts for the enormous diversity of human languages [13]? Recent evidence suggests that the structure of languages may be shaped by the social and demographic environment in which the languages are learned and used. In an analysis of over 2000 languages Lupyan and Dale [25] demonstrated that socio-demographic variables, such as population size, significantly predicted the complexity of inflectional morphology. Languages spoken by smaller populations tend to employ more complex inflectional systems. Languages spoken by larger populations tend to avoid complex morphological paradigms, employing lexical constructions instead. This relationship may exist because of how language learning takes place in these different social contexts [44, 45]. In a smaller population, a tightly-knit social group combined with exclusive or almost exclusive language acquisition by infants permits accumulation of complex inflectional forms. In larger populations, adult language learning and more extensive cross-group interactions produce pressures that lead to morphological simplification. In the current paper, we explore this learning-based hypothesis in two ways. First, we develop an agent-based simulation that serves as a simple existence proof: As adult interaction increases, languages lose inflections. Second, we carry out a correlational study showing that English-speaking adults who had more interaction with non-native speakers as children showed a relative preference for over-regularized (i.e. morphologically simpler) forms. The results of the simulation and experiment lend support to the linguistic niche hypothesis: Languages may vary in the ways they do in part due to different social environments in which they are learned and used. In short, languages adapt to the learning constraints and biases of their learners.

Background

Languages differ greatly both in their syntactic and morphological systems and in the social environments in which they exist. We challenge the view that language grammars are unrelated to social environments in which they are learned and used.

Methodology/Principal Findings

We conducted a statistical analysis of >2,000 languages using a combination of demographic sources and the World Atlas of Language Structures a database of structural language properties. We found strong relationships between linguistic factors related to morphological complexity, and demographic/socio-historical factors such as the number of language users, geographic spread, and degree of language contact. The analyses suggest that languages spoken by large groups have simpler inflectional morphology than languages spoken by smaller groups as measured on a variety of factors such as case systems and complexity of conjugations. Additionally, languages spoken by large groups are much more likely to use lexical strategies in place of inflectional morphology to encode evidentiality, negation, aspect, and possession. Our findings indicate that just as biological organisms are shaped by ecological niches, language structures appear to adapt to the environment (niche) in which they are being learned and used. As adults learn a language, features that are difficult for them to acquire, are less likely to be passed on to subsequent learners. Languages used for communication in large groups that include adult learners appear to have been subjected to such selection. Conversely, the morphological complexity common to languages used in small groups increases redundancy which may facilitate language learning by infants.

Conclusions/Significance

We hypothesize that language structures are subjected to different evolutionary pressures in different social environments. Just as biological organisms are shaped by ecological niches, language structures appear to adapt to the environment (niche) in which they are being learned and used. The proposed Linguistic Niche Hypothesis has implications for answering the broad question of why languages differ in the way they do and makes empirical predictions regarding language acquisition capacities of children versus adults.

A major feature that sets language apart from other communication systems is the use of categorylabels -- words. In addition to providing a means of communication, there is growing evidence that category labels play a role in the formation and shaping of concepts. If verbal labels help humans acquire or use category information, one can ask whether it is easier to learn labeled categories compared to unlabeled ones. Normal English-speaking adults participated in a category-learning task in which categories were labeled or unlabeled. The presence of labels facilitated the learning of unfamiliar categories and resulted in more robust category representations. The advantage for acquiring named categories was observed even though the category labels did not convey any additional information and all participants had equivalent experience categorizing the stimuli. This work provides empirical support for the idea of labels as conceptual anchor points (Clark, 1997).