Language Evolution and Computation Bibliography

The paper argues that the structure, derivation and evolution of syntax is given by the sequence (elements, concatenation, embedding). We discuss the implications of this sequence for language and the numeral system in general and on the evolution of language in particular. A four-stage model of the evolution of syntax, broadly compatible with several earlier scenarios, is proposed. The four stages are (1) signs, (2) increased number of signs, (3) commutative concatenation, and (4) noncommutative concatenation. We support the model by showing that its stages can be adaptive per se, which could explain why they evolved. We also identify two preconditions for maintaining the stages: stage (2) depends on the ability to conceptualize asymmetric relations between concepts and the adaptiveness of stage (3) depends on cultural constraints on linguistic interpretation.

Due to the nature of the subject, the field of language evolution has to rely largely on theoretical considerations. A coherent fundamental framework for approaching language evolution has to relate principles of evolution of complex traits with those governing the organization of cognitive processes, communication and natural language architecture. We suggest that by treating the language faculty as a complex trait with predefined functional interfaces, it is possible to delineate the evolutionary forces that have led to the emergence of natural language. We analyze embedding and recursion in communication, and propose a conceptual prerequisite for natural language and fully symbolic reference: a hierarchical way of conceptualization termed 'conceptual embedding' (the ability to nest concepts within concepts). We argue that parallel (multidimensional) interpretation and evolving abstract categories are the effects of conceptual embedding. We review and analyze relevant experiments in ethological literature and conclude that their results do not imply conceptual embedding in non-humans, which leads us to hypothesize that conceptual embedding may be a uniquely human trait. We go on to hypothesize that, initially, the selective force driving the development of the language faculty was towards enhanced conceptualization of reality that is functionally relevant in the absence of linguistic communication. According to this scenario, the invention of linguistic communication was a secondary event, dependent on conceptual embedding which supports the sophisticated conceptual underpinnings of linguistic meaning.