How did human language evolve?
Presentation for ANP 840
Language Evolution: Basic Questions
1. What is the difference between language origins and
language evolution?
2. Why do you want to study the origin and evolution of
language?
3. What is the relationship between
language/communication and human physiology?
4. What is the relationship between language and being
human?
• Answers at the end of the lecture.
• Evolution of Language versus Origin of
Language.
– What’s the difference?
• Very little done these days on the evolution of
language and the evolution of culture.
– Why?
Early Approaches
•
The study of evolution of humanity has been approached
from:
–
–
–
•
The evolution of the human body (physical anthropology)
The evolution of culture (sociocultural anthropology)
The evolution of language (linguistics)
Traditionally, each domain each has been studied
independently of each other without the awareness that the
areas are dialectically interdependent.
Early assumptions based on concepts of
•
–
–
–
–
Absolute progress,
Linear development
Eurocentricity
The failure to recognize the interconnectedness of the three areas.
The Autonomous Study of
The Evolution of Culture
• The domain of the cultural anthropologists (Tylor,
Morgan, ….)
– e.g., savages, barbarians, civilization
• Early models
– Did not relate to evolution of the body or to language or to
culture other than to say a bigger brain implied greater
intelligence.
– Based on the assumption that Europe represented the most
advanced form of cultural evolution. That some societies
represented “living fossils”.
• Presumed the ability to sign was unique to humans.
– Leslie White
The Autonomous Study of the
Evolution of the Human Body
1. The domain of the physical anthropologists.
2. Studies of Brain Development
1. Bigger brain – smarter animal and capacity for culture.
2. Unaware of the modular hypothesis, bigger brain – smarter
creature.
1. What is the modular hypothesis?
3. The development of bipedalism.
4. Such approaches (2 & 3) did not help us understand
our uniqueness of humans.
Who Are Our Ancestors?
•
•
•
•
Australopithecus Afarensis: -4 -3 million
Homo Habilis: -3 to -1 million
Homo Erectus: -1 Million to -200,000
Homo Sapiens:
– Archaic
– Neanderthalensis: 300,000 – 50,000 BP
– Sapien: 50,000 - Present
Brain Size
Name
Time
Size in ml
Australopithecus
Afarensis
-4M to
-3M
375 to
500
Homo Habilis
-3M to
-1M
500-800*
Homo Erectus
-1M to
-200k
750-1250
Homo Sapien
1. Neanderthal
2. Cromagnon
-300k to -50k
-100k to -0k
1100-1300
* Evidence of Broca’s and Wernicke’s in HH
The Autonomous Study of
The Evolution of Language
• Early views: Much like the early culture models,
primitive languages as living fossils.
– Early invention stories. (Yo-heave ho, bow-wow, click-clack)
– Psammethicus: Egyptian King (664-610 BC)
• Hockett’s linear evolution model
– Increasing complexity of message systems
• Hill and other’s discontinuity
– The ability to speak different from intelligence.
• Comparative Primate Studies
• Evolution of Language Structure
– (surprisingly very few have looked at this)
Questions of learning and intelligence
1. Continuity: Hockett
1.
2.
3.
4.
Focused on the evolution of communication,
Proposed a number of design features found in communication.
Charted their evolutionary sequence.
Communicative competency seen as a function of intelligence/brain size.
2. Discontinuity, Hill, Chomsky, Lenneberg, Piaget
1. Language ability is independent of general intelligence.
2. Adaptive value of language
3. Comparison of Argentine birds with early humans. (creation of learnable
dialects in certain types of birds (passerine) produces smaller breading
populations which means a greater potential to adapt to smaller
ecological niches.
Hockett’s Design Features
Comparative Primate Studies
• Chimpanzee Studies
– Washoe (Gardener and Gardner)
– Nim Chimsky (Herbert Terrace)
– Others (Yerkees, …)
• Monkey Studies
– Sefarth on Signing
Comparative Primate Studies
The motor areas of a monkey and human brain.
Comparative Brain Development
Chimpanzee Language Studies
• Could use the representational signing system of
American Sign Language.
• Showed the capacity for controlling signs.
– Arbitrary association of signifier and signified
– Able to prevaricate
– Question of face?
• Showed ability to create atactic and paratactic
sentences.
Sefarth’s Studies of Signing Potentials
• Basic question, what are the properties of the
sign and what are the associated mental abilities
use them.
• Which of these capacities do our phylogenetic
relatives possess?
1. Association of Signifier and Signified
leopard
loud barking
The Vervet
Monkey
eagle
run up a tree
Snake
stand up
The Diana
Monkey
Leopard
male and female calls differ
slightly.
Crowned
Eagle
male and female calls differ
slightly
Chimps
(pursuit)
retreat silently
Human (gun
hunters)
retreat silently
1 Examples of different signs used by monkeys
2. Note range of signifiers.
different dangers require
different sign strategies.
Also communicates to
predators.
shows no control over
vocabulary.
.What does it mean to use a word?
Seyfarth identified several abilities an organism must possess in order to use a
word. As some of his terminology conflicted with existing linguistic usage, I
chose to redefine them without losing the sense.
Properties of a word:
AHL
Chimps
Monkeys
True signs: Capacity to associate signifier with signifier
Understanding of Sign and Referent)
yes
yes
?
Learning to Associate the signifier with the signified, as
opposed to instinctively associating them.
yes
yes
?
Learned v instinctive Relationship between signifier and
signified.
yes
yes
?
Contextual Meaning
yes
yes
?
Intentionality of Signing (formerly #5:Sign and Mental
State). And Voluntary Production (formerly #1) [It is not
clear to me how this is different from intentionality.
yes
yes
?
Chimpanzees and Tactic Abilities
Parataxis versus Syntax
•
•
•
•
•
Two word Sentences: Parataxis
Case like relationships
Three word sentences
Mean length of utterance
Syntactic signs – the basis for syntax
Comparison of Chimp and Human Case-like relationships
Agent-Action
Action-Object
Location
Possession
Modification
Humans
Chimps
Mail come.
Give dress.
There book
My shoe.
Pretty ball.
Eat Nim.
Eat grape.
Food there. Nim out. (?)
Banana Nim. (?)
Banana more. (?)
Two Word
Combinations
Three Word
Combinations
Play me. 375
Me Nim. 328
Tickle me. 316
Eat Nim. 302
More eat. 287
Me eat.
237
Nim eat. 209
Finish hug. 187
Drink Nim. 143
More tickle. 136
Play me. Nim.
81
Eat me. Nim.
48
Tickle me. Nim. 44
Hug me. Nim.
20
Me. Nim eat.
21
Eat me. Eat.
22
Eat Nim. Eat.
46
Banana. Eat Nim. 33
Grape eat. Nim. 37
Yogurt. Nim eat. 20
Analysis of three word sentences
Three-word combinations e.g.
“Play me. Nim.” could be viewed
1.
as either incipient syntax or
2.
a sequence of a paratactic and
atactic sentence.
1.
Play me. + Nim.
2.
Here the second sentence, “Nim.” is
seen as emphasizing, or clarifying, the
me or the first sentence.
But the incipient
syntax hypothesis
offers no insights.
Syntactic Signs
• To be a sign the sentence
must have a signified and
a signifier.
• The signified is the
(meaning (value) of the
sentence.
• The signifier is spelled by
parts of speech. Parts of
speech are represented by
words. Each word in the
lexicon must be assigned a
part of speech.
Properties of the different
tactic systems
NA = Not Applicable
Sign Structure
Word Order Significant
Parts of Speech
Case Meaning
Fixed Case Meaning
Max words per sentence
Mean Length of Utterance
Utility of Embedding
One-Word
(Ataxis)
Two-Word
(Parataxis)
Syntax
S-->W
NA
No
NA
NA
1
1
NA
S-->W:W
No
No
Yes?
No
2
2.2
No
S-->NP+VP
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Infinite
> 2.2
Yes
Syntactic Signs and Parts of Speech
The Perils of Parataxis
The Far Side
By Gary Larson
Integrated Approaches
• New understandings have
emerged once we start looking at
integrated models.
• Once we discover the
interactions between the two
– The principle of dialectics or
coevolution
• Body and Culture
• Body and Language
• Language and Culture
Body and Culture
• Body Culture
• Tools
• Other physical manifestations of human culture.
• Questions of the interrelatedness of body and
culture
Australopithecus Afarensis
Technology:
Architecture:
Art and Letters:
Religion:
Biology:
No tools identified.
??
??
??
Brain: 375-500 ml.
Upright posture.
Homo Habilis: -3 to -1 million
Tech:
Stone tools (Oldowan),
Definite Omnivore
Habitat: Savannah Habitat.
Arts:
Religion:
Biology: Brain: 500-800 ml.
Evidence of buldge in
Broca's area.
Homo Erectus: -1 Million to -200,000
Tech:
Better made Tool Kit (Acheulean),
Fire, Definite Omnivore.
Habitat: Moved out of Africa; Varried habitat.
Arts:
??
Religion: ??
Biology: Brain: 750-1250 ml.
Some evidence of vocal tract
development
Homo Sapiens Neanderthalensis
300,000 to -50,000 BP
Tech:
Habitat:
Arts:
Religion:
Biology:
Uniform tools (secondary
chipping) Levallois spread
rapidly at expense of Erectus.
Clothing, tent pegs?
Care of aged.
Burial of dead with implements.
Some use of red ochre).
Brain: 1100 -1300 ml. (same as
HSS)
50,000 Years B.P.
Vocal tract in place; brain has modern volume;
Stronger evidence of Broca's area; appearance of Homo Sapiens.
37,000 to 22,000 BP Aurignatian
Tech:
Advanced Hunting techniques, thin blades,
chisels, gravers, tools for bone working.
Habitat: Iran and Afganistan
Arts:
Simple animal cave drawings (some areas).
Religion: Burial of dead with red ochre.
Biology: Modern Man (cromagnon)
The Integrated Study of the
Body and Language
• Language Body
• The evolution of the brain
– The modular hypothesis and the language processing areas
of the brain.
• The evolution of the vocal tract
– How the (2 tube) vocal tract evolved to produce a more
efficient transmitter of information.
• Chomsky – the syntax gene.
– Was there a genetic change that enabled humans to speak
syntactically?
Body Questions: The Brain
• What is the modular principle?
• Why is it relevant to the study of language?
• What are the modules relevant to the study of
language?
• When did they develop?
1. When did Broca's area develop?
Endocranial casting of fossil sculls
suggests that Broca's area has been
evolving for at least 100,000 years.
Other Evidence suggests Homo
Habilis
2. When did the Wernicke's Area
develop? Also Homo Habilis
3. When did The Arcuate Fasciculus
(nerves connecting Broca's and
Wernicke's area.
We have concluded that there are significant differences, evident in the fossil record, that
distinguish H. habilis from the australopithecines with respect to neurolinguistic preconditions.
These include a demarcated Broca's area, an identifiable POT (indicative of Wernicke's area),
and asymmetrical development of the cerebral hemispheres indicative of handedness.
Wilkins, W.K. & Wakefield, J. (1995). Brain evolution and neurolinguistic preconditions. Behavioral
and Brain Sciences 18 (1): 161-226
Caveat
• Examination of endocasts of fossil hominids has suggested to
some researchers that the neurological substrate for the
production of language was in place as early as 2 million years
ago. Enlarged perisylvian structures (like Broca's and Wernicke's
areas), along with increasing cerebral asymmetry (another
indication of specialized brain function) act as evidence for the
early development of language centers. However, difficulties
arise in the interpretation of fossil endocast materials, particularly
the accuracy of endocrania, endocasts, and the validity of
assuming any kind of continuous function from present to past.
Other researchers contend that the emergence of language did
not occur until after 100,000 years ago, when the production of
the full compliment of human-like sounds was not hindered by
the morphology of the throat
The evolution of the Vocal Tract
•Some evidence of vocal development in Homo Habilis (1-3 million).
•The two tube vocal tract fully developed by 50,000 BP
•Why did humans shift to a completely vocal representational
system.
•What activities, events would encourage the vocal tract.
– Upright posture?
The Production and Recognition of Vowels
• Underlying the human vocal system is the
dialectical relationship between the production
and recognition of vowels.
• The recognition of vowels depends on the
identification of the first and the second formant.
• The production of formants in the vocal tract can
be understood as an illustration of the sourcefilter theory.
– What is the source? What is the filter?
The recognition of vowels
The above picture is a sound spectogram which maps frequency
vertically and time horizontally.
The Vocal Tract as an acoustic filter
The filters include
the oral cavity, the
pharynx and the
nasal cavity.
The oral cavity and
pharynx are coupled
producing a filter 17 cm
in length.
The source is the
voice box or larynx.
An Example
• Wave lengths
–
–
–
–
Speed of sound = 33,500 cm per second.
Frequency: number of cycles (highs and lows per second)
Unit = Hertz (Hz).
Wave length = How far a sound at a frequency can travel.
• A 1 Hz wave can travel 33,500 cm
• A 2 Hz wave can travel 16,750 cm
• A 10 Hz wave can travel 3,350 cm
• What’s so great about 67 cm?
– 67 is 4 times 17. (16.75)
• Whats so great about 17?
– Length of human vocal tract.
A 100 Hz wave can travel 335 cm
A 500 Hz wave can travel 67 cm
What is the relationship between 17 and 64
• The filter is a simple
question of fitting a
wave in a tube.
• A formant is the
frequency of wave that
is reinforced by the filter.
• Length is the primary
consideration
• Open, half open and
closed tubes function
differently.
•A full wave fits in a closed tube.
•A half a wave fits in a half-closed tube.
•A quarter wave fits in an open tube.
The significance of the numbers 500 and 17
• The first formant of an open tube 17 cm long is
500 Hertz
• 500 Hertz is the first formant of the vowel schwa.
• Thus source-filter theory demonstrates that the
first formant of the vowel schwa is the simple
consequence, a 17 cm long straight tube acting
as a filter.
Schematic of the vowels a i u
Formant 1 versus Formant 2
The production of vowels
The Source-Filter Theory (Acoustics)
• The Source of sound to be filtered
– Noise = sound at all frequencies
– The voice box (a.k.a. larynx
• The Filter
– Formants are frequencies are those reinforced by
the filter.
– Non-formants are those not reinforced by the filter.
– Formants are primarily dependent on the length of
the filter.
The reason for a 2 tube vocal tract.
•
•
•
•
The source-filter theory
The production of vowels
The production of consonants
Why the 2 tube vocal tract works.
Language and DNA
The Integrated Study of
Language and Culture
• Language Culture
• Language structure (semiology) versus
communication.
• Semiology and Culture
– The role of the sign system
• Communication and Culture
Semiology and Culture
• Has been looked at but not integrated with other evolutionary
perspectives
• The Symbolic Interactionism of George Herbert Mead
– Mutual understanding – intersubjectivity
– What sort of sign system would enable what type of intersubjectivity
– The public self and the private self.
• The Sociology of Knowledge of Berger and Luckmann
– Objectification
• The role of tools
– Control of time
– Spheres of reality
Semiology and Culture (cont.)
• Institution building (Burger and Luckmann and
Bourdieu)
– Institutions as objects.
– Institutions as the basic building blocks of
culture
– Components (game metaphore, institutional
practices, knowledge, capital)
• The Syntax Gene - Chomsky
The Syntax Gene - Chomsky
• Chomsky’s biological orientation
• Question – what adaptation for language is truly unique
for humans vrs what adaptations could be understood
as preadaptations or exaptions?
– Fortuitious adaptations which have an effect on human
nature.
– Where do human qualities like a love of music come from?
• Focus on recursiveness.
– What is recursiveness?
– This is the cat that ate the rat that lived in the house that Jack
built.
When did syntax evolve?
• Consider the differences between syntax and
parataxis.
• What can you do with syntax that you can’t do
with parataxis?
• When was the first cultural explosion?
• Suppose syntax developed 35k years ago, what
was going on before?
Recursivity
This is the cat
that ate the rat
that lived in the house
that Jack built.
• Recursivity involves the embedding of one syntactic sign (in this
case a sentence) within another.
• Chomsky argues that there is a gene that does this.
• Dwyer argues that the ability is derived from the ability to see
syntactic signs.
– Recall the difference between syntax and parataxis presented above.
– The ability to do this may or may not involve a gene.
Communication and Culture
• Goffman – face work.
– Builds on Mead’s public and private self.
• Grice and the cooperative principle
• Austin and speech acts
– What is a performative?
– What is the relationship between performatives and
the evolution of institutions (thank Bourdieu for this)
Language, Body and Culture
Needed – a fully integrated
approach which recognizes
the [dialectical]
interrelationships between
language, body and culture.
•Mead’s Mind, Self and Society comes as close as
anybody.
Questions revisited.
1.
2.
3.
4.
What is the difference between language origins and
language evolution?
Why do you want to study the origin and evolution of
language?
What is the relationship between
language/communication and human physiology?
What is the relationship between language and being
human?
Appendicies
• Evolution of the sentence
• The development of intersubjectivity
• Tools as objects.
Evolution of the Sign System
1. Lexical Signs
2. Representational signs:
3. Tactic development
1. Ataxis,
2. Parataxis (evidence from chimps, children)
3. Syntax (the role of parts of speech)
Lexical signs
1. Simple Lexical Signs
1. Each signifier is wholly distinct from other signifier
2. Hoots versus growls versus facial gestures.
2. Complex Lexical Signs (words)
1. Each signifier is spelled out as a string of
representational signs AND v. DAN v. DNA, etc.
3. How did signs expand beyond the growl, snarl
and bark
–
How did the representational system develop?
Representational signs:
1. Gestural, Phonological, Graphic
2. How did phonemes develop? When?
3. Possibly related to the emergence of affixes
Tactic development
1.
Ataxis,
a) What can you do with atactic signs?
b) Naming? commands?
2. Parataxis (evidence from chimps, children)
1) When did parataxis develop?
2) What can you do with parataxis that you can't do with ataxis?
3. What enabled the leap from ataxis to syntax?
1. Syntax (the role of parts of speech)
2. What can you do with syntax that you can't do with parataxis?
3. What developments enabled syntax to take place?
4. When did syntax develop
The Development Of Intersubjectivity
1.
Presumption of communication
CONTEXT
Self <--> Message <--> Other
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Taking the perspective of the other
Using the same context
Mutually Habituating Behavior
Institutionalization
The development of Roles
The development of self awareness
Culture and Language
1. Tools
1. Tools are objects
2. Tools as controlable objects
3. Tools as an expression of intention
4. Tools as semiological signs
2. The Act Of Communication
1. Intention
2. manufacturing tools
3. communication:
4. A. breaking the s -> r bond
3. Direction Of Attention.
The Whole Ball of Wax
lateralization
hands for
tool handedness
increase Wernicke´s
manipulation use objectivation signin
Area
reduced
fire
cooking mandible
size
Brachiation
Fore/hind leg
Dimorphism
feet for upright 2-tube increased
Broca´s
walking posture vocal
Area
tract
use of oral
phonation
Name
Brain (size in ml)
Vocal
Tract
Tools
Australopithecus
Afarensis
4 to3 M BP
375-500 .
(av =430)
Upright
posture
No tool s identified.
Homo Habilis
3 to -1 M BP
500-800
(av = 650
151%
Evidence of bulge in
Broca's area.
Homo Erectus
100-200 k BP
750-1250
(av = 950
146%
Homo Sapien
Neanderthalensis
300-50 K
1100-1300
(av =1200)
126%
Evidence of broca's
area; appearance of
Homo Sapien
Homo Sapiens
Sapiens (HSS),
M odern Man
50k BP
Almost the same as
HSN
HSS -Aurignatian
37-22k BP
Stone tools (Oldowan),
Better made Tool Kit
(Acheulean),
Some
ev idence of
v ocal tract
development
Fire
Uni form tools
(secondary chi pping)
Levallois
Vocal tract in
place; brain
has modern
v olume;
Activities
Savanna
Definite O
Varried h
Definite O
Moved o
Clothing,
spread ra
expense
Care of a
Burial of
impleme
use of re
Advanced Hunting
techniques, thin
blades, chisel s,
grav ers, tools for bone
worki ng.
Simple a
drawings
areas). B
with red