Advertisement

How Did Language Evolve? Some Reflections on the Language Parasite Debate

  • Tzu-wei HungEmail author
Perspective

Abstract

The language parasite approach (LPA) refers to the view that language, like a parasite, is an adaptive system that evolves to fit its human hosts. Supported by recent computer simulations, LPA proponents claim that the reason that humans can use languages with ease is not because we have evolved with genetically specified linguistic instincts but because languages have adapted to the preexisting brain structures of humans. This article examines the LPA. It argues that, while the LPA has advantages over its rival, Chomskyan nativism, there are additional factors that may limit linguistic variety that have yet to be identified by its insightful proponents. This article suggests abandoning the search for a decisive cause of language capacity and argues that language evolution is more likely to arise from balancing multiple engineering constraints.

Keywords

Adaptation Language capacity Language change Language parasite approach The logical problem of language evolution 

Notes

References

  1. Adger D (2015) Mythical myths: comments on Vyvyan Evans’ “The Language Myth”. Lingua 158:76–80Google Scholar
  2. Alves MJ (2008) Sino-Vietnamese grammatical borrowing: an overview. In: Matras Y, Sakel J (eds) Grammatical borrowing in cross-linguistic perspective. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, pp 343–363Google Scholar
  3. Bar-Sever G, Pearl L (2016) Syntactic categories derived from frequent frames benefit early language processing in English and ASL. In: Proceedings of the 40th annual Boston University conference on child language development. Berlin and New York, pp 32–46. http://www.reference-global.com/doi/pdf/10.1515/9783110199192.343. Accessed 5 Jan 2013
  4. Berlinghoff WP, Gouvêa FQ (2004) Math through the ages: a gentle history for teachers and others. Mathematical Association of America Textbooks, Oxton House Publishers, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  5. Berwick RC, Pietroski P, Yankama B, Chomsky N (2011) Poverty of the stimulus revisited. Cogn Sci 35(7):1207–1242Google Scholar
  6. Bloom P (1990) Syntactic distinctions in child language. J Child Lang 17(2):343–355Google Scholar
  7. Carroll SB (2005) Endless forms most beautiful: the new science of Evo Devo and the making of the animal kingdom. Norton, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Chater N, Christiansen MH (2012) A solution to the logical problem of language evolution: language as an adaptation to the human brain. In: Tallerman M, Gibson KR (eds) The Oxford handbook of language evolution. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 626–639Google Scholar
  9. Chater N, Reali F, Christiansen MH (2009) Restrictions on biological adaptation in language evolution. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106:1015–1020Google Scholar
  10. Chen J-Y (2010) Folk imitating-animal dance in southeast Guangxi in view of social anthropology. J Yulin Norm Univ 31(4):40–46Google Scholar
  11. Chomsky N (1965) Aspects of the theory of syntax. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  12. Chomsky N (1980) Rules and representations. Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Chomsky N (1981) Lectures on government and binding. Foris Publications, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  14. Chomsky N (2000) Language from an internalist perspective. Talk given at Centre for Philosophical Studies, King’s College, London, May 24, 1994. Part 2 of “Language and Nature” (1995) Mind 104(413): 27–61. Reprinted in Chomsky (2000) New horizons in the study of language and mind. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 134–163Google Scholar
  15. Chomsky N (2005) Three factors in language design. Linguist Inq 36:1–22Google Scholar
  16. Chomsky N (2013) Problems of projection. Lingua 130:33–49Google Scholar
  17. Chomsky N (2014a) Minimal recursion: exploring the prospects. In: Roeper T, Speas M (eds) Recursion: complexity in cognition. Springer, Cham, pp 1–15Google Scholar
  18. Chomsky N (2014b) Problems of projection: extensions. Unpublished MS. MIT, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  19. Christiansen MH (1994) Language as an organism—implications for the evolution and acquisition of language. Unpublished manuscript, Washington University, St LouisGoogle Scholar
  20. Christiansen MH, Chater N (2008) Language as shaped by the brain. Behav Brain Sci 31(5):489–558Google Scholar
  21. Christiansen MH, Chater N (2015) The language faculty that wasn’t: a usage-based account of natural language recursion. Front Psychol 6:1182Google Scholar
  22. Christiansen MH, Chater N (2016a) The now-or-never bottleneck: a fundamental constraint on language. Behav Brain Sci 39:1–72Google Scholar
  23. Christiansen MH, Chater N (2016b) Creating language: integrating evolution, acquisition, and processing. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  24. Christiansen MH, Reali F, Chater N (2006) The Baldwin effect works for functional, but not arbitrary, features of language. In: Proceedings of the 6th international conference on the evolution of language. World Scientific, Rome, pp 27–34Google Scholar
  25. Clark A (2006) Material symbols. Philos Psychol 19(3):291–307Google Scholar
  26. Clark A (2015) Surfing uncertainty: prediction, action, and the embodied mind. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  27. Clark A, Lappin S (2011) Linguistic nativism and the poverty of the stimulus. Wiley, West SussexGoogle Scholar
  28. Crass J (2008) Grammatical borrowing in Kabeena. In: Matras Y, Sakel J (eds) Grammatical borrowing in cross-linguistic perspective. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, pp 91–106Google Scholar
  29. Croft W (2000) Explaining language change: an evolutionary approach. Longman, LondonGoogle Scholar
  30. Croft W (2008) Evolutionary linguistics. Annu Rev Anthropol 37:219–234Google Scholar
  31. Cruickshank A, Gautier J, Chappuis C (1993) Vocal mimicry in wild African grey parrots Psittacus erithacus. Ibis 135(3):293–299.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1474-919x.1993.tb02846.x Google Scholar
  32. Darwin C ([1871]1922) The descent of man and selection in relation to sex. J. Murray, LondonGoogle Scholar
  33. Dawkins R (1976) The selfish gene. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  34. de Boer B (2015) Biology, culture, evolution and the cognitive nature of sound systems. J Phon 53:79–87Google Scholar
  35. de Boer B (2016) Modeling co-evolution of speech and biology. Top Cogn Sci 8(2):459–468Google Scholar
  36. de Rooij VA (2008) Grammatical borrowing in Katanga Swahili. In: Matras Y, Sakel J (eds) Grammatical borrowing in cross-linguistic perspective. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin. http://www.reference-global.com/doi/pdf/10.1515/9783110199192.123. Accessed 5 Jan 2010
  37. Deacon TW (1997) The symbolic species: the co-evolution of language and the brain. Norton, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  38. Deacon TW (2012) Beyond the symbolic species. In: Schilhab T, Stjernfelt F, Deacon T (eds) The symbolic species evolved. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 9–38Google Scholar
  39. Dediu D, Levinson SC (2014) 14.1 Social origins and the time frame of language evolution. In: The social origins of language, vol 19. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p 184Google Scholar
  40. Evans N, Levinson SC (2009) The myth of language universals: language diversity and its importance for cognitive science. Behav Brain Sci 32(5):429–492Google Scholar
  41. Everett C, Blasí DE, Roberts SG (2016) Language evolution and climate: the case of desiccation and tone. J Lang Evol 1(1):33–46Google Scholar
  42. Fischer SR (2008) Grammatical borrowing. In: Matras Y, Sakel J (eds) Grammatical borrowing in cross-linguistic perspective. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin. http://www.reference-global.com/doi/pdf/10.1515/9783110199192.387. Accessed 5 Jan 2010
  43. Frank RM (2008) The language–organism–species analogy: a complex adaptive systems approach to shifting perspective on ‘language’. Body Lang Mind 2:215–262Google Scholar
  44. Goertzel B (1997) From complexity to creativity: explorations in evolutionary, autopoietic, and cognitive dynamics. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  45. Gómez-Rendón J (2008) Grammatical borrowing in Imbabura Quichua (Ecuador). In: Matras Y, Sakel J (eds) Grammatical borrowing in cross-linguistic perspective. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin. http://www.reference-global.com/doi/pdf/10.1515/9783110199192.481. Accessed 5 Jan 2010
  46. Gottlieb G (2002) Developmental–behavioral initiation of evolutionary change. Psychol Rev 109:211–218Google Scholar
  47. Griebel U, Oller DK (2008) Evolutionary forces favoring contextual flexibility. In: Oller DK, Griebel U (eds) Evolution of communicative flexibility: complexity, creativity and adaptability in human and animal communication. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 9–40Google Scholar
  48. Griebel U, Pepperberg IM, Oller DK (2016) Developmental plasticity and language: a comparative perspective. Top Cogn Sci 8(2):435–445Google Scholar
  49. Haddow PC, Tufte G, Van Remortel P (2001) Shrinking the genotype: L-systems for EHW? In: International conference on evolvable systems. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 128–139Google Scholar
  50. Hall BK (1992) Evolutionary developmental biology. Chapman and Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  51. Hirsh-Pasek K, Golinkoff RM (1999) The origins of grammar: evidence from early language comprehension. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  52. Hume D ([1738]2000) A treatise of human nature. Reprinted in: Norton DF, Norton MJ (eds) Oxford philosophical texts. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  53. Hung T (2014). What action comprehension tells us about meaning interpretation. In: Hung T (ed) Communicative action: selected papers of the 2013 IEAS conference on language and action. Springer, Singapore, pp 125–137Google Scholar
  54. Hung T (2015) How sensorimotor interactions enable sentence imitation. Mind Mach 25(4):321–338Google Scholar
  55. Hurley S (2008) The shared circuits model (SCM): how control, mirroring, and simulation can enable imitation, deliberation, and mindreading. Behav Brain Sci 31(01):1–22Google Scholar
  56. Iyengar S, Parishar P, Mohapatra AN (2017) Avian cognition and consciousness—from the perspective of neuroscience and behaviour. In: Menon S, Nagaraj N, Binoy VV (eds) Self, culture and consciousness. Springer, Singapore, pp 23–50Google Scholar
  57. Katz VJ, Imhausen A (2007) The mathematics of Egypt, Mesopotamia, China, India, and Islam: a sourcebook. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  58. Kirby S (2001) Spontaneous evolution of linguistic structure: an iterated learning model of the emergence of regularity and irregularity. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 5(2):102–110Google Scholar
  59. Kirby S, Tamariz M, Cornish H, Smith K (2015) Compression and communication in the cultural evolution of linguistic structure. Cognition 141:87–102Google Scholar
  60. Korflandt F (2003) The origin and nature of the linguistic parasite. In: Bauer LM, Pinault G-J (eds) Language in time and space: a Festschrift for Werner Winter on the occasion of his 80th birthday. Mouton, Berlin, pp 241–244Google Scholar
  61. Kortlandt F (1985) A parasitological view of non-constructible sets. In: Pieper U, Stickel G (eds) Studia linguistica diachronica et synchronica: Werner Winter sexagenario, 1983. Mouton, Berlin, pp 477–483Google Scholar
  62. Kortlandt F (1998) Syntax and semantics in the history of Chinese. J Intercult Stud 5:167–176Google Scholar
  63. Kossmann M (2008) Grammatical borrowing in Tasawaq. In: Matras Y, Sakel J (eds) Grammatical borrowing in cross-linguistic perspective. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin. http://www.reference-global.com/doi/pdf/10.1515/9783110199192.75. Accessed 5 Jan 2010
  64. Lakoff G (1970) Linguistics and natural logic. Synthese 22(1–2):151–271Google Scholar
  65. Lickliter R, Honeycutt H (2003) Developmental dynamics: toward a biologically plausible evolutionary psychology. Psychol Bull 129(6):819–835Google Scholar
  66. Lindenmayer A (1968) Mathematical models for cellular interaction in development. J Theor Biol 18:280–315Google Scholar
  67. Livio M (2003) The golden ratio: the story of PHI, the world’s most astonishing number. Broadway, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  68. Locke JL (2006) Parental selection of vocal behavior: crying, cooing, babbling, and the evolution of language. Hum Nat 17:155–168Google Scholar
  69. Locke JL (2009) Evolutionary developmental linguistics: naturalization of the faculty of language. Lang Sci 31:33–59Google Scholar
  70. Locke JL, Bogin B (2006) Language and life history: a new perspective on the evolution and development of linguistic communication. Behav Brain Sci 29:259–325Google Scholar
  71. Maddy P (2007) Second philosophy. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  72. Maddy P (2014) The logical must: Wittgenstein on logic. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  73. Mannell R, Cox F, Harrington J (2014) An introduction to phonetics and phonology. Macquarie University, SydneyGoogle Scholar
  74. Matras Y, Sakel J (2007) Grammatical borrowing in cross-linguistic perspective. Mouton de Gruyter, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  75. McCawley JD (1971) On the role of notation in generative phonology. Indiana University Linguistics Club, BloomingtonGoogle Scholar
  76. Mendívil-Giró J-L (2006) Languages and species: limits and scope of a venerable comparison. In: Martín J, Rosselló J (eds) The biolinguistic turn. Publicacions de la Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, pp 82–118Google Scholar
  77. Minier L, Fagot J, Rey A (2015) The temporal dynamics of regularity extraction in non-human primates. Cogn Sci 40(4):1019–1030Google Scholar
  78. Mueller J, Oberecker R, Friederici AD (2009) Syntactic learning by mere exposure—an ERP study in adult learners. BMC Neurosci 10:89Google Scholar
  79. Mufwene S (2001) The ecology of language evolution. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  80. Müller GB, Newman SA (2003) Origination of organismal form: beyond the gene in developmental and evolutionary biology. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  81. Nanda S, Warms R (2019) Cultural anthropology. SAGE Publications, LondonGoogle Scholar
  82. Newman SA (2012) Physico-genetic determinants in the evolution of development. Science 338:217–219Google Scholar
  83. Nishiyama Y (2010) The mathematics of direction in writing. Int J Pure Appl Math 61(3):347–356Google Scholar
  84. no Mabuchi K ([1769]1980) Kamo no Mabuchi zenshu. Zoku Gunsho Ruijū Kanseikai, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  85. O’Grady W (2007) Syntactic development. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  86. Oller DK (2000) The emergence of the speech capacity. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, MahwahGoogle Scholar
  87. Oller DK, Griebel U (2005) Contextual freedom in human infant vocalization and the evolution of language. In: Burgess R, MacDonald K (eds) Evolutionary perspectives on human development. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, pp 135–166Google Scholar
  88. Oller DK, Buder EH, Ramsdell HL, Warlaumont AS, Chorna L, Bakeman R (2013) Functional flexibility of infant vocalization and the emergence of language. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 110(16):6318–6632.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1300337110 Google Scholar
  89. Oller DK, Griebel U, Warlaumont AS (2016) Vocal development as a guide to modeling the evolution of language. Top Cogn Sci Spec Issue N Front Lang Evol Dev Ed Wayne D. Gray, Spec Issue Ed D. Kimbrough Oller, Rick Dale, Ulrike Griebel 8(2):382–392Google Scholar
  90. Oudeyer PY, Kaplan F (2007) Language evolution as a Darwinian process: computational studies. Cogn Process 8(1):21–35Google Scholar
  91. Petrovic M, Ljubinkovic N (2011) Imitation of animal sound patterns in Serbian folk music. J Interdiscip Music Stud 5(2):101–118Google Scholar
  92. Pickering MJ, Garrod S (2013) Forward models and their implications for production, comprehension, and dialogue. Behav Brain Sci 36(04):377–392Google Scholar
  93. Posamentier AS, Lehmann I (2007) The fabulous fibonacci numbers. Prometheus Books, AmherstGoogle Scholar
  94. Prusinkiewicz P, Hanan J (1989) Lindenmayer systems, fractals, and plants. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  95. Prusinkiewicz P, Lindenmayer A (1990) The algorithmic beauty of plants. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  96. Quine W (1969) Ontological relativity and other essays. Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  97. Rey A, Perruchet P, Fagot J (2012) Centre-embedded structures are a by-product of associative learning and working memory constraints: evidence from baboons (Papio papio). Cognition 123(1):180–184Google Scholar
  98. Scott-Phillips TC (2015) Language and communication. In: Zeigler-Hill V, Welling LLM, Shackelford TK (eds) Evolutionary perspectives on social psychology. Springer, Cham, pp 279–289Google Scholar
  99. Smith AR (1984) Plants, fractals and formal languages. Comput Graph 18:1–10Google Scholar
  100. Stanley HE, Buldyrev SV, Goldberger AL, Havlin S, Ossadnik SM et al (1993) Fractal landscapes in biological systems. Fractals 1(3):283–301Google Scholar
  101. Stillwell J (2006) Yearning for the impossible: the surprising truths of mathematics. AK Peters, WellesleyGoogle Scholar
  102. Tadmor U (2008) Grammatical borrowing in Indonesian. In: Matras Y, Sakel J (eds) Grammatical borrowing in cross-linguistic perspective. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin. http://www.reference-global.com/doi/pdf/10.1515/9783110199192.301. Accessed 5 Jan 2010
  103. Thompson SP, Newport EL (2007) Statistical learning of syntax: the role of transitional probability. Lang Learn Dev 3:1–42Google Scholar
  104. Thompson B, Kirby S, Smith K (2016) Culture shapes the evolution of cognition. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 113(16):4530–4535Google Scholar
  105. van Driem G (2001) Languages of the Himalayas: an ethnolinguistic handbook of the greater Himalayan region, containing an introduction to the symbiotic theory of language. Brill, LeidenGoogle Scholar
  106. van Driem G (2005) The language organism: the Leiden theory of language evolution. In: Minett JW, Wang WS-Y (eds) Language acquisition, change and emergence: essays in evolutionary linguistics. City University of Hong Kong Press, Hong Kong, pp 331–340Google Scholar
  107. van Driem G (2007) Symbiosism, symbiomism and the Leiden definition of the meme. In: Invited keynote speech presented at the symposium on Imitation, Memory, and Cultural Changes: Probing the Meme Hypothesis, Toronto, 6 May 2007. Semiotic Circle at the University of Toronto. https://semioticon.com/virtuals/imitation/van_driem_paper.pdf. Accessed 4 April 2019
  108. van Driem G (2008a) The language organism: parasite or mutualist? Stud Slav Gen Linguist 33:101–112Google Scholar
  109. van Driem G (2008b) The origin of language. In: Bengtson JD (ed) In hot pursuit of language in prehistory: essays in the four fields of anthropology: in honor of Harold Crane Fleming. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp 381–400Google Scholar
  110. van Driem G (2015) Symbiosism, symbiomism and the perils of memetic management. In: Post MW, Morey S, DeLancey S (eds) Language and culture in Northeast India and beyond. Australian National University Press, Canberra, pp 327–347Google Scholar
  111. van Gelder T (1995) What might cognition be, if not computation? J Philos 92(7):345–381Google Scholar
  112. Waliszewski P, Konarski J (2002) Fractal structure of space and time is necessary for the emergence of self-organization, connectivity, and collectivity in cellular system. In: Losa GA, Merlini D, Nonnenmacher TF, Weibel ER (eds) Fractals in biology and medicine, vol 3. Birkhauser, Basel, pp 15–24Google Scholar
  113. West-Eberhard M-J (2003) Developmental plasticity and evolution. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  114. Wilks Y (1972) Lakoff on linguistics and natural logic (No. AIM-170). Stanford Artificial Intelligence Project. Dept of Computer Science, StanfordGoogle Scholar
  115. Wolpert D, Doya K, Kawato M (2003) A unifying computational framework for motor control and social interaction. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B 358:593–602Google Scholar
  116. Worth P, Stepney S (2005) Growing music: musical interpretations of L-Systems. Lect Notes Comput Sci 3449:545–555Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Konrad Lorenz Institute for Evolution and Cognition Research 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of European and American Studies, Academia SinicaTaipeiTaiwan

Personalised recommendations