Minds and Machines

, Volume 9, Issue 3, pp 309–346

Syntax as an Emergent Characteristic of the Evolution of Semantic Complexity

  • P. Thomas Schoenemann


It is commonly argued that the rules of language, as distinct from its semantic features, are the characteristics which most clearly distinguish language from the communication systems of other species. A number of linguists (e.g., Chomsky 1972, 1980; Pinker 1994) have suggested that the universal features of grammar (UG) are unique human adaptations showing no evolutionary continuities with any other species. However, recent summaries of the substantive features of UG are quite remarkable in the very general nature of the features proposed. While the syntax of any given language can be quite complex, the specific rules vary so much between languages that the truly universal (i.e. innate) aspects of grammar are not complex at all. In fact, these features most closely resemble a set of general descriptions of our richly complex semantic cognition, and not a list of specific rules. General principles of the evolutionary process suggest that syntax is more properly understood as an emergent characteristic of the explosion of semantic complexity that occurred during hominid evolution. It is argued that grammatical rules used in given languages are likely to be simply conventionalized, invented features of language, and not the result of an innate, grammar-specific module. The grammatical and syntactic regularities that are found across languages occur simply because all languages attempt to communicate the same sorts of semantic information.

language grammar syntax semantics evolution emergence brain size 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bates, E. (1992), ‘Language development’, Current Opinion in Neurobiology 2, pp. 180–185.Google Scholar
  2. Bates, E. and MacWhinney, B. (1990), ‘Welcome to functionalism’, Behavioural and Brain Sciences 13, pp. 727–728.Google Scholar
  3. Bates, E., Thal, D. and Marchman, V. (1991), ‘Symbols and syntax: A Darwinian approach to language development’, in N. Krasnegor, D. Rumbaugh, R. Schiefelbusch and M. Studdert-Kennedy, eds., Biological and Behavioural Determinants of Language Development, Hillsdale, New Jersey: Erlbaum, pp. 29–65.Google Scholar
  4. Bever, T. G. (1970), ‘The cognitive basis for linguistic structures’,, in J. R. Hayes, ed., Cognition and the Development of Language, New York: Wiley & Sons, pp. 279–362.Google Scholar
  5. Bickerton, D. (1990), Language & Species. Chicago, University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bowerman, M. (1988), ‘The no negative evidence’ problem: How do children avoid constructing an overly general grammar?’, in J. A. Hawkins, ed., Explaining Language Universals, New York: Basil Blackwell Inc., pp. 73–101.Google Scholar
  7. Brown, R. and Hanlon, C. (1970), ‘Derivational complexity and order of acquisition of syntax’, in J. R. Hayes, ed., Cognition and the Development of Language, New York; Wiley, pp. 11–53.Google Scholar
  8. Carroll, J. B. (1979), ‘Psychometric approaches to the study of language abilities’, Individual Differences in Language Ability and Language Behavior. C. J. Fillmore, D. Kempler and W. S.-Y. Wang. New York: Academic Press, pp. 13–31.Google Scholar
  9. Cartmill, M. (1990), ‘Human uniqueness and theoretical content in paleoanthropology’. International Journal of Primatology (3), pp. 173–192.Google Scholar
  10. Chomsky, N. (1972). Language and Mind, New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc.Google Scholar
  11. Chomsky, N. (1980), ‘Rules and representations’, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 3, pp 1–61.Google Scholar
  12. Chomsky, N. (1981), Lectures on Government and Binding, Dordrecht: Foris Publications.Google Scholar
  13. Christianson, G. E. (1978), This Wild Abyss: The Story of the Men Who Made Modern Astronomy, New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  14. Crain, S. (1991), ‘Language acquisition in the absence of experience’, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14, pp. 597–650.Google Scholar
  15. Curtiss, S. (1977), Genie: A Psycholinguistic Study of a Modern-Day ‘Wild Child’, New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  16. Damasio, A. R. and Damasio, H. (1992), ‘Brain and language’, Scientific American 267(3), pp. 89–95.Google Scholar
  17. Darwin, C. (1859), The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, London: John Murray.Google Scholar
  18. Darwin, C. (1868), The Variation of Animals and Plants Under Domestication. Google Scholar
  19. Dawkins, R. (1982), The Extended Phenotype: The Gene as the Unit of Selection, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Dawkins, R. (1986), The Blind Watchmaker, New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc.Google Scholar
  21. Deacon, T. W. (1997), The Symbolic Species: The Co-evolution of Language and the Brain, New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
  22. Ebbesson, S. O. E. (1984), ‘Evolution and ontogeny of neural circuits’, Behavioural and Brain Sciences 7, pp. 321–366.Google Scholar
  23. Falk, D. (1987), ‘Hominid Paleoneurology’, Annual Review of Anthropology 16, pp. 13–30.Google Scholar
  24. Ferguson, A. (1767), An Essay on the History of Civil Society. London.Google Scholar
  25. Fetzer, J. H. (1988), ‘Signs and minds: An introduction to the theory of semiotic systems’, in J. H. Fetzer, ed., Aspects of Artificial Intelligence, Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 133–161.Google Scholar
  26. Fodor, J. A. (1975), The Language of Thought, New York: Crowell.Google Scholar
  27. Gardner, H. (1974), The Shattered Mind, New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
  28. Gardner, R. A. and Gardner, B. T. (1984), ‘A vocabulary test for chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes)’, Journal of Comparative Psychology 98, pp. 381–404.Google Scholar
  29. Gold, E.M. (1967), ‘Language identification in the limit?’, Information and Control 10, pp. 447–474.Google Scholar
  30. Gopnik, M. and Crago, M. B. (1991), ‘Familial aggregation of a developmental language disorder’, Cognition 39, pp. 1–50.Google Scholar
  31. Gordon, P. (1986), ‘Level-ordering in lexical development’, Cognition 21, pp. 73–93.Google Scholar
  32. Haiman, J. (1985a), Natural Syntax: Iconicity and Erosion, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Haiman, J., ed. (1985b), Iconicity in Syntax, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  34. Hayek, F. A. (1973), Law, Legislation and Liberty, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  35. Herrnstein, R. J. (1979), ‘Acquisition, generalization, and discrimination reversal of a natural concept’, Journal of Experimental Psychology 5, pp. 116–129.Google Scholar
  36. Hopper, P. (1987), ‘Emergent Grammar’, Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 13, pp. 139–157.Google Scholar
  37. Hopper, P. J. and Traugott, E. C. (1993), Grammaticalization, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Jacob, F. (1977), ‘Evolution and tinkering’, Science 196, pp. 1161–1166.Google Scholar
  39. Jerison, H. J. (1973), Evolution of the Brain and Intelligence, New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  40. Jerison, H. J. (1985), ‘Animal intelligence as encephalization’, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B 308, 21–35.Google Scholar
  41. Karmiloff-Smith, A., Tyler, L. K., Voice, K., Sims, K., Udwin, O., Howlin, P. and Davies, M. (1998), ‘Linguistic dissociations in Williams syndrome: evaluating receptive syntax in on-line and offline tasks’, Neuropsychologia 36(4), 343–51.Google Scholar
  42. Kiparsky, P. (1982), ‘Lexical phonology and morphology’, in I. S. Yang, ed., Linguistics in the Morning Calm, Seoul: Hansin.Google Scholar
  43. Langacker, R. W. (1987), Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Lashley, K. S. (1951), ‘The problem of serial order in behavior’, Cerebral Mechanisms in Behavior. L. A. Jeffress. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., pp. 112–136.Google Scholar
  45. Lenneberg, E. H. (1967), Biological Foundations of Language, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Google Scholar
  46. Lieberman, P. (1984), The Biology and Evolution of Language, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Lovejoy, C. O. (1988), ‘Evolution of Human Walking’, Scientific American (November): 118–125.Google Scholar
  48. Markman, E. M. (1987), ‘How children constrain the possible meanings of words?’ in U. Neisser, ed., Concepts and Conceptual Development: Ecological and Intellectual Factors in Categorization, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Mayr, E. (1978), ‘Evolution’, Scientific American 239, pp. 47–55.Google Scholar
  50. McNeill, D. (1966), ‘Developmental psycholinguistics’, in F. Smith and G. Miller, eds., The Genesis of Language: A Psycholinguistic Approach, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 15–84.Google Scholar
  51. Miller, G. A. and Gildea, P. M. (1991), ‘How children learn words’, in The Emergence of Language: Development and Evolution. W. S.-Y. Wang, ed., New York: W. H. Freeman, pp. 150–158.Google Scholar
  52. O'Grady, W. (1987), Principles of Grammar & Learning, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  53. Ogura, M. (1993), ‘The development of periphrastic do in English: A case of lexical diffusion in syntax’, Diachronica 10(1), pp. 51–85.Google Scholar
  54. Pepperberg, I. M. (1990), ‘Conceptual abilities of some nonprimate species, with an emphasis on an African Grey parrot’, in S.T. Parker and K.R. Gibson, eds., ‘Language’ and Intelligence in Monkeys and Apes: Comparative Developmental Perspectives, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 469–507.Google Scholar
  55. Pinker, S. (1994), The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language, New York: Harper Collins Publishers, Inc.Google Scholar
  56. Pinker, S. and P. Bloom (1990), ‘Natural language and natural selection’, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13(4), pp. 707–784.Google Scholar
  57. Premack, A. J. and Premack, D. (1972), ‘Teaching language to an ape’, Scientific American (October), pp. 92–99.Google Scholar
  58. Regier, T. (1996), The Human Semantic Potential: Spatial Language and Constrained Connectionism, Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  59. Ringo, J. L. (1991), ‘Neuronal interconnection as a function of brain size’, Brain Behavior and Evolution 38, pp. 1–6.Google Scholar
  60. Ross, J. R. (1979), ‘Where's English?’, in C. J. Fillmore, D. Kempler and W. S.-Y. Wang, eds., Individual Differences in Language Ability and Language Behavior, New York: Academic Press, pp. 127–163.Google Scholar
  61. Sampson, G. (1978), ‘Linguistic universals as evidence for empiricism’, Journal of Linguistics 14, pp. 183–206.Google Scholar
  62. Sampson, G. (1979), ‘A non-nativist account of language universals’, Linguistics and Philosophy 3, pp. 99–104.Google Scholar
  63. Sampson, G. (1980), Making Sense, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  64. Sampson, G. (1997), Educating Eve: The ‘Language Instinct’ Debate, London: Cassell.Google Scholar
  65. Savage-Rumbaugh, S. (1988), ‘A new look at ape language: Comprehension of vocal speech and syntax’, in D.W. Leger, ed., Comparative Perspectives in Modern Psychology, Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, pp. 201–255.Google Scholar
  66. Savage-Rumbaugh, E. S., Murphy, J., Sevcik, R. A., Brakke, K. E., Williams, S. L. and Rumbaugh, D. M. (1993), ‘Language comprehension in ape and child’, Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Develonment 58(3–4), pp. 1–222.Google Scholar
  67. Savage-Rumbaugh, E. S. and Rumbaugh, D. M. (1993), ‘The emergence of language’, in K.R. Gibson and T. Ingold, eds., Tools, Language and Cognition in Human Evolution, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 86–108.Google Scholar
  68. Schoenemann, P. T. (1997), An MRI Study of the Relationship Between Human Neuroanatomy and Behavioral Ability, Unpublished dissertation. University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  69. Schoenemann, P. T. and Wang, W. S.-Y. (1996), ‘Evolutionary principles and the emergence of syntax’, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 19(4), pp. 646–647.Google Scholar
  70. Seyfarth, R. M., Cheney, D. L. and Marler, P. (1980), ‘Vervet monkey alarm calls: Semantic communication in a free-ranging primate’, Animal Behavior 28, pp. 1070–1094.Google Scholar
  71. Simon, H. (1962), ‘The architecture of complexity’, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 106, pp. 467–482.Google Scholar
  72. Smith, B. H. (1990), ‘The cost of a large brain’, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13, pp. 365–366.Google Scholar
  73. Snowdon, C. T. (1990), ‘Language capacities of nonhuman animals’, Yearbook of Physical Anthropology 33, pp. 215–243.Google Scholar
  74. Steele, S. (1978), ‘Word order variation: A typological study’, in J.H. Greenberg, ed., Universals of Human Language: Syntax, Stanford: Stanford University Press, pp. 585–623.Google Scholar
  75. Traugott. E. C. (1972), A History of English Syntax, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  76. Vargha-Khadem, F., Watkins, K., Alcock, K., Fletcher, P. and Passingham, R. (1995), ‘Praxic and nonverbal cognitive deficits in a large family with a genetically transmitted speech and language disorder’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. U.S.A. 92, pp. 930–933.Google Scholar
  77. Visalberghi, E. and Fragaszy, D.M. (1990), ‘Do monkeys ape?’, in S. T. Parker and K. R. Gibson, ed., ‘Language’ and Intelligence in Monkeys and Apes: Comparative Developmental Perspectives, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 247–273.Google Scholar
  78. Wang, W. S.-Y. (1984), ‘Organum ex machina?’, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 7(2), pp. 210–211.Google Scholar
  79. Wang, W. S.-Y. (1991a), ‘Language prefabs and habitual thought’, in W. S.-Y. Wang, ed., Explorations in Language, Taipei, Taiwan: Pyramid Press, pp. 397–412Google Scholar
  80. Wang, W. S.-Y. (1991b), Explorations in Language, Taipei: Pyramid Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. Thomas Schoenemann
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of AnthropologyUniversity of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA e-mail

Personalised recommendations