Show simple item record

Files in this item

Thumbnail

Item metadata

dc.contributor.authorZuberbuhler, Klaus
dc.date.accessioned2019-11-18T10:30:02Z
dc.date.available2019-11-18T10:30:02Z
dc.date.issued2019-11-18
dc.identifier259379028
dc.identifier0a017fc0-7965-41a0-9bb9-dcc66fffde05
dc.identifier85075114148
dc.identifier000506580700015
dc.identifier.citationZuberbuhler , K 2019 , ' Syntax and compositionality in animal communication ' , Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society. B, Biological Sciences , vol. 375 , no. 1789 , 20190062 . https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2019.0062en
dc.identifier.issn0962-8436
dc.identifier.otherORCID: /0000-0001-8378-088X/work/65013937
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10023/18943
dc.descriptionMuch of the research reviewed in this article has benefitted from funding by the Leverhulme Trust, the European Research Council, the Royal Zoological Society of Scotland, and the Swiss National Science Foundation.en
dc.description.abstractSyntax has been found in animal communication but only humans appear to have generative, hierarchically structured syntax. How did syntax evolve? I discuss three theories of evolutionary transition from animal to human syntax: computational capacity, structural flexibility and event perception. The computation hypothesis is supported by artificial grammar experiments consistently showing that only humans can learn linear stimulus sequences with an underlying hierarchical structure, a possible by-product of computationally powerful large brains. The structural flexibility hypothesis is supported by evidence of meaning-bearing combinatorial and permutational signal sequences in animals, with sometimes compositional features, but no evidence for generativity or hierarchical structure. Again, animals may be constrained by computational limits in short-term memory but possibly also by limits in articulatory control and social cognition. The event categorization hypothesis, finally, posits that humans are cognitively predisposed to analyse natural events by assigning agency and assessing how agents impact on patients, a propensity that is reflected by the basic syntactic units in all languages. Whether animals perceive natural events in the same way is largely unknown, although event perception may provide the cognitive grounding for syntax evolution.
dc.format.extent1137258
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofPhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society. B, Biological Sciencesen
dc.subjectPrimate communicationen
dc.subjectLanguage evolutionen
dc.subjectSemanticsen
dc.subjectMeaningen
dc.subjectPermutationen
dc.subjectGrammaren
dc.subjectBF Psychologyen
dc.subjectQH301 Biologyen
dc.subject3rd-NDASen
dc.subject.lccBFen
dc.subject.lccQH301en
dc.titleSyntax and compositionality in animal communicationen
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. Institute of Behavioural and Neural Sciencesen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. Centre for Social Learning & Cognitive Evolutionen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. School of Psychology and Neuroscienceen
dc.identifier.doi10.1098/rstb.2019.0062
dc.description.statusPeer revieweden
dc.date.embargoedUntil2019-11-18


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record