Show simple item record

Files in this item

Thumbnail

Item metadata

dc.contributor.authorZuberbuhler, Klaus
dc.date.accessioned2020-04-09T23:32:25Z
dc.date.available2020-04-09T23:32:25Z
dc.date.issued2019-05
dc.identifier.citationZuberbuhler , K 2019 , ' Evolutionary roads to syntax ' , Animal Behaviour , vol. 151 , pp. 259-265 . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2019.03.006en
dc.identifier.issn0003-3472
dc.identifier.otherPURE: 257793989
dc.identifier.otherPURE UUID: b4a90fa2-4679-4817-9c78-bc8409051571
dc.identifier.otherScopus: 85063676464
dc.identifier.otherWOS: 000467013300026
dc.identifier.otherORCID: /0000-0001-8378-088X/work/64360724
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10023/19777
dc.descriptionThe author is grateful to the Swiss National Science Foundation (Project 31003A_166458) for support.en
dc.description.abstractSyntax is habitually named as what sets human language apart from other communication systems, but how did it evolve? Comparative research on animal behaviour has contributed in important ways, with mainly three sets of data. First, animals have been subjected to artificial grammar tasks, based on the hypothesis that human syntax has evolved through advanced computational capacity. In these experiments humans generally outperform animals, but there are questions about validity, as experimental stimuli are (deliberately) kept devoid of semantic content. Second, animal communication has been compared in terms of the surface structures with the aim of developing a typology of animal syntax, based on the hypothesis that syntax is an evolutionary solution to the constraints of small signal repertoires. A wide range of combinatorial phenomena has been described, mainly in nonhuman primates, but there is little support for the hypothesis that syntax has emerged due to repertoire size constraints. A third way of studying the evolution of syntax is to compare how animals perceive and communicate about external events, the mental deep structure of syntax. Human syntax is closely aligned with how we perceive events in terms of agency, action and patience, each with subsidiary functions. The event perception hypothesis has been least explored in animals and requires a serious research programme.
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofAnimal Behaviouren
dc.rightsCopyright © 2019, Elsevier Ltd on behalf of The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour. This work is made available online in accordance with the publisher’s policies. This is the author created, accepted version manuscript following peer review and may differ slightly from the final published version. The final published version of this work is available at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2019.03.006en
dc.subjectArgument structureen
dc.subjectCombinatorialityen
dc.subjectCommunicationen
dc.subjectCompositionalityen
dc.subjectComputational capacityen
dc.subjectEvent perceptionen
dc.subjectGrammaren
dc.subjectLanguageen
dc.subjectMeaningen
dc.subjectRepertoire constraintsen
dc.subjectRC0321 Neuroscience. Biological psychiatry. Neuropsychiatryen
dc.subjectQH301 Biologyen
dc.subjectT-NDASen
dc.subject.lccRC0321en
dc.subject.lccQH301en
dc.titleEvolutionary roads to syntaxen
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.description.versionPostprinten
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.doihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2019.03.006
dc.description.statusPeer revieweden
dc.date.embargoedUntil2020-04-10


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record