Language and Evolution Reading Group 3/29/2012 Natural Language and Natural Selection Steven Pinker and Paul

l Bloom (1990)

Nicholas Lester, 2012

Key Terms: gradualism/punctuated equilibrium evolution occurs typically at abrupt speciation events which are smoothed out gradually over geologically significant periods of time law of growth and form for instance, as bodies grow, brains grow; bisymmetry in human form, etc. natural selection retention of mutations that increase reproductive success within a gene pool adaptive complexity part of any system that has many interacting parts whose structure and arrangement suggest design for a particular purpose saltation abrupt changes in genome selective pressure any cause that reduces reproductive success spandrel triangular area formed when a dome is fit over a series of curved arches analogy similar in function, but having a different evolutionary origin homology similar in position, structure, evolutionary origin (not necessarily function) exaptation shift in the function of a trait through evolution (repurposing) genetic drift change in the frequency of an allele within a population due to random sampling genetic fixation reduction of 2+ possible alleles to a single allele allele genetic variant homeosis transformation of one body part into another because of developmental misexpression of genetic material parity system may be arbitrary so long as it is consistent across instances (shared) Baldwin Effect superficially Lamarckian developments that can be attributed to adaptation 1. Introduction Chomsky (1982) Though theories of natural selection are well-equipped and quite accurate in detailing the distributions and fixation/attrition of features within a genetic population, they do not explain the emergence of these traits. Presumably, language is a system which must have emerged with a great deal of complexity already built in. Pinker & Bloom Natural selection is the only theory that can explain the emergence of complex systems within genetic populations. Changes of this type (qualitatively distinct emergent systems of high complexity) are astronomically improbable (cf. the development of the human eye). 2. The role of Natural Selection in Evolutionary Theory Gould & Lewontin (1979) Not all traits emerge via adaptationist processes of selection. Processes of evolution may be constrained by spandrel effects, whereby conditions inherent to the architecture already present within a system define or parameterize the development of subsystems. Thus, coincidental structure emerging from the interaction of broader systems shapes future developments within that structure. has been interpreted as minimizing the role of natural selection, though it actually simply outlined another component of the evolutionary process

Language and Evolution Reading Group 3/29/2012

Nicholas Lester, 2012

future works will argue that language emerged from such a spandrel, viz. one generated by coincidental interactions of other non-linguistic cognitive mechanisms sensory-motor, analogical, metaphorical, etc. suggests that unmodified spandrels, that is, instances of exaptation, suggest that natural selection is not necessary within such events of repurposing.

Pinker & Bloom Spandrels and selectionist processes in evolution are independent but interactive. There are spandrels without function (that is, spandrels that have not been the site of selectionist change). Spandrels, exaptations, laws of growth, and so on can explain the basic plans, parts, and materials that natural selection works with, but when such parts and patterns are modified and combined into complex biological machines fulfilling some delicate function, these modifications must be explained by natural selection. (p. 7) Kingsolver & Koehl (1985) In their evolutionary history, certain flying insects had proto-wings which, given their inadequate size, could not possibly function as wings however, they functioned rather well as solar heat exchange panels. Piattelli-Palmarini cites this as an example of exaptation solar heat exchange panels grow and are repurposed for flight. Pinker & Bloom This process is still gradual, and natural selection would be the only available force to fixate the genetic buttressing of this appendage for flight. 3. Design in Language Evidence of design Vocal tract uniquely suited to communication (high bandwidth, volume-variable, non-manual) Complex internal structure that appears to operate according to universal principles System serves specific purposes o Communicate propositions between humans o Communicates only a subset of all knowledge possible communicated between humans Resemblance to man-made artifacts (e.g. symbolic logic) Design and diversity Diversity of functions of similar forms seems to counter claims that selective pressure could result in such structures (word order for predicate-argument relations or pragmatic/discursive/focus purposes) Multi-purpose (within a finite set) structures frequent in evolution o Though different languages use the same structures for different purposes, these divergent uses fall within a bounded set o All languages seem to make use of the same structures but may apply these structures at different granularities of scope (S, NP, Text, etc), different levels of grammatical abstraction, etc. Why more than one language? o Device for creating/acquiring ways to refer to cultural innovations could a priori account for any lexeme Different cultures could therefore generate different lexicons

Language and Evolution Reading Group 3/29/2012 o

Nicholas Lester, 2012

Lexicon too unwieldy/massive to be stored in the genome Would impede evolution (size would stretch evolutionary span, thereby making the process more vulnerable to random perturbations of stochastic genetic processes Would require highly improbably synchrony across potentially large genetic pop. Other cognitive processes may facilitate acquisition of certain components of the grammar, which could then be stored in the environment rather than in the genome

Language design and arbitrariness Arguments against language as an adaptive phenomenon Language could be better than it is o Seemingly functionless constraints (e.g., subjacency) Even if something is functionless, it could be a spandrel of a broader grammatical function At any rate, it does not imply that all grammar is functionless o Evolution does not strive for perfection There are tradeoffs between adaptive goals Language contains many such tradeoffs Speaker/listener asymmetry Decisions in tradeoffs can result in different emphases Further evidence for the variability of languages within different populations The possibility for difference/better formulation does not entail functionlessness Subjacency, for instance, could serve processing concerns based on limited working-memory capacity Language could be different than it is o Parity shows that arbitrariness is outweighed by standardization Adaptation may reside in the push for all members of a community to share the system Preference for arbitrariness Choose rules arbitrarily from an arbitrary set Choose only those arbitrary rules that your community also chooses Arbitrainess and Language Evolution/Acq Language evolution and language acquisition must be distinct processes Children acquire a fully formed system LAD is a manual for interpreting linguistic input o Evol. is functionalist o Acq. is not it is governed by the arbitrary complex system resulting from evolution Idiosyncrasies persist because of the need for stable forms in communication o As in closed genetic systems like certain courtship behaviors 4. Arguments for language being a spandrel The mind is a all-purpose learning device The computer may have many potential applications, but the actualization of these requires reprogramming

Language and Evolution Reading Group 3/29/2012

Nicholas Lester, 2012

Neural systems have developed different purposes across the animal kingdom The purposes to which this material has been put does not appear to be circumscribed in the manner that the spandrel metaphor suggests Enlarged brain = qualitative shift? or Do physical laws lead inevitably to language? Complex computational systems require externally imposed structure or high frequency, richly structured input Developmental anomalies in the brain may result in reduced linguistic but otherwise normal functionality Genetic variation How can language be adaptionist if there doesnt appear to be variation across individuals? There is such variability, and it can be very subtle (cf. the notion of idiolect) Intermediate steps How can language be adaptionist if there dont appear to be non-shared innovations? Differences in comprehensibility and production could account for productive innovations being understandable by individuals not sharing such innovation Drawing new distinctions could lead to reinforcement of new neuronal structures o fake Lamarckianism o Baldwin Effect Categorical rules How could categorical rules develop gradually? Homeosis could provide such an example Proto-rules could develop within other cognitive systems, then through selection be repurposed towards the specific demands of language Reproductive advantages? Small advantages can snowball quickly Transmission of knowledge crucial to survival Social use of language Cooperative relationships Ever-increasing competition centered in use of language o Deception o Reproductive relationships o Familial relationships o Persuasion and argument Phyletic continuity Why dont we find evidence of something like human language in closely-related species? Simply because we have not found such evidence does not mean that it does not exist Chimps and humans diverge enough in terms of genetic content that the development of language in one and not the other is not impossible Chimps have presumably done evolving of their own since our common ancestor that could have followed a different path

Language and Evolution Reading Group 3/29/2012

Nicholas Lester, 2012