Biolinguistics (E-Journal)
Not a member yet
250 research outputs found
Sort by
Evo-Devo — Of Course, But Which One? Some Comments on Chomsky’s Analogies between the Biolinguistic Approach and Evo-Devo
No full textIn some recent papers, Chomsky has suggested some non-trivial analogies between the biolinguistic approach and evolutionary developmental biology (Evo-Devo). In this paper, the point is made that those analogies should be handled with caution. The reason is that the Evo-Devo version chosen by Chomsky in order to build the analogies fully assumes a gene-centric perspective. Although providing genes with a special power fits in well with the Principles-and-Parameters model, it does not agree at all with the reduction of the power attributed to genes that the Minimalist Program has placed on the agenda. Nevertheless, other Evo-Devo approaches exist that seem more accurate than the particular version adopted by Chomsky — approaches therefore which are more promising for fulfilling the minimalist biolinguistic approach
The Cartography of Ibero-Romance Agrammatic Deficits
No full textThis paper aims at examining whether grammatical errors produced by Broca’s aphasics are a consequence of a selective impairment of functional categories in three closely related Ibero-Romance languages — Catalan, Galician, and Spanish — for which almost no work had hitherto been done. In addition, a reinterpretation will be proposed under cartographical terms (Cinque 1999, 2002, 2006, Belletti 2004, Rizzi 2004) of previous structural neurolinguistic models of agrammatic production, more specifically the Tree-Pruning Hypothesis (Friedmann 1994, Friedmann & Grodzinsky 1997, and subsequent work). Cartography has been applied to the field of language variation. However, the present article constitute a completely new use. Since the Tree-Pruning Hypothesis was based on a model of monolithic nodes, the application of the cartographic tree structure provides us with further insights about the degree of structural preservation or damage of functional categories
Viable Syntax: Rethinking Minimalist Architecture
No full textHauser et al. (2002) suggest that the human language faculty emerged as a genetic innovation in the form of what is called here a ‘keystone factor’—a single, simple, formal mental capability that, interacting with the pre-existing faculties of hominid ancestors, caused a cascade of effects resulting in the language faculty in modern humans. They take Merge to be the keystone factor, but instead it is posited here that Merge is the pre-existing mechanism of thought made viable by a principle that permits relations interpretable at the interfaces to be mapped onto c-command. The simplified minimalist architecture proposed here respects the keystone factor as closely as possible, but is justified on the basis of linguistic analyses it makes available, including a relativized intervention theory applicable across Case, scope, agreement, selection and linearization, a derivation of the A/A’-distinction from Case theory, and predictions such as why in situ wh-interpretation is island-insensitive, but susceptible to intervention effects
Language Learning and Language Universals
No full textThis paper explores the role of learning in generative grammar, highlighting interactions between distributional patterns in the environment and the innate structure of the language faculty. Reviewing three case studies, it is shown how learners use their language faculties to leverage the environment, making inferences from distributions to grammars that would not be licensed in the absence of a richly structured hypothesis space
Why Possibly Language Evolved
No full textHuman language has no close parallels in other systems of animal communication. Yet it is an important part of the cultural adaptation that serves to make humans an exceedingly successful species. In the past 20 years, a diverse set of evolutionary scholars have tried to answer the question of how language evolved in our species and why it is unique to us. They have converged on the idea that the cultural and innate aspects of language were tightly linked in a process of gene-culture coevolution. They differ widely about the details of the process, particularly over the division of labor between genes and culture in the coevolutionary process. Why is language restricted to humans given that communication seems to be so useful? A plausible answer is that language is part of human cooperation. Why did the coevolutionary process come to rest leaving impressive cultural diversity in human languages? A plausible answer is that language diversity functions to limit communication between people who cannot freely trust one another or where even truthful communications from others would result in maladaptive behavior on the part of listeners
The Biological Nature of Human Language
No full textBiolinguistics aims to shed light on the specifically biological nature of human language, focusing on five foundational questions: (1) What are the properties of the language phenotype? (2) How does language ability grow and mature in individuals? (3) How is language put to use? (4) How is language implemented in the brain? (5) What evolutionary processes led to the emergence of language? These foundational questions are used here to frame a discussion of important issues in the study of language, exploring whether our linguistic capacity is the result of direct selective pressure or due to developmental or biophysical constraints, and assessing whether the neural/computational components entering into language are unique to human language or shared with other cognitive systems, leading to a discussion of advances in theoretical linguistics, psycholinguistics, comparative animal behavior and psychology, genetics/genomics, disciplines that can now place these longstanding questions in a new light, while raising challenges for future research
Syntax: Its Evolution and Its Representation in the Brain
No full textPoeppel (2008) observes that there is no clear correspondence between units of analysis in linguistics (especially the abstract and arbitrary-looking principles of syntax) and biological units of neuroscience, concluding that current neurolinguistic research presents a case of cross-sterilization, rather than cross-fertilization. Here the proposal is developed that decomposing syntax into intermediate evolutionary layers, into its evolutionary primitives, not only makes syntax compatible with gradualist accounts, but it also renders it more tangible and less abstract. In this approach, at least some complexities (and oddities) of syntax, such as Subjacency effects and the small clause core, can be seen as side-effects/by-products of evolutionary tinkering. It is conceivable that such evolutionary considerations are a necessary missing ingredient in any attempt to establish links between the postulates of syntax and the units of neuroscience. This article considers concrete linguistic data and suggestions as to where and how to look for neurobiological correlates of syntax
Where Is the Conflict between Internalism and Externalism? A Reply to Lohndal and Narita (2009)
No full textBrain-Language Research: Where is the Progress?
No full textRecent cognitive neuroscience research improved our understanding of where, when, how, and why language circuits emerge and activate in the human brain. Where: Regions crucial for very specific linguistic processes were delineated; phonetic features and fine semantic categories could be mapped onto specific sets of cortical areas. When: Brain correlates of phonological, syntactic and semantic processes were documented early-on, suggesting language understanding in an instant (within 250ms). How: New mechanistic network models mimicking structure and function of left-perisylvian language areas suggest that multimodal action-perception circuits — rather than separate modules for action and perception — carry the processing resources for language use and understanding. Why language circuits emerge in specific areas, become active at specific early time points and are connected in specific ways is best addressed in light of neuroscience principles governing neuronal activation, correlation learning, and, critical-ly, partly predetermined structural information wired into connections between cortical neurons and areas