Language and other Communication Systems

HUL 242

12th Jan 2023

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 1 / 21

Recap

Goals of linguistics
Levels of language analysis
Notion of grammar

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 2 / 21

 Today’s class

Communication from a biological perspective

Why do humans have language? Where did it come from?
How do our languages compare with those of other species?

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 3 / 21

Language origins

In order to investigate the origins of speech, we can examine physical

characteristics from the fossil record
Most language scientists seem to agree that the human capacity of
speech is an adaptation, i.e. a characteristic that has been selected
for (over time) and maintained
Speech as an adaptation has survived because its advantages for the
species, eventually outweighed the evolutionary disadvantages

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 4 / 21

 When we compare ourselves to our ape ancestors (below, a
chimpanzee), two important changes took place that made spoken
language possible:-
I Lowering of larynx (and subsequent expansion of pharynx)
I Expansion in the brain size

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 5 / 21

 These physiological changes allowed the tongue greater range of
motion, which allowed the production of various types of sounds
Vowels like [u], [i] and [a] are found in almost all the world’s
languages, but chimps cannot produce them1
In the reconstructed skull of early man Homo erectus, it is possible to
see an intermediate phase between apes and modern man

Picture from Boule and Vallois (1957)

1
Why human speech is special by Philip Lieberman
Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 6 / 21
 But physiological changes alone are not enough- humans evolved to
also have bigger brains
Humans compared to apes and chimpanzees, have larger brains
compared to their body weight
However, it wasn’t just size that mattered- important
re-organizational changes also took place in human brains
I development of Wernicke’s area (language comprehension)
I development of Broca’s area (motor control for speech)
I localization of language abilities in the left hemisphere

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 7 / 21

Adaptation

With these changes also came drawbacks: lowered larynx increases

chances of death by choking,
A larger brain requires more energy to maintain and human babies
also mature more slowly compared to apes
But this was offset by the ability to speak and produce thousands of
different words corresponding to different concepts
It also gave us a way organize ourselves into much larger social groups
The adaptation has persisted and thrived in our species

see Terrence Deacon, Derek Bickerton, Robin Dunbar for references on language evolution

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 8 / 21

Language emergence: case of NSL

In the 1970s, deaf children did not have a school in Nicaragua and
the deaf community lived mostly in isolation
Many developed some system of ‘home sign’ to communicate with
immediate family
When a special school opened in 1977, children from all over the
country came together
They were taught lip-reading and Spanish in school but talked to
each other in sign
Over time, as new students joined school, more sophisticated
grammatical features got added to the ‘primitive’ sign language
A new (sign) language was born, due to both communication pressure
and the mental capacity to ‘invent’ a new grammar

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 9 / 21

Communication from a biological perspective
Why do humans have language? Where did it come from?
How do our languages compare with those of other species?

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 10 / 21

What distinguishes language from other species?

Communication systems in other species are diverse, ranging from

colour changes in an octopus, gestures made by fiddler crabs, songs
of birds and dolphins
For most social animals however, the total repertoire of different
‘displays’ for communication are relatively small i.e. ranging from
15-35
This is in contrast with the unboundedness of human languages
(generativity)

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 11 / 21

Talking birds

Parrots and mynas are expert mimics- they can reproduce words and
phrases found in language, but without understanding their meaning

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 12 / 21

Talking birds

Parrots and mynas are expert mimics- they can reproduce words and
phrases found in language, but without understanding their meaning
E.g. if the bird learns to say ‘parrot‘ and also knows ‘cat’, ‘cats’,
‘dog’, ‘dogs’, it is unlikely to generalize ‘parrot-parrots’

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 12 / 21

Talking birds

Parrots and mynas are expert mimics- they can reproduce words and
phrases found in language, but without understanding their meaning
E.g. if the bird learns to say ‘parrot‘ and also knows ‘cat’, ‘cats’,
‘dog’, ‘dogs’, it is unlikely to generalize ‘parrot-parrots’
Awareness of such a plural rule is seen in children at the age of 3

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 12 / 21

Talking birds

Parrots and mynas are expert mimics- they can reproduce words and
phrases found in language, but without understanding their meaning
E.g. if the bird learns to say ‘parrot‘ and also knows ‘cat’, ‘cats’,
‘dog’, ‘dogs’, it is unlikely to generalize ‘parrot-parrots’
Awareness of such a plural rule is seen in children at the age of 3
Apart from mimicry, some birds can produce songs which contain
more complex patterns of notes

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 12 / 21

 Two types of string sequences, corresponding to languages
(AB)n An Bn
ab ab
abab aabb
ababab aaabbb
abababab aaaabbbb
Append elements to the end of a Embed elements in the centre of a
sequence sequence

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 13 / 21

 Two types of string sequences, corresponding to languages
(AB)n An Bn
ab ab
abab aabb
ababab aaabbb
abababab aaaabbbb
Append elements to the end of a Embed elements in the centre of a
sequence sequence
Most birdsong is of the (AB)n pattern (regular language)

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 13 / 21

 Two types of string sequences, corresponding to languages
(AB)n An Bn
ab ab
abab aabb
ababab aaabbb
abababab aaaabbbb
Append elements to the end of a Embed elements in the centre of a
sequence sequence
Most birdsong is of the (AB)n pattern (regular language)
Human languages can exhibit the type of nested centre embedding in
An Bn e.g. the baby the kids saw was crying

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 13 / 21

 Two types of string sequences, corresponding to languages
(AB)n An Bn
ab ab
abab aabb
ababab aaabbb
abababab aaaabbbb
Append elements to the end of a Embed elements in the centre of a
sequence sequence
Most birdsong is of the (AB)n pattern (regular language)
Human languages can exhibit the type of nested centre embedding in
An Bn e.g. the baby the kids saw was crying
the baby the kids I called saw was crying

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 13 / 21

 Two types of string sequences, corresponding to languages
(AB)n An Bn
ab ab
abab aabb
ababab aaabbb
abababab aaaabbbb
Append elements to the end of a Embed elements in the centre of a
sequence sequence
Most birdsong is of the (AB)n pattern (regular language)
Human languages can exhibit the type of nested centre embedding in
An Bn e.g. the baby the kids saw was crying
the baby the kids I called saw was crying
(It’s also possible for human languages to have structures like An Bm Cn Dm or
cross-serial dependencies) aabccd

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 13 / 21

 Gentner et al, 2006 showed that European starlings could recognize
centre embedded structures like aabb, aaabbb, aaaabbbb

Gentner, T., Fenn, K., Margoliash, D. et al. Recursive syntactic pattern learning by songbirds. Nature 440, 12041207 (2006).

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 14 / 21

 Gentner et al, 2006 showed that European starlings could recognize
centre embedded structures like aabb, aaabbb, aaaabbbb
However, it was not possible to test whether they recognized the
nested embedding i.e. a1 a2 a3 b3 b2 b1

Gentner, T., Fenn, K., Margoliash, D. et al. Recursive syntactic pattern learning by songbirds. Nature 440, 12041207 (2006).

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 14 / 21

 Gentner et al, 2006 showed that European starlings could recognize
centre embedded structures like aabb, aaabbb, aaaabbbb
However, it was not possible to test whether they recognized the
nested embedding i.e. a1 a2 a3 b3 b2 b1
This allows us to know that it was the baby crying, the kids who saw
.. etc in the baby the kids I called saw was crying

Gentner, T., Fenn, K., Margoliash, D. et al. Recursive syntactic pattern learning by songbirds. Nature 440, 12041207 (2006).

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 14 / 21

 Gentner et al, 2006 showed that European starlings could recognize
centre embedded structures like aabb, aaabbb, aaaabbbb
However, it was not possible to test whether they recognized the
nested embedding i.e. a1 a2 a3 b3 b2 b1
This allows us to know that it was the baby crying, the kids who saw
.. etc in the baby the kids I called saw was crying
The birds could recognize the equal number of as and bs – but not
whether these were the right nested pairs

Gentner, T., Fenn, K., Margoliash, D. et al. Recursive syntactic pattern learning by songbirds. Nature 440, 12041207 (2006).

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 14 / 21

 Gentner et al, 2006 showed that European starlings could recognize
centre embedded structures like aabb, aaabbb, aaaabbbb
However, it was not possible to test whether they recognized the
nested embedding i.e. a1 a2 a3 b3 b2 b1
This allows us to know that it was the baby crying, the kids who saw
.. etc in the baby the kids I called saw was crying
The birds could recognize the equal number of as and bs – but not
whether these were the right nested pairs
Starlings also find the task difficult, and some don’t learn at all

Gentner, T., Fenn, K., Margoliash, D. et al. Recursive syntactic pattern learning by songbirds. Nature 440, 12041207 (2006).

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 14 / 21

 Gentner et al, 2006 showed that European starlings could recognize
centre embedded structures like aabb, aaabbb, aaaabbbb
However, it was not possible to test whether they recognized the
nested embedding i.e. a1 a2 a3 b3 b2 b1
This allows us to know that it was the baby crying, the kids who saw
.. etc in the baby the kids I called saw was crying
The birds could recognize the equal number of as and bs – but not
whether these were the right nested pairs
Starlings also find the task difficult, and some don’t learn at all
Can non-human species really recognize context-free patterns found
in human language?

Gentner, T., Fenn, K., Margoliash, D. et al. Recursive syntactic pattern learning by songbirds. Nature 440, 12041207 (2006).

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 14 / 21

Talking birds

Songbirds acquire the ability to sing at a certain stage of

development, and in this respect, they are similar to humans

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 15 / 21

Talking birds

Songbirds acquire the ability to sing at a certain stage of

development, and in this respect, they are similar to humans
But bird songs lack semantics and words in the human sense- novel
combinations do not produce novel meanings

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 15 / 21

Talking birds

Songbirds acquire the ability to sing at a certain stage of

development, and in this respect, they are similar to humans
But bird songs lack semantics and words in the human sense- novel
combinations do not produce novel meanings
Songs seem to be meant for two purposes alone- marking territory
and seeking mates

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 15 / 21

Talking birds

Songbirds acquire the ability to sing at a certain stage of

development, and in this respect, they are similar to humans
But bird songs lack semantics and words in the human sense- novel
combinations do not produce novel meanings
Songs seem to be meant for two purposes alone- marking territory
and seeking mates
In contrast, human language has the ability to combine words into
phrases and sentences to create many new meanings

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 15 / 21

Talking birds

Songbirds acquire the ability to sing at a certain stage of

development, and in this respect, they are similar to humans
But bird songs lack semantics and words in the human sense- novel
combinations do not produce novel meanings
Songs seem to be meant for two purposes alone- marking territory
and seeking mates
In contrast, human language has the ability to combine words into
phrases and sentences to create many new meanings

Compositionality
the ability to construct larger sentences by combining smaller ones
recursively, and construct more complex meanings from smaller ones

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 15 / 21

Language characteristics

Generativity: being able to generate potentially infinite utterances

from finite means
Arbitrariness: sounds and meanings are arbitrarily related
Learnability: Language is teachable and learnable- after the first
language, other languages may also be learned
Reflexivity: Language can be used to talk about language
Compositionality: the ability to construct larger sentences by
combining smaller ones recursively, and construct more complex
meanings from smaller ones
Semanticity: refers to the idea that language can communicate
meaning, and that specific signals can be assigned specific meanings.
Duality of patterning: We can be conscious of language as a
collection of individual sounds /k/ /æ/ /t/ and as wholes ’cat’

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 16 / 21

Ape studies

Our closest ancestors-chimpanzees, gorillas and other primates

communicate using visual and auditory signals

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 17 / 21

Ape studies

Our closest ancestors-chimpanzees, gorillas and other primates

communicate using visual and auditory signals
These, like the other examples we have seen earlier appear to be
limited to scenarios like aggression, danger and subordination

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 17 / 21

Ape studies

Our closest ancestors-chimpanzees, gorillas and other primates

communicate using visual and auditory signals
These, like the other examples we have seen earlier appear to be
limited to scenarios like aggression, danger and subordination
Many people have been interested in whether primates have the
untapped potential to learn language like humans

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 17 / 21

Ape studies

Our closest ancestors-chimpanzees, gorillas and other primates

communicate using visual and auditory signals
These, like the other examples we have seen earlier appear to be
limited to scenarios like aggression, danger and subordination
Many people have been interested in whether primates have the
untapped potential to learn language like humans
Early studies ‘raised’ chimpanzees with humans and attempted to
teach them sign language (given the limitations of their vocal tract)
e.g Nim Chimpsky, Washoe

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 17 / 21

 An example interaction (in sign) between Washoe and a trainer:-

Washoe: fruit gimme

Trainer: Who funny?
Washoe: Roger
Trainer: Where cat?
Washoe: Roger gimme.
Trainer: Where cat?
Washoe: Gimme

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 18 / 21

 Chimps like Nim would produce sign sequences like eat Nim eat Nim
or banana me eat banana
These signs were characterized by repetition, and any longer
sequences were simply the result of repeating the same two signs over
and over
These signs were also not expressive, but mainly aimed at getting
food/rewards
Because apes were also trained to speak using rewards, some
questioned whether the apes were expressing intentions or trying to
get rewards

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 19 / 21

Kanzi
(Image: Wikipedia, Savage-Rumbaugh and
Kanzi with lexigrams )
Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242)
Kanzi the bonobo was trained
using observational learning
(learning by watching)
The bonobo’s caregivers
modelled language behaviour
using lexigrams
Kanzi was encouraged to pay
attention, but not explicitly
rewarded
He eventually learned about 200
signs and could spontaneously
use them
12th Jan 2023 20 / 21
Ape talk

The acquisition trajectory of signing apes has differed greatly from

human children
There is variability in whether an animal will learn signing even when
exposed to similar models of learning
Human children actively experiment with language e.g. babbling, and
also comprehend language-specific sounds before they start producing
them
The domain of ape language is mainly imperative, making requests,
asking for food etc. This was true even for Kanzi who was trained
differently
The application of grammatical rules does not show the systematicity
found in human children (e.g. more juice and juice more used
interchangeably)

Ashwini Vaidya (HUL 242) 12th Jan 2023 21 / 21