Upload
lydan
View
217
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
The Role of Analysis and Recombination in the Evolution
of Language Structure
Mónica Tamariz [email protected]
OVERVIEW I. Aques)onandananswer
– Whatareanalysisandrecombina.on?
II. Originofhumanculture– Theore)calargumenta)on(archaeology,evolu)onarytheory)
– Theroleofanalysisandrecombina)on
III. Theevolu)onofcomposi)onalityinlanguage– Empiricaldata(ar)ficiallanguagelearningstudies)
– Adapta)onofformstomeaningsthroughanalysisandrecombina)on
IV. Conclusion
- Whyishumanlanguagestructuresocomplex?
- Becauseonlyhumanscandoanalysisandrecombina2onofsymbols
- Whyishumanlanguagestructuresocomplex?
- Becauseonlyhumanscandoanalysisandrecombina2onofsymbols
- Whyishumanlanguagestructuresocomplex?
- Becauseonlyhumanscandoanalysisandrecombina2onofsymbols
- Whyishumanlanguagestructuresocomplex?
- Becauseonlyhumanscandoanalysisandrecombina2onofsymbols
E.g.Cons)tuency,Redundancy
- Whyishumanlanguagestructuresocomplex?
- Becauseonlyhumanscandoanalysisandrecombina2onofsymbols
Regularityallows:
• Generalisa)on• Compression
am wasthink
thoughttell toldsee saw
look lookedwalk walkedwork workedplay played
look‐=‘look’walk‐=‘walk’work‐=‘work’play‐=‘play’‐ =‘present’‐ed=‘past’
am=‘am’was=‘was’think=think’ thought=‘thought’tell=‘tell’told=‘told’ see =‘see’saw =‘saw
IRREGULAR REGULAR
- Whyishumanlanguagestructuresocomplex?
- Becauseonlyhumanscandoanalysisandrecombina/onofsymbols
hit
cut
- Whyishumanlanguagestructuresocomplex?
- Becauseonlyhumanscandoanalysisandrecombina/onofsymbols
hit
cut
withhand
moverepeatedly
- Whyishumanlanguagestructuresocomplex?
- Becauseonlyhumanscandoanalysisandrecombina/onofsymbols
hit(liRleeffort)
cut(lotsofeffort)
withhand
moverepeatedly
- Whyishumanlanguagestructuresocomplex?
- Becauseonlyhumanscandoanalysisandrecombina/onofsymbols
hit(liRleeffort)
cut(lotsofeffort)
withhand
moverepeatedly
Cut(liRleeffort)
- Whyishumanlanguagestructuresocomplex?
- Becauseonlyhumanscandoanalysisandrecombina2onofsymbols
Dobzhansky(1973):“Nothinginbiologymakessenseexceptinthelightofevolu)on”
…alsoapplicabletolinguis)cbehaviour!
II. Language Origins
• Apuzzle:Ifcumula)vecultureissoadap)ve,whyisitsorare?(Boyd&Richerson1996)
• Ananswer:Becausethecogni)vebiasesfavouredbynon‐cumula)vecultureareatoddswiththoserequiredforcumula)veculture(Tamariz2008)
Origins of culture
• Cultural
1.Emergenceofearlyculture
2.Emergenceofcumula)veculture
(Tamariz2008)Notonebuttwomajortransi)ons
Nonhuman cultural traditions
• Holis)ctransmission)edtofunc)on• Brokenchains
‐ Innova)onthrough“localenhancement”‐ Maximumcomplexity:individuallearning
‐ Noaccumula)on(Marshall‐Pescini&Whiten,2008)
1. Transition to early culture
• Holis)ctransmission)edtofunc)on
• Unbrokenchains– Someinnova)on(analysis,recombina)on)– Someaccumula)onofstructure
Oldowan&Acheuleanstonetools:negligibleinnova2onfor1Millionyears!
Language:holis)cprotolanguage,veryliRleanalysis/recombina)on(Wray2000)
Ifsomecomplexity,innova)ondeleterioustofunc)on
Sonorms/pressuresagainstinnova)on
2. Transition to cumulative culture
• Analytic transmission • Accumulation of features
– Extensive innovation (analysis, recombination)
– Interaction of different traditions
Language:grammar,composi)onality
Veryadvantageous!(Boyd&Richerson1996)
hit(liRleeffort)
cut(lotsofeffort)
withhand
moverepeatedly
Cut(liRleeffort)
If it is so advantageous, why is cumulative culture so rare?
Anadap)vegap
• Earlycultureposespressure– Forrigidimita)on– Againstanalysisandrecombina)on
• Cumula)veculture– Requiresanalysisandrecombina)on
If it is so advantageous, why is cumulative culture so rare?
Bridgingthegap• Largegroups/groupcontactmanycoexis)ngtradi)ons
• Culturalenvironmentfavours“localenhancement”• Theculturalenvironmenttriggersitsownevolu.on!
III. Adaptation of linguistic forms to meanings
Adaptation between form structure and meaning structure
Languageisasystemofsigns(Saussure)
MFFORMS MEANINGS
Adaptation between form structure and meaning structure
Adapta)onofmeaningstoforms
Tracesofformstructureinthemeanings
FFORMS MEANINGS
Adaptation between form structure and meaning structure
Adapta)onofformstomeanings
Tracesofmeaningstructureintheforms Focusonthis
MFORMS MEANINGS
kimako
koni
kanige
kuni
winige
komako
Genera.on0:randomsignals
3featuresx3values
27differentmeanings
Artificial Language Learning Kirby, Cornish & Smith 2008
Genera.on1
• Acorpusofdiachronic‘linguis)c’data
• 8lineages
• Examineonelineagewithpressureforexpressivity
Artificial Language Learning
Kirby, Cornish & Smith 2008
• Oneofthefinallanguages
• Theirresults– Learningofforms– Structureofthelanguage(systema)city)– Composi)onalityisapparent,butitisnotquan2fied
Artificial Language Learning Kirby, Cornish & Smith 2008
Analysis and recombination
• Evidenceforanalysis– Independenttransmissionofcomponentsoftheforms
• Evidenceforrecombina)on– Aretheyrecombinedindifferentways?
Evolu)onarydynamics– Formunitsandtheirfrequency– Adapta)ontothestructureofmeanings
keko 2
keke 1
ki 1
kiki 5
kiko 4
kio 1
ko 2
koku 1
ku 1
ni 1
niki 3
niko 4
nuko 1
kehu 1
keko 1
kewa 1
kike 1
kiki 1
kiko 1
guke 1
ko 2
guki 1
hu 1
huke 1
huki 1
huko 1
hupo 1
mu 2
ni 1
nigu 1
nike 1
nimu 1
niwa 1
po 1
wa 2
wagu 1
wapo 1
keko 3
ki 2
kiki 4
kiko 8
kuki 1
kuko 1
neki 1
neko 5
niki 1
niko 1
kiko 7
kuki 8
neki 2
neko 9
nuki 1
keko 1
kiko 8
kuki 9
neko 8
niko 1
kike 6
kiko 2
kuki 9
neke 2
nike 8
keke 1
keko 1
kike 7
kiko 10
neke 6
nike 2
kike 8
kiko 10
neke 4
nike 5
keke 1
ike 1
kike 6
kiko 8
neke 6
nike 5
kike 2
kiko 9
neke 2
nike 14
kiki 1
kike 10
kiko 8
neke 5
nike 3
Segment 3
1 2 3 4 5678910
Evolutionary dynamics - Variant units
Evolutionary dynamics - Frequency
!"
#"
$!"
$#"
%!"
%#"
&!"
!" $" %" &" '" #" (" )" *" +" $!"
," -"
." /"
0" 1"
2"
!"
#"
$!"
$#"
%!"
%#"
&!"
!" $" %" &" '" #" (" )" *" +" $!"
," -"
." /"
0" 1"
2" 3"
• Likegene)cdrik:intheabsenceofvaria)on,onevariantgoestofixa)on
Last consonant
Second consonant
!"#
"#
$#
%#
&#
'#
""#
"$#
(# "# )# $# *# %# +# &# ,# '# "(#
-# .# /#
0# 1# 2#
First consonant
!"
#"
$"
%"
&"
'!"
'#"
'$"
'%"
!" '" #" (" $" )" %" *" &" +" '!"
,-,." ,-,-" /0,." /-,."
,1,0" ,0,0" /0,-" /-,-"
,0,." ,0,-"
Final segment
• Stabilitysuggestsadapta)on
• Innova)on(genera)on5)
frequ
ency
generation
Evolutionary dynamics – Adaptation of forms to meanings
• Signalsegmentsbecomeassociatedwithdifferentaspectsofthemeaning
– Ini)alsegment:colour
– Middlesegment:mo)on?
– Finalsegment:mo)on
• Quan)ta)veanalysis
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Generation
RegMap
!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
! Colour Shape MotionSegment 1
Evolutionary dynamics – Adaptation of forms to meanings
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Generation
RegMap
!
!! ! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
! Colour Shape MotionSegment 2
Evolutionary dynamics – Adaptation of forms to meanings
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Generation
RegMap !
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
! Colour Shape MotionSegment 3
Evolutionary dynamics – Adaptation of forms to meanings
Evolutionary dynamics – Adaptation of forms to meanings
• Adapta)onofformscomponentstomeaningcomponentsresultsinComposi.onality
• Throughanalysisandrecombina)on
“ponekuki”
po‐=red‐kuki=bouncy
“Themeaningofawholeworddependson
themeaningoftheparts,
andtherulestocombinethem”
Artificial Language Learning Population approach
• Kirby,Cornish&Smith(2008)1par)cipantpergenera)on.Enormousimpactofindividualvaria)on
• Tamariz&Smith(2008)10par)cipantsforasinglegenera)onmanipulatelevelofstructureintheinput
tunodi
kinaga
kilobe
+
kinoga
kildige
pelobe+
Artificial Language Learning Population approach
• Kirby,Cornish&Smith(2008)1par)cipantpergenera)onEnormousimpactofindividualvaria)on
• Tamariz&Smith(2008)10par)cipantsforasinglegenera)onmanipulatelevelofstructureintheinput
• Sensi)vetoinputstructure(p<0.001)
• Alotofinnova)on(Kirby,Cornish&Smithdatashowthatinnova)ontowardscomposi)onalityisselectedfor)
0 1 2 3
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Input Languages
RegMap
Artificial Language Learning Musical language
• Par)cipantsexpect/mayinten)onallycreatepaRernsinwriRenlanguage–Effectofextensiveencultura)on?
• Brown&Tamariz(submiYed)amusicallanguage,comparetrainedmusiciansvs.non‐musicians
+ +
Artificial Language Learning Musical language
• Par)cipantsexpect/mayinten)onallycreatepaRernsinwriRenlanguage–Effectofextensiveencultura)on?
• Brown&Tamariz(submiYed)amusicallanguage,comparetrainedmusiciansvs.non‐musicians
RESULTSFORMUSICIANS
• ComparabletothoseofTamariz&Smith(2008)
• Sensi)vetoinputstructure(p<0.001)
• LiRleinnova)on1 2 3
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Input Languages
RegMap
Artificial Language Learning Musical language
• Par)cipantsexpect/mayinten)onallycreatepaRernsinwriRenlanguage–Effectofextensiveencultura)on?
• Brown&Tamariz(submiYed)amusicallanguage,comparetrainedmusiciansvs.non‐musicians
RESULTSFORNON‐MUSICIANS
• VerydifferentfromTamariz&Smith2008
• NOTsensi)vetoinputstructure
• Noinnova)on1 2 3
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Input Languages
RegMap
Artificial language learning - Conclusions
• Composi)onality– Analysisofsignalsandmeaningsintocategories/components
– Independenttransmissionofsignalcomponents– Recombina)onofsignalcomponents
• Evolu)onarydynamics– Replica)on,varia)on,selec)on– Descentwithmodifica)on
• Effectsofencultura)on(prac)ceandliteracy)
IV. Summary and conclusions (1)
• Otheranimalscancategorizetheirenvironment
• Onlyhumanscancategorize,analyze;imitateandrecombinecomponentsoftheirownbehaviouralproduc)ons
• Componentsundergoevolu)onarydynamics
– Replica)on,varia)on,selec)on
" Cumula)veculture
" Increasinglevelsofcomplexity
“Standingontheshouldersofgiants”
Summary and conclusions (and 2)
• Roleofanalysisandrecombina2oninlanguageorigin,changeanddiversifica)on
• Uniquelyhumancapaci)es,lowprobabilityofevolving• Onceitevolvedgene)cally,allowedawholenewsystem,
culture,toevolveindependentlyofgenes
!
Biologicalevolu)o
n‐gen
es
Cultu
ralevolu)o
n–
‘com
pone
nts’