Representational Systems in Zoosemiotics and Anthroposemiotics Part II: On Meta-Representation and Human Language

Vilém Uhlíř

doi:10.2478/lf-2018-0006

Abstract

Following the conclusions of the previous paper (Uhlir, this issue), this paper adopts a theory that is based on the notion that the essence of language is uniquely human, with no homologue elsewhere in nature, and advances the possibility that human language is discontinuous not only within communication systems but also within representational systems. Linguistic data from disparate sources in Homo sapiens are contrasted with evidence from animals. After briefly discussing the dialectics between the mosaic approach to language and the holistic approach to an integrated left hemisphere, the paper culminates in a proposal of a general zoosemiotic theory of “Representational Systems” and a special anthroposemiotic theory of “Meta-representational Systems”.

References

[1] Harris, R.A., 1995. The linguistics wars. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[2] Chomsky, N., 1965. Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.21236/AD0616323
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[3] Chomsky, N., 1968. Language and mind. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.10.1037/e400082009-004
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[4] Chomsky, N., 1980. Rules and representations. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.10.1017/S0140525X00001515
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[5] Chomsky, N., 1986. Knowledge of language: Its nature, origin and use. New York: Praeger.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[6] Pinker, S., 1984. Language learnability and language development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[7] Pinker, S., 1995. The language instinct: How the mind creates language. New York, NY: Harper Perennial.10.1037/e412952005-009
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[8] Berwick, R.C., 1985. The acquisition of syntactic knowledge. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/1074.001.0001
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[9] Lightfoot, D., 1982. The language lottery: Toward a biology of grammars. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[10] van der Hulst, H., 2010. Re recursion. In van der Hulst, H. (Ed.), Recursion and human language. Germany: Mouton de Gruyter10.1515/9783110219258
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[11] van der Hulst, H., 2010. A note on recursion in phonology. In van der Hulst, H. (Ed.), Recursion and human language. Germany: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 285–300.10.1515/9783110219258
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[12] van der Hulst, H. (Ed.) 2010. Recursion and human language. Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110219258
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[13] Karlsson, F., 2010. Recursion and iteration. In van der Hulst, H. (Ed.), Recursion and human language. Germany: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 43–68.10.1515/9783110219258.43
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[14] Perfors, A., Tenenbaum, J., Gibson, E., et al., 2010. How recursive is language? A Bayesian exploration. In van der Hulst, H. (Ed.), 2010. Recursion and human language. Germany: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 159–178.10.1515/9783110219258.159
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[15] Jackendoff, R., 1972. Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[16] Jackendoff, R., 1977. X-bar syntax: A study of phrase structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[17] Bever, T.G., 1970. The cognitive basis for linguistic structures. In Hayes, J.R. (Ed.), Cognition and the development of language. New York: Wiley and Sons, pp. 279–362.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[18] Sebeok, T.A., Rosenthal, R. (Eds.) 1981. The Clever Hans phenomenon: Communication with horses, whales, apes, and people. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, Vol. 364.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[19] Umiker-Sebeok, J., Sebeok, T.A. (Eds.) 1980. Speaking of apes: A critical anthology of two-way communication with man. Berlin: Springer.10.1007/978-1-4613-3012-7
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[20] Terrace, H., Petitto, L.A., Sanders, R.J., et al., 1979. Can an ape create a sentence? Science, 206 4421, 891–902.10.1126/science.504995
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[21] Terrace, H., Petitto, L.A., Sanders, R.J., et al., 1980. On the grammatical capacity of apes. In Nelson, K. (Ed.), Children’s language, vol. 2. New York: Gardner Press, pp. 371–495.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[22] Terrace, H., Petitto, L.A., Sanders, R.J., et al., 1981. Ape language. Science, 211, 87–88.10.1126/science.7444455
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[23] Premack, D., 1983. The codes of man and beasts. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 6(1), 125–37.10.1017/S0140525X00015077
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[24] Premack, D., 1984. Possible general effects of language training on the Chimpanzee. Human Development, 27, 268–281.10.1159/000272921
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[25] Premack, D., 1988. Minds with and without language. In Weiskrantz, L. (Ed.), Thought without language. A Fyssen Foundation Symposium. New York: Calderon Press, 46–65.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[26] Seidenberg, M.S., Petitto, L.A., 1979. Signing behavior in apes: A critical review. Cognition, 7, 177–215.10.1016/0010-0277(79)90019-2
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[27] Seidenberg, M.S., Petitto, L.A., 1981. Ape signing: Problems of method and interpretation. In Sebeok, T.A., Rosenthal, R. (Eds.), The Clever Hans phenomenon: Communication with horses, whales, apes, and people. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, Vol. 364, pp. 94–114.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[28] Sebeok, T.A., 1980. Looking in the destination for what should have been sought in the source. In Umiker-Sebeok, J., Sebeok, T.A. (Eds.), Speaking of apes: A critical anthology of two-way communication with man. Berlin: Springer, pp. 407–428.10.1007/978-1-4613-3012-7_20
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[29] Sebeok, T.A., 1981. The ultimate enigma of “Clever Hans”: The union of nature and culture. In Sebeok, T.A., Rosenthal, R. (Eds.), The Clever Hans phenomenon: Communication with horses, whales, apes, and people. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, Vol. 364, pp. 199–205.10.1111/j.1749-6632.1981.tb34473.x
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[30] Wallman, J., 1992. Aping language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511611858
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[31] Anderson, S.R., 2004. Doctor Dolittle’s delusion: Animals and the uniqueness of human language. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[32] Tomasello, M.E., 1994. Can an ape understand a sentence? A review of language comprehension in ape and child by E. D. Savage-Rumbaugh et al. Language and Communication, 14, 377–390.10.1016/0271-5309(94)90027-2
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[33] Tomasello, M.E., 1999. The cultural origins of human cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.10.4159/9780674044371
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[34] Tomasello, M.E., 2007. If They’re so good at grammar, Then why don’t they talk? Hind from apes’ and humans’ use of gestures. Language, Learning and Development, 3, 133–156.10.1080/15475440701225451
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[35] Pinker, S., 1994. How could a child use verb syntax to learn verb semantics? Lingua, 92, 377–410.10.1016/0024-3841(94)90347-6
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[36] Passingham, R.E., 1979. Specialization and the language areas. In Steklis, H., Raleigh, M.J. (Eds.), Neurobiology of social communication in primates. New York: Academic Press, pp. 221–256.10.1016/B978-0-12-665650-3.50014-1
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[37] Anderson, S.R., Lightfoot, D.W., 2002. The language organ: Linguistics as cognitive physiology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511613869
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[38] Gleitman, L.R., Gleitman, H., Landau, B., et al., 1988. Where learning begins: Initial representations for langage learning. In Newmeyer, F.J. (Ed.), Linguistics: The Cambridge Survey vol. III. Language: Psychological and biological aspects. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 150–193.10.1017/CBO9780511621062.007
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[39] Gleitman, L.R., 1986. Biological dispositions to learn language. In Demopoulos, W., Madras, A. (Eds.), Language leasing and koncept acquisition: Foundational issues. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, pp. 3–28.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[40] Bowerman, M., 1973. Early syntactic development. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[41] Clark, H.H., Clark, E.V., 1977. Psychology and language. New York: Hartcourt Brace.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[42] Cromer, R., 1981. Reconceptualizing language acquisition and cognitive development. In Scheifelbusch, R.L., Bricker, D.D. (Eds.), 1981. Early language: Acquisition and intervention. Baltimore: University Park Press, pp. 53–102.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[43] de Villiers, J.G., de Villiers, P.A., 1978. Early language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.10.4159/harvard.9780674331495
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[44] Newport, E.L., Gletiman, H., Gleitman, L.R., 1977. Mother, i’d rather do it myself: Some effects and non-effects of maternal speech style. In Snow, C.E., Ferguson, C.A. (Eds.), Talking to children: Language input and acquisition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 109–149.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[45] Josse, G., Mazoyer, B., Crivello, F., et al., 2003. Left planum temporale: An anatomical marker of left hemispheric specialization for language comprehension. Cognitive Brain Research, 18(1), 1–14.10.1016/j.cogbrainres.2003.08.007
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[46] Josse, G., Hervé, P., Crivello, F., et al., 2006. Hemispheric specialization for language: Brain volume matters. Brain Research, 1068(1), 184–193.10.1016/j.brainres.2005.11.037
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[47] Josse, G., Tzourio-Mazoyer, N., 2004. Hemispheric specialization for language. Brain Research Reviews, 44(1), 1–12.10.1016/j.brainresrev.2003.10.001
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[48] Witelson, S.F., 1977. Anatomic asymmetry in the temporal lobes: Its documentation, phylogenesis and relationship to functional asymmetry. In Diamond, S.J., Blizard, D.A. (Eds.), Evolution and lateralization of the brain. Annals of The New York Academy of Sciences, Vol. 299, pp. 328–354.10.1111/j.1749-6632.1977.tb41920.x
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[49] Chomsky, N., 1995. The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[50] Boeckx, C., 2006. Linguistic minimalism: Origins, concepts, methods and aims. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199247455.013.0018
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[51] Boeckx, C. (Ed.) 2006. Minimalist essays. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.91
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[52] Al-Mutairi, F.R., 2014. The minimalist program: The nature and plausibility of Chomsky’s biolinguistics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139649551
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[53] Berwick, R.C., Chomsky, N., 2016. Why only us: Language and evolution. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/9780262034241.001.0001
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[54] Chomsky, N., 1999. Derivation by phase. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[55] Hauser, M., Chomsky, N., Fitch, T., 2002. The faculty of language: What is it, who has it, and how did it evolve? Science, 2985598, 1569–1579.10.1126/science.298.5598.1569
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[56] Fitch, T., Hauser, M., 2004. Computational constraints on syntactic processing in a Nonhuman primate. Science, 303(56), 377–380.10.1126/science.1089401
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[57] Hauser, M., Fitch, T., 2003. What are the uniquely human components of the language faculty? In Christiansen, M., Kirby, S. (Eds.), Language evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 158–181.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199244843.003.0009
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[58] Fitch, T., Hauser, M., Chomsky, N., 2005. The evolution of the language faculty: Clarifications and implications. Cognition, 97(2), 179–210.10.1016/j.cognition.2005.02.005
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[59] Enard, W., Przeworski, M., Fisher, S.E., et al., 2002. Molecular evolution of FOXP2, a gene involved in speech and language. Nature, 4186900, 869–872.10.1038/nature01025
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[60] Vargha-Khadem, F., Watkins, K., Alcock, K., et al., 1995. Praxic and nonverbal cognitive deficits in a large family with a genetically transmitted speech and language disorder. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 92(3), 930–933.10.1073/pnas.92.3.930
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[61] Vargha-Khadem, F., Gadian, D.G., Copp, A., et al., 2005. FOXP2 and the neuroanatomy of speech and language. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 6(2), 131–138.10.1038/nrn1605
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[62] MacDermot, K.D., Bonora, E., Sykes, N., et al., 2005. Identification of FOXP2 truncation as a novel cause of developmental speech and language deficits. The American Journal of Human Genetics, 76(6), 1074–1080.10.1086/430841
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[63] Krause, J., Alueza-Fox, C., Orlando, L., et al., 2007. The derived FOXP2 variant of modern humans was shared with Neandertals. Current Biology, 17(21), 1908–1912.10.1016/j.cub.2007.10.008
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[64] Christiansen, M., Kirby, S. (Eds.) 2003. Language evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199244843.001.0001
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[65] Di Sciullo, A.M., Boeckx, C. (Eds.) 2011. The biolinguistic enterprise: New perspectives on the evolution and nature of the human language faculty. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[66] Pinker, S., Jackendoff, R., 2005. The faculty of language: what’s special about it? Cognition, 95(2), 201–236.10.1016/j.cognition.2004.08.004
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[67] Jackendoff, R., Pinker, S., 2005. The nature of the language faculty and its implications for evolution of language (Reply to Fitch, Hauser, and Chomsky). Cognition, 97(2), 211–225.10.1016/j.cognition.2005.04.006
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[68] Fitch, T., 2011. “Deep homology” in the biology and evolution of language. In Di Sciullo, A.M., Boeckx, C. (Eds.), The biolinguistic enterprise: New perspectives on the evolution and nature of the human language faculty. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 135–168.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[69] Sebeok, T.A. (Ed.) 1977. How animals communicate. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[70] Witzany, G. (Ed.) 2014. Biocommunication of animals. Netherlands: Springer.10.1007/978-94-007-7414-8
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[71] Maynard-Smith, J.,; Harper, D., 2003. Animal signals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/gao/9781884446054.article.T028974
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[72] Marler, P., 1984. Animal communication: Affect or cognition? In Scherer, K.R., Ekman, P. (Eds.), Approaches to emotion. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 345–65.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[73] Seyfarth, R.M., Cheney, D.L., 1982. How Monkeys see the world: Areview of recent research on East African Vervet Monkeys. In Snowdon, C.T., Brown, C.H., Petersen, M.R. (Eds.), Primate communication. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 239–52.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[74] Seyfarth, R.M., Cheney, D.L., 1986. Vocal development in vervet Monkeys. Animal Behaviour, 34, 1640–58.10.1016/S0003-3472(86)80252-4
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[75] Zuberbühler, K., 2002. A syntactic rule in forest monkey communication. Animal Behaviour, 63(2), 293–299.10.1006/anbe.2001.1914
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[76] Marler, P., 1977. The evolution of communication. In Sebeok, T.A. (Ed.), How animals communicate. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, pp. 45–70.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[77] Demers, R.A., 1988. Linguistics and animal communication. In Newmeyer, F.J. (Ed.), Linguistics: The cambridge survey vol. III. Language: Psychological and biological aspects. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 314–335.10.1017/CBO9780511621062.013
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[78] Rendall, D., Owren, M.J., 2013. Communication without meaning or information: Abandoning language-based and informational constructs in animal communication theory. In Stegmann, U.E. (Ed.), Animal communication theory: Information and influence. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 151–188.10.1017/CBO9781139003551.010
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[79] Haven Wiley, R., 2013. Communication as a transfer of information: Measurement, mechanism and meaning. In Stegmann, U.E. (Ed.), Animal communication theory: Information and influence. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. pp. 113-132.10.1017/CBO9781139003551.007
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[80] Bowling, D.L., Fitch, W.T., 2015. Do animal communication systems have phonemes? Trends in Cognitive Sciences. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2015.08.01110.1016/j.tics.2015.08.011
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[81] Yip, M.J., 2006. The search for phonology in other species. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10(10), 442–446.10.1016/j.tics.2006.08.001
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[82] Marler, P., 2000. Origins of music and speech: Insights from animals. In Wallin, N., Merker, B., Brown, S. (Eds.) The origins of music. Cambridge: The MIT Press, pp. 31–48.10.7551/mitpress/5190.003.0007
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[83] Barton, R.A., Dunbar, R., 1997. Evolution of the social brain. In Byrne, R., Whiten, A. (Eds.), Machiavellian intelligence II. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 240–263.10.1017/CBO9780511525636.010
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[84] Petrides, M., 2013. Neuroanatomy of language regions of the human brain. Elsevier: Academic Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[85] Ardila, A., Ostrosky-Solis, F. (Eds.) 1989. Brain organization of language and cognitive processes. New York, NY: Plenum Publishing Company.10.1007/978-1-4613-0799-0
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[86] Breznitz, Z. (Ed.) 2007. Brain research in language. Berlin: Springer.10.1007/978-0-387-74980-8
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[87] Schnelle, H., 2010. Language in the brain. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[88] Lamb, S.M., 1999. Pathways of the brain: The neurocognitive basis of language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/cilt.170
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[89] Pulvermüller, F., 2002. The neuroscience of language: On brain circuits of words and serial order. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511615528
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[90] Wray, A.J., 1992. The focusing hypothesis: The 49 theory of left hemisphere lateralised language re-examined. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/sspcl.3
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[91] Pike, K.L., 1967. Language in relation to a unified theory of structure of human behavior. The Hague, Netherlands: Mouton.10.1515/9783111657158
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[92] Bloom, P., 2000. How children learn the meanings of words. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/3577.001.0001
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[93] Taylor, C., 2016. The language animal: The full shape of the human linguistic capacity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.10.4159/9780674970250
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[94] Lieberman, P., 2013. The unpredictable species: What makes humans unique. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9781400846702
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[95] Jackendoff, R., 1987. The status of thematic roles in linguistic theory. Linguistic Inquiry, 18, 369–411.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[96] Saffran, E.M., Schwartz, M.F., Linebarger, M.C., 1998. Semantic influences on thematic role assignment: Evidence from normals and aphasics. Brain and Language, 62(2), 255–297.10.1006/brln.1997.1918
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[97] Bornkessel, I., Schlesewsky, M., Comrie, B., et al., (Eds.) 2006. Semantic role universals and argument linking: Theoretical, typological, and psycholinguistic perspectives. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110219272
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[98] Luraghi, S., Narrog, H. (Eds.) 2014. Perspectives on semantic roles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/tsl.106
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[99] Terrace, H.S., 1979. Nim: A Chimapnzee who learned sign language. New York: Knopf.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[100] Terrace, H.S., 1979. How Nim Chimpsky changed my mind. Psychology Today, November 1979, pp. 65–76
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[101] Terrace, H.S., 1980. More on Monkey talk: Response to Patterson ‘ s rejoinder to Martin Gardners review of Nim and speaking of apes. New York Review of Books, 4 December 1980, p. 59.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[102] Terrace, H.S., 1981. A report to the academy, 1980. In Sebeok, T.A., Rosenthal, R. (Eds.), The Clever Hans phenomenon: Communication with horses, whales, apes, and people. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, Vol. 364, pp. 94–114.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[103] Terrace., 1984
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[104] Bowerman, M., 1990. Mapping thematic roles onto syntactic functions: Are children helped by innate linking rules? Linguistics, 28(6), 1253–1289.10.1515/ling.1990.28.6.1253
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[105] Noble, C.H., Rowland, C.F., Pine, J.M., 2011. Comprehension of argument structure and semantic roles: Evidence from english-learning children and the forced-choice pointing paradigm. Cognitive Science, 35(5), 963–982.10.1111/j.1551-6709.2011.01175.x
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[106] Deffler, S.A., Fox, C., Ogle, C.M., et al., 2016. All my children: The roles of semantic category and phonetic similarity in the misnaming of familiar individuals. Memory & Cognition, 44(7), 989–99.10.3758/s13421-016-0613-z
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[107] Brooks, P., Tomasello, M., 1999. How children constrain their argument structure constructions. Language, 75(4), 720–738.10.2307/417731
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[108] Theakston, A.L., 2012. “The spotty cow tickled the pig with a curly tail”: How do sentence position, preferred argument structure, and referential complexity affect children’s and adults’ choice of referring expression? Applied Psycholinguistics (04), 691–724.10.1017/S0142716411000531
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[109] McClure, K., Pine, J.M., Lieven, E.V.M., 2006. Investigating the abstractness of children’s early knowledge of argument structure. Journal of Child Language, 33(04), 693–720.10.1017/S0305000906007525
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[110] Peter, M., Chang, F., Pine, J.M., et al., 2015. When and how do children develop knowledge of verb argument structure? Evidence from verb bias effects in a structural priming task. Journal of Memory and Language, 81, 1–15.10.1016/j.jml.2014.12.002
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[111] Naigles, L.R., Lehrer, N., 2002. Languagegeneral and language-specific influences on children’s acquisition of argument structure: A comparison of French and English. Journal of Child Language, 29(03), 545–566.10.1017/S0305000902005159
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[112] Braine, M.D.S., Brody, R.E., Fisch, S.M., et al., 1990. Can children use a verb without exposure to its argument structure? Journal of Child Language, 17(02), 313–342.10.1017/S0305000900013799
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[113] Naigles, L.R., Maltempo, A., 2011. Verb argument structure acquisition in young children: Defining a role for discourse. Journal of Child Language, 38(03), 662–674.10.1017/S0305000910000334
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[114] Chomsky, N., 1957. Syntactic structures, Second Edition 2002. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783112316009
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[115] Kako, E., 1999. Elements of syntax in the systems of three language-trained animals. Learning & Behavior, 27(1), 1–14.10.3758/BF03199424
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[116] Powers, S., 2001. A minimalist approach to phrase structure acquisition. In Alexandrova, G.M., Arnaudova, O. (Eds.), The minimalist parameter: Selected papers from the open linguistics forum, Ottawa, 21–23 March 1997, pp. 33–50.10.1075/cilt.192.04pow
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[117] Fodor, J.D., Crain, S., 1987. Simplicity and generality of rules in language acquisition. In MacWhinney, B. (Ed.), Mechanisms of language acquisition: Proceedings of the 20th Annual Carnegie Mellon Symposium on Cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 35–64.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[118] Friederici, A.D., 1983. Children’s sensitivity to function words during sentence comprehension. Linguistics, 21(5), 717–739.10.1515/ling.1983.21.5.717
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[119] Maloney, E.M., Payne, D.L., Redford, M.A., 2012. What children’s pause patterns indicate about their constituent structure. In BUCLD 36 Proceedings Supplement. Boston, MA.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[120] Taeschner, T., Devescovi, A., Volterra, V., 1988. Affixes and function words in the written language of deaf children. Applied Psycholinguistics, 9(04), 385–401.10.1017/S0142716400008079
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[121] Schlaggar, B.L., 2002. Functional neuroanatomical differences between adults and school-age children in the processing of single words. Science, 2965572, 1476–1479.10.1126/science.1069464
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[122] Gass, S., Ard, J., 1980. L2 data: Their relevance for language universals. Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages Quarterly, 14(4), 443–452.10.2307/3586233
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[123] Gaer, E.P., 1969. Children’s understanding and production of sentences. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 8(2), 289–294.10.1016/S0022-5371(69)80078-2
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[124] Karlsson, F., 2007. Constraints on multiple centerembedding of clauses. Journal of Linguistics, 43(2), 365–392.10.1017/S0022226707004616
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[125] Clark, A., Lappin, S., 2011. Linguistic nativism and the poverty of the stimulus. Wiley-Blackwell.10.1002/9781444390568
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[126] Laurence, S., Margolis, E., 2001. The poverty of the stimulus argument. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 52(2), 217–276.10.1093/bjps/52.2.217
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[127] Berwick, R.C., Okanoya, K., Beckers, G.J.L., et al., 2011. Songs to syntax: The linguistics of birdsong. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15(3), 113–121.10.1016/j.tics.2011.01.002
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[128] Berwick, R.C., Pietroski, P., Yankama, B., et al., 2011. Poverty of the stimulus revisited. Cognitive Science, 35(7), 1207–1242.10.1111/j.1551-6709.2011.01189.x
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[129] Vallauri, E.L., 2004. The relation between mind and language: The innateness hypothesis and the poverty of the stimulus. The Linguistic Review, 21(3), 345–387.10.1515/tlir.2004.21.3-4.345
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[130] Lidz, J., Waxman, S., 2004. Reaffirming the poverty of the stimulus argument: A reply to the replies. Cognition, 93(2), 157–165.10.1016/j.cognition.2004.02.001
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[131] Legate, J.A., Yang, C.D., 2002. Empirical reassessment of stimulus poverty arguments. The Linguistic Review, 18(1–2), 151–162.10.1515/tlir.19.1-2.151
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[132] Fodor, J.D., Crowther, C., 2002. Understanding stimulus poverty arguments. The Linguistic Review, 18(1–2), 106–145.10.1515/tlir.19.1-2.105
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[133] Thomas, M., 2002. Development of the concept of “the poverty of the stimulus”. The Linguistic Review, 18(1-2), 51–71.10.1515/tlir.19.1-2.51
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[134] Pullum, G.K., Scholz, B.C., 2002. Empirical assessment of stimulus poverty arguments. The Linguistic Review, 18(1–2), 9–50.10.1515/tlir.19.1-2.9
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[135] Lasnik, H., Uriagereka, J., 2002. On the poverty of the challenge. The Linguistic Review, 18(1–2), 147–150.10.1515/tlir.19.1-2.147
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[136] Limber, J., 1977. Language in child and chimp? American Psychologist, 32, 280–95.10.1037/0003-066X.32.4.280
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[137] Redshaw, M., 1978. Cognitive development in humans and gorilla infants. Journal of Human Evolution, 7, 133–141.10.1016/S0047-2484(78)80005-0
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[138] Greenfield, P.M., Savage-Rumbaugh, S.E., 1993. Comparing communicative competence in child and chimp: The pragmatics of repetition. Journal of Child Language, 20, 1–26.10.1017/S0305000900009090
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[139] Dalby, M.A., 1977. Aetiological studies in language retarded children. Neuropediatrics, 8(1), 499–500.10.1055/s-0028-1091553
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[140] Prior, M.R., Frolley, M., Sanson, A., 1983. Language lateralization in specific reading retarded children and backward readers. Cortex, 19(2), 149–163.10.1016/S0010-9452(83)80011-2
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[141] Fowler, A.E., 1984. Language Acquisition of Down’s Syndrome Children: Production and Comprehension. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[142] Paul, R., Dykens, E., Leckman, J.F., et al., 1987. A comparison of language characteristics of mentally retarded adults with fragile X syndrome and those with nonspecific mental retardation and autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 17(4), 457–468.10.1007/BF01486963
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[143] Abbeduto, L., Boudreau, D., 2004. Theoretical influences on research on language development and intervention in individuals with mental retardation. Development Disabilities Research Reviews, 10(3), 184–192.10.1002/mrdd.20032
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[144] Fedor, A., Ittzés, P., Szathmáry, E., 2009. The biological background of syntax evolution. In Bickerton, D., Szathmáry, E. (Eds.), Biological foundations and origin of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 15–40.10.7551/mitpress/8468.003.0006
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[145] Bishop, D.V.M., 2009. What can developmental language impairment tell us about the genetic bases of syntax? In Bickerton, D., Szathmáry, E. (Eds.), Biological foundations and origin of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 185–206.10.7551/mitpress/8468.003.0015
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[146] Dediu, D., Ladd, D., 2007. Linguistic tone is related to the population frequency ofthe adaptive haplogroups of two brain size genes, Microcephalin and ASPM. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(26), pp. 10944–10949.10.1073/pnas.0610848104
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[147] Woods, C.G., Bond, J., Enard, W., 2005. Autosomal recessive primary microcephaly (MCPH): A review of clinical, molecular, and evolutionary findings. The American Journal of Human Genetics, 76(5), 717–728.10.1086/429930
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[148] Lenneberg, E.H., 1967. Biological foundation of language. New York: John Wiley.10.1080/21548331.1967.11707799
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[149] Grela, B.G., 2003. Do children with Down syndrome have difficulty with argument structure? Journal of Communication Disorders, 36(4), 263–279.10.1016/S0021-9924(03)00014-5
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[150] Pepperberg, I., 1983. Cogniton in the African Grey Parrot: Preliminary evidence for auditory/vocal comprehension of the class concept. Animal Learning and Behavior, 11, 175–85.10.3758/BF03199646
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[151] Pepperberg, I., 1987. Acquisition of the same/different concept by an African Grey Parrot (Psittacus erithacus): Learning with respect to categories of color, shape, and material. Animal Learning and Behavior, 15, 423–432.10.3758/BF03205051
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[152] Pepperberg, I., 1987. Evidence for conceptual quantitative abilities in the African Grey Parrot: Labeling of cardinal sets. Ethology, 75, 37–61.10.1111/j.1439-0310.1987.tb00641.x
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[153] Pepperberg, I., 1990. Conceptual abilities of some nonprimate species, with an emphasis on an African Grey Parrot. In: Parker, S.T., Gibson, K.R. (Eds.), „Language“ and intelligence in monkeys and apes. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 469–507.10.1017/CBO9780511665486.020
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[154] Pepperberg, I., 1990. Cognition in an African Gray Parrot (Psittacus erithacus): Further evidence for comprehension of categories and labels. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 104(1), pp. 41–52.10.1037/0735-7036.104.1.41
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[155] Shettleworth, S.J., 2010. Cognition, evolution and behavior. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780195319842.001.0001
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[156] Dapretto, M., Bookheimer, S.Y., 1999. Form and content: Dissociating syntax and semantics in sentence comprehension. Neuron, 24(2), 427–432.10.1016/S0896-6273(00)80855-7
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[157] Wright, P., Stamatakis, E.A., Tyler, L.K., 2012. Differentiating hemispheric contributions to syntax and semantics in patients with lefthemisphere lesions. Journal of Neuroscience, 32(24), 8149–8157.10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0485-12.2012
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[158] Ullman, M.T., 2001. A neurocognitive perspective on language: The declarative/procedural model. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 2(10), 717–726.10.1038/35094573
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[159] Miozzo, M., Fischer-Baum, S., Postman, J.A., 2010. A selective deficit for inflection production. Neuropsychologia, 48(9), 2427–2436.10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2010.04.001
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[160] Połczyńska, M., Curtiss, S., Walshaw, P., et al., 2014. Grammar tests increase the ability to lateralize language function in the Wada test. Epilepsy Research, 108(10), 1864–1873.10.1016/j.eplepsyres.2014.09.014
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[161] Bornkessel, I., Zysset, S., Friederici, A.D.F., et al., 2005. Who did what to whom? The neural basis of argument hierarchies during language comprehension. NeuroImage, 26(1), pp. 221–233.10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.01.032
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[162] Menenti, L., Gierhan, S.M.E., Segaert, K., et al., 2011. Shared language: Overlap and segregation of the neuronal infrastructure for speaking and listening revealed by functional MRI. Psychological Science, 22(9), 1173–1182.10.1177/0956797611418347
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[163] Dronkers, N.F., Wilkins, D.P., Van Valin R.D.Jr., et al., 2004. Lesion analysis of the brain areas involved in language comprehension. Cognition, 92(1–2), 145–177.10.1016/j.cognition.2003.11.002
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[164] Yamada, Y., Neville, H.J., 2007. An ERP study of syntactic processing in English and nonsense sentences. Brain Research, 1130, 167–180.10.1016/j.brainres.2006.10.052
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[165] Batterink, L., Neville, H.J., 2013. The human brain processes syntax in the absence of conscious awareness. Journal of Neuroscience, 33(19), 8528–8533.10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0618-13.2013
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[166] Pulvermüller, F., Shtyrov, Y., Hasting, A.S., et al., 2008. Syntax as a reflex: Neurophysiological evidence for early automaticity of grammatical processing. Brain and Language, 104(3), 244–253.10.1016/j.bandl.2007.05.002
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[167] Pulvermüller, F., Assadollahi, R., 2007. Grammar or serial order? Discrete combinatorial brain mechanisms reflected by the syntactic mismatch negativity. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19(6), 971–980.10.1162/jocn.2007.19.6.971
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[168] Sauerland, U., Gärtner, H.M. (Eds.) 2007. Interfaces + recursion = language? Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110207552
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[169] Terrace., 1983
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[170] Rowe, D.L., Cooper, N.J., Liddell, B.J., et al., 2007. Brain Structure and Function Correlates of general and social cognition. Journal of Integrative Neuroscience, 06(01), 35–74.10.1142/S021963520700143X
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[171] Atkinson, A.P., Wheeler, M., 2004. The grain of domains: The evolutionary-psychological case against domain-general cognition. Mind & Language, 19(2), 147–176.10.1111/j.1468-0017.2004.00252.x
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[172] Deaner, R.O., van Schaik, C.P., Johnson, V., 2006. Do some taxa have better domain-general cognition than others? A meta-analysis of Nonhuman primate studies. Evolutionary Psychology, 4(1), 149–196.10.1177/147470490600400114
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[173] Geary, D.C., 2004. Origin of mind: Evolution of brain, cognition, and general intelligence. Washington, DC, USA: American Psychological Association (APA).10.1037/10871-000
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[174] Roberts, M.J. (Ed.) 2007. Integrating the mind: Domain general versus domain specific processes in higher cognition. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[175] Martindale, C., Covello, E., West, A., 1986. Primary process cognition and hemispheric asymmetry. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 147(1), 79–87.10.1080/00221325.1986.9914482
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[176] Pulvermüller, F., Kherif, F., Hauk, O., et al., 2009. Distributed cell assemblies for general lexical and category-specific semantic processing as revealed by fMRI cluster analysis. Human Brain Mapping, 30(12), 3837–3850.10.1002/hbm.20811
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[177] Loring, D.W., Meador, K.J., Lee, G.P., et al., 1992. Amobarbital effects and lateralized brain function: The Wada test. New York: Springer-Verlag.10.1007/978-1-4612-2874-5
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[178] Abou-Khalil, B., 2007. An update on determination of language dominance in screening for epilepsy surgery: The Wada test and newer noninvasive alternatives. Epilepsia, 48(3), 442–455.10.1111/j.1528-1167.2007.01012.x
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[179] Doss, R.C., Zhang, W., Risse, G.L., et al., 2009. Lateralizing language with magnetic source imaging: Validation based on the Wada test. Epilepsia, 50(10), 2242–2248.10.1111/j.1528-1167.2009.02242.x
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[180] Gutbrod, K., Spring, D., Degonda, N., et al., 2012. Determination of language dominance: Wada test and fMRI compared using a novel sentence task. Journal of Neuroimaging, 22(3), 1–9.10.1111/j.1552-6569.2011.00646.x
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[181] Gazzaniga, M.S., 1980. The role of language for conscious experience: Observations from splitbrain man. Progress in Brain Research, 54, 689–696.10.1016/S0079-6123(08)61691-X
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[182] Levy, J., Trevarthen, C., 1977. Perceptual, semantic and phonetic aspects of elementary language processes in split-brain patients. Brain, 100(1), 105–118.10.1093/brain/100.1.105
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[183] Goodman, R.A., Whitaker, H.A., 1985. Hemispherectomy: A review (1928-1981) with special reference to the linguistic abilities and disabilities if the residual right hemisphere. In Best, C.T. (Ed.), Hemispheric function and collaboration in the child. New York: Academic Press, pp. 121–156.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[184] Grabowecky, M., Kingstone, A., 2004. Can semantic information be transferred between hemispheres in the split-brain? Brain and Cognition, 55(2), 310–313.10.1016/j.bandc.2004.02.028
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[185] Lambert, A.J., 1991. Interhemispheric interaction in the split-brain. Neuropsychologia, 29(10), 941–948.10.1016/0028-3932(91)90058-G
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[186] Kingstone, A., Gazzaniga, M.S., 1995. Subcortical transfer of higher order information: More illusory than real? Neuropsychology, 9(3), 321–328.10.1037/0894-4105.9.3.321
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[187] Lambert, A.J., Beard, C.T., Thompson, R.J., 1988. Selective attention, visual laterality, awareness, and perceiving the meaning of parafoveally presented words. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 40(4), 615–652.10.1080/14640748808402291
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[188] Linebarger, M.C., Schwartz, M.F., Saffran, E.M., 1983. Sensitivity to grammatical structure in socalled agrammatic aphasics. Cognition, 13(3), 361–392.10.1016/0010-0277(83)90015-X
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[189] Zurif, E., Grodzinsky, Y., 1983. Sensitivity to grammatical structure in agrammatic aphasics: A reply to Linebarger, Schwartz and Saffran. Cognition, 15(1–3), pp. 207–213.10.1016/0010-0277(83)90041-0
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[190] Linebarger, M.C., Schwartz, M.F., Saffran, E.M., 1983. Syntactic processing in agrammatism: A reply to Zurif and Grodzinsky. Cognition, 15(1–3), 215–225.10.1016/0010-0277(83)90042-2
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[191] Schwartz, M.F., Linebarger, M.C., Saffran, E.M., et al., 1987. Syntactic transparency and sentence interpretation in aphasia. Language and Cognitive Processes, 2(2), 85–113.10.1080/01690968708406352
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[192] Hinzen, W., 2006. Mind design and minimal syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199289257.001.0001
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[193] Hinzen, W., 2007. An essay on names and truth. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780199274420.001.0001
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[194] Hinzen, W., 2011. Language and thought. In: Boeckx, C. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic minimalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, Chapter 22.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199549368.013.0022
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[195] Hinzen, W., 2012. The emergence of complex language. In McFarland, D., Stenning, K., McGonigle-Chalmers, M. (Eds.), The complex mind an interdisciplinary approach. Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 243–263.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[196] Hinzen, W., Sheehan, M., 2013. The philosophy of universal grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199654833.001.0001
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[197] Terrace, H.S., 2005. Metacognition and the evolution of language. In Terrace, H., Metcalfe, J. (Eds.), The Missing link in cognition: Origins of self-reflective consciousness. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 84–115.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195161564.003.0003
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[198] Forrester, G.S., 2008. A multidimensional approach to investigations of behaviour: Revealing structure in animal communication signals. Animal Behaviour, 76(5), 1749–1760.10.1016/j.anbehav.2008.05.026
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[199] Kauffman, S.A., 2000. Investigations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[200] Boeckx, C., 2009. The nature of merge: Consequences for language, mind and biology. In Piattelli-Palmarini, M., Uriagereka, J., Salaburu, P. (Eds.), Of minds and language: a dialogue with Noam Chomsky in the Basque country. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 44–57.10.1093/oso/9780199544660.003.0004
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[201] Boeckx, C., 2012. The emergence of language, from a biolinguistic point of view. In Tallerman, M., Gibson, K.R. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of language evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 492–501.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199541119.013.0052
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[202] Chomsky, N., 1990. On formalization and formal linguistics. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 8(1), 143–147.10.1007/BF00205534
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[203] Jackendoff, R., 1993. Patterns in the mind: Language and human nature. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[204] Jackendoff, R., 2002. Foundations of language: Brain, meaning, grammar, evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198270126.001.0001
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[205] Jackendoff, R., 2007. A parallel architecture perspective on language processing. Brain Research, 1146, 2–22.10.1016/j.brainres.2006.08.111
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[206] Pinker, S., 1989. Learnability and cognition: The acquisition of argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article

Representational Systems in Zoosemiotics and Anthroposemiotics Part II: On Meta-Representation and Human Language

Abstract

Paradigm

My account