The Theory of Natural Selection and the Evolutionary Origin of the Faculty of Language within Generativism

Autores

  • Daniel Blanco Universidad Nacional del Litoral
  • Adriana Noemí Gonzalo Universidad Nacional del Litoral

Palavras-chave:

Chomsky, Human Language Faculty, Intended applications, Spandrel, Theory of Natural Selection

Resumo

The current debate about the evolution of language within linguistic generativism primarily deals with the intended explanatory scope of the theory of natural selection. This discussion has generated numerous misinterpretations regarding conceptual issues, what makes an explication necessary. This contribution, metatheoretical in nature, means to partially satisfy this desideratum considering how the multiplicity of adaptationist hypotheses affects the controversy. Furthermore, we show the connection between how the faculty of language is characterized as explanandum of diverse theoretical perspective, and the explanative approach the parts in the debate are willing to accept.

Referências

Balari, Sergio. Communication. Where Evolutionary Linguistics Went Wrong. Biological Theory, 5, 2010, pp. 228-239.

———. What Lenneberg Got Right: A Homological Program for the Study of Language Evolution. Biolinguistics, 11, 2017, pp. 139-170.

Balzer, Wolfgang, Ulises Moulines, and Joseph Sneed. An Architectonic for Science. The Structuralist Program. Dordrecht: Reidel, 1987.

Berwick, Robert and Noam Chomsky. Why Only Us. Language and Evolution. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2016.

Bickerton, Derek. Language and Species. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990.

———. 2014. Some Problems for Biolinguistics. Biolinguistics 8, 73-96.

Brüne Martin and Elaine Mulcahy. 2003. Exaptation, Cooptation and the Evolution of Human Cognition. Evolution and Cognition 9, 25-30.

Burian, Richard. Adaptation: Historical Perspectives. In: Fox Keller and Elisabeth Lloyd (eds.). Keywords in Evolutionary Biology. London: Harvard University Press, 1994, pp. 7-12.

Chomsky, Noam. Syntactic Structures. The Hague: Mouton, 1957.

———. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1965.

———. Language and Mind. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1968.

———. Rules and Representations, New York: Columbia University Press, 1990.

———. Knowledge of Language: Its Nature, Origins, and Use. New York: Praeger, 1986.

———.Language and Problems of Knowledge: the Managua lectures. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1988.

———. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1995.

———. The Architecture of Language. New Delhi: Oxford India Paperbacks, 2000.

———. 2005. Three Factors in Language Design. Linguistic Inquiry 36, 1-22.

———. Language and Mind. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006.

———. Biolinguistic Explorations: Design, Development, Evolution. International Journal of Philosophical Studies, 15, 2007, pp. 1-21.

———. Some Simple Evo-devo Theses: How True Might They Be for Language? In R. Larson, V. Déprez, and H. Yamakido (eds.), The Evolution of Language: Biolinguistic Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010, pp. 45-62.

Chomsky, Noam, Adriana Belleti, and Luigi Rizzi. An Interview on Minimalism. In A. Belleti and L. Rizzi (eds.), On Nature and Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002, pp. 92-161.

Corballis, Michael. The Truth about Language. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2017.

Darwin, Charles. The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex. Vol. I. London: John Murray, 1871.

Dunbar, Robin. Grooming, Gossip, and the Evolution of Language. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1996.

Everett, Daniel. On Metrical Constituent Structure in Piraha Phonology. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 6, 1988, pp. 207-246.

———. What does Piraha Grammar Have to Teach us About Human Language and the Mind? Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 3, 2012, pp. 555-563.

Fitch, Tecumseh. The Evolution of Speech: a Comparative Review. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 2000, pp. 258-267.

———. The Evolution of Language Comes of Age. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 2010, pp. 278-279.

———. The evolution of language. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010.

Fitch, Tecumseh and David Reby. The Descended Larynx Is Not Uniquely Human. Proceedings: Biological Science, 268, 2001, pp. 1669-1675.

Fitch, Tecumseh and Marc Hauser. Computational Constraints on Syntactic Processing in a Nonhuman Primate. Science, 303, 2004, pp. 377-380.

Fitch, Tecumseh, Marc Hauser and Noam Chomsky. The Evolution of the Language Faculty: Clarifications and Implications. Cognition, 97, 2005, pp. 179-210.

Ginnobili, Santiago. La teoría de la selección natural. Bernal: UNQ, 2018.

Ginnobili, Santiago and Daniel Blanco. Wallace’s and Darwin’s Natural Selection Theories. Synthese, 196, 2019, pp. 991-1017.

Gould, Stephen. The Limits of Adaptation: Is Language a Spandrel of the Human Brain? Conference in the Cognitive Science Seminar, MIT: Center for Cognitive Science, 1987.

———. On Replacing the Idea of Progress with an Operational Notion of Directionality. In Matthew Nitecki (ed.), Evolutionary Progress, 319-338. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988, pp. 319-338.

———. 1989. Tires to Sandals. Natural History 98, 8-15.

———. 1991. Exaptation: A Crucial Tool for an Evolutionary Psychology. Journal of Social Issues 47, 43-65.

———. Fulfilling the Spandrels of World and Mind. In Jack Selzer (ed.), Understanding Scientific Prose. Wisconsin: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1993, pp. 310-336.

———. The Exaptive Excellence of Spandrels as a Term and Prototype. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States, 94, 1997, pp. 10750-10755.

———. The Structure of Evolutionary Theory. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press, 2002.

Gould, Stephen and Elisabeth Vrba. Exaptation – A Missing Term in the Science of Form. Paleobiology, 8, 1982, pp. 4-15.

Gould, Stephen and Richard Lewontin. The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm: A Critique of the Adaptationist Programme. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 205, 1979, pp. 581-598.

Hauser, Marc, Noam Chomsky and Tecumseh Fitch. The Faculty of Language: What Is It, Who Has It, And How Did it Evolve? Science, 298, 200, pp. 1569-1579.

Hauser, Marc, Charles Yang, Robert Berwick, Ian Tattersall, Michael Ryan, Jeffrey Watumull, Noam Chomsky, and Richard Lewontin. The Mystery of Language Evolution. Frontiers in Pschology, 5, 2014, pp. 1-12.

Jackendoff, Ray and Stephen Pinker. The Nature of the Language Faculty and its Implications for Evolution of Language (Reply to Fitch, Hauser, and Chomsky). Cognition, 97, 2005, pp. 211-225.

Johansson, Sverker. Origins of Language. Philadelphia: John Benjamins North America, 2005.

Knight, Chris. Puzzles and Mysteries in the Origins of Language. Language and Communication, 50, 2016, pp. 12–21.

Lightfoot, David. The Spandrels of the Linguistic Genotype. In C. Knight, M. Studdert-Kennedy, and J. Hurford (eds.), The Evolutionary Emergency of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000, pp. 231-247.

Longa, Víctor. Sciences of Complexity and Language Origins: An Alternative to Natural Selection. Journal of Literary Semantics, 30, 2001, pp. 1-17.

Longa, Víctor and Guillermo Lorenzo. Self-organization and Natural Selection: The Intelligent Auntie’s Vade-mecum. Biolinguistics, 8, 2014, pp. 130-140.

Longa, Víctor, Guillermo Lorenzo, and Juan Uriagereka. Minimizing Language Evolution: The Minimalist Program and the Evolutionary Shaping of Language. In C. Boeckx (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Minimalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011, 595-616.

Lorenzo, Guillermo. El tercer factor. Reflexiones marginales sobre la evolución de la sintaxis. Teorema, 25, 2006, pp. 77-92.

Newmeyer, Frederic. Functional Explanation in Linguistics and the Origins of Language. Language and Communication, 11, 1991, pp. 3-28, 97-108.

———. On the Supposed ‘Counter-functionality’ of Universal Grammar: Some Evolutionary Implications. In J. Hurford, M. Kennedy, and C. Knight (eds.), Approaches to the Evolution of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998, pp. 305-319.

Piattelli-Palmarini, Massino. Evolution, Selection, and Cognition: From 'Learning' to Parameter Setting in Biology and the Study of Language. Cognition, 31, 1989, pp. 1-44.

Piattelli-Palmarini, Massimo and Juan Uriagereka. The Evolution of the Narrow Faculty of Language: The Skeptical View and a Reasonable Conjecture. Lingue e Linguaggio, 4, 2004, pp. 27-79.

Pinker, Stephen. The Language Instinct. New York: William Morrow and Co., 1994.

———. Language as an Adaptation to the Cognitive Niche. In M. Christiansen and S. Kirby (eds.), Language Evolution: States of the Art. New York: Oxford University Press, 2003, pp. 16-37.

Pinker, Stephen and Paul Bloom. Natural Language and Natural Selection. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 13, 1990, pp. 707-726.

Pinker Stephen and Ray Jackendoff. The Faculty of Language: What’s Special About It? Cognition, 95, 2005, pp. 201-236.

West-Eberhard, Mary Jane. Adaptation: Current Usages. In Fox Keller and Elisabeth Lloyd (eds.), Keywords in Evolutionary Biology, 13-18. London: Harvard University Press, 1994, pp. 13-18.

Williams, George. Adaptation and Natural Selection, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1966.

Downloads

Publicado

2020-10-03

Edição

v. 12 n. 1 (2020): v. 12, n. 1: Temática Filosofia da Biologia

Seção

Artigos - Temático

Licença

    1. Autores mantém os direitos autorais e concedem à revista o direito de primeira publicação, com o trabalho simultaneamente licenciado sob a Creative Commons Attribution License que permite o compartilhamento do trabalho com reconhecimento da autoria do trabalho e publicação inicial nesta revista.
    2. Autores têm autorização para assumir contratos adicionais separadamente, para distribuição não-exclusiva da versão do trabalho publicada nesta revista (ex.: publicar em repositório institucional ou como capítulo de livro), com reconhecimento de autoria e publicação inicial nesta revista.
    3. Autores têm permissão e são estimulados a publicar e distribuir seu trabalho online (ex.: em repositórios institucionais ou na sua página pessoal) a qualquer ponto antes ou durante o processo editorial, já que isso pode gerar alterações produtivas, bem como aumentar o impacto e a citação do trabalho publicado (Veja O Efeito do Acesso Livre).