Nav: Home

New book explores grand riddles of human language

March 01, 2016

For many years, researchers tried to teach other kinds of animals some human language. Chimps, dolphins, gorillas -- it didn't seem to matter which animals they tried. Few experiments were regarded as success stories.

Small children, however, learn whichever language they are taught, and abundant evidence points toward the universality of human language. Platoons of linguists have detailed strong syntactical similarities among the world's tongues. And biologists have begun to identify some of the genes involved in the development of speech and possibly language.

"Human language is a generative system that determines an infinite set of possible semantic objects," says Noam Chomsky, Institute Professor and Professor of Linguistics Emeritus at MIT.

"People don't realize how uniform the human population is," adds Robert C. Berwick, a computer scientist at MIT. "We're all very alike as humans, and this language capacity is incredibly uniform. If you take a baby from Southern Africa and put it in Beijing, they'll speak Chinese."

Now Berwick and Chomsky have collaborated on a new book on the topic, "Why Only Us?," published on March 1 by the MIT Press, which explores the grand riddles of human language -- what makes it unique, as well as where, when, why, and how humans acquired a distinctive, language capacity of nonpareil sophistication.

Out of Blombos?

The questions of when and where human language emerged are probably the simplest to grapple with. Like some other scholars, Berwick and Chomsky think the emergence of symbolic behavior is a guidepost indicating when human language developed. The Blombos cave artifacts in South Africa, comprising engravings and beads that are 80,000 years old, are a possible landmark. Modern humans arose about 200,000 years ago, so the development of our language capacity most likely falls in between those two points in time. Still, Chomsky notes how "thin the empirical record is" on this count.

Precisely what evolved, Berwick and Chomsky contend, is what Chomsky calls "Merge:" the human cognitive capacity to take any two things that we now recognize as sentence elements, and combine them into a new, more complex, hierarchically structured phrase.

"In its simplest terms, the Merge operation is just set formation," the authors write. But if it sounds simple, this operation is precisely what allows human language to be infinite; there is absolutely no limit on the number of sentences we can form.

There are some other things that mark human language as distinct, so far as we know -- for instance, our statements do not have to make reference to the external world. But the unbounded nature of language appears crucial at all times.

If so, how did such a powerful capability emerge in people? Berwick and Chomsky suggest it resulted from not a giant evolutionary leap but a modest evolutionary step that turned out to be very useful.

"What we're arguing is that there was probably a very small change which had large effects," Chomsky says. In the book as well, the authors suggest our language capacity was "the result of a minor mutation" in genomic terms that had far-reaching changes in our capacities.

"Evolution has [often] assembled lots of other parts that enable a whole host of other behaviors that you didn't have before," Berwick observes. "It [the language capacity] is standard in that kind of picture. It's fully compatible with what a Darwinian might have thought."

He adds: "We're getting more and more of an understanding of the genomic basis for some of these traits, but it's extremely challenging to work out."

The real leap: intentional, conceptual thoughts

The hardest question to answer, it seems, is why humans should have a uniquely unbounded language. Or, to put it another way, what purpose did language play that made it a useful trait in evolutionary terms?

Berwick and Chomsky, following decades of work and theorizing by Chomsky, do not believe that language evolved primarily as a form of communication. Rather, it is an offshoot of the development of our cognitive capacities -- an "inner mental tool," as they write, at the interface of intentional thought and the ability to think conceptually.

In this sense, "Merge would be just like any other 'internal' trait that boosted selective advantage," they write, something that would be helpful in planning, making inferences, and other basic capacities.

That said, Berwick and Chomsky readily acknowledge they do not possess a full hypothesis explaining how people developed the capacity for having those abstract conceptual thoughts in the first place.

"There is no explanation of where those come from," Berwick says.

"The nature of elementary human concepts, such as table or chair, is unknown, and what's striking about them is that they're radically different than anything in the animal world," Chomsky says. "It's very different from other animals."

And Berwick and Chomsky note that they hope to inspire further research, potentially integrating neuroscience to a growing extent, in addition to proposing answers to these scientific mysteries.

Or, as they write, "a vast array of language phenomena remain unexplained and even barely examined, but the picture sketched here seems to us the most plausible one we have, and one that offers many opportunities for fruitful research and inquiry."
Additional background

ARCHIVE: How human language could have evolved from birdsong

ARCHIVE: The rapid rise of human language

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Related Human Language Articles:

Emerging infectious disease and challenges of social distancing in human and non-human animals
Humans are not the only social animal struggling with new infectious diseases.
Powerful human-like hands create safer human-robotics interactions
A team of engineers designed and developed a novel humanoid hand that may be able to help human-robotic interactions.
Human embryo-like model created from human stem cells
Scientists have developed a new model to study an early stage of human development, using human embryonic stem cells.
Origins of human language pathway in the brain at least 25 million years old
The human language pathway in the brain has been identified by scientists as being at least 25 million years old -- 20 million years older than previously thought.
Human language most likely evolved gradually
One of the most controversial hypotheses for the origin of human language faculty is the evolutionary conjecture that language arose instantaneously in humans through a single gene mutation.
'Substantially human,' a good starting point for determining boundaries of what's human
Recent and rapid developments in the biosciences continually blur the lines between human beings and other living organisms, while straining the legal definitions of what is or is not human.
How does language emerge?
How did the almost 6000 languages of the world come into being?
New research quantifies how much speakers' first language affects learning a new language
Linguistic research suggests that accents are strongly shaped by the speaker's first language they learned growing up.
Differences in human and non-human primate saliva may be caused by diet
Humans are known to be genetically similar to our primate relatives.
Pyschologists analyze language to categorize human goals
The researchers say human goals can be broadly categorized in terms of four goals: 'prominence,' 'inclusiveness,' 'negativity prevention' and 'tradition.'
More Human Language News and Human Language Current Events

Trending Science News

Current Coronavirus (COVID-19) News

Top Science Podcasts

We have hand picked the top science podcasts of 2020.
Now Playing: TED Radio Hour

Listen Again: The Power Of Spaces
How do spaces shape the human experience? In what ways do our rooms, homes, and buildings give us meaning and purpose? This hour, TED speakers explore the power of the spaces we make and inhabit. Guests include architect Michael Murphy, musician David Byrne, artist Es Devlin, and architect Siamak Hariri.
Now Playing: Science for the People

#576 Science Communication in Creative Places
When you think of science communication, you might think of TED talks or museum talks or video talks, or... people giving lectures. It's a lot of people talking. But there's more to sci comm than that. This week host Bethany Brookshire talks to three people who have looked at science communication in places you might not expect it. We'll speak with Mauna Dasari, a graduate student at Notre Dame, about making mammals into a March Madness match. We'll talk with Sarah Garner, director of the Pathologists Assistant Program at Tulane University School of Medicine, who takes pathology instruction out of...
Now Playing: Radiolab

What If?
There's plenty of speculation about what Donald Trump might do in the wake of the election. Would he dispute the results if he loses? Would he simply refuse to leave office, or even try to use the military to maintain control? Last summer, Rosa Brooks got together a team of experts and political operatives from both sides of the aisle to ask a slightly different question. Rather than arguing about whether he'd do those things, they dug into what exactly would happen if he did. Part war game part choose your own adventure, Rosa's Transition Integrity Project doesn't give us any predictions, and it isn't a referendum on Trump. Instead, it's a deeply illuminating stress test on our laws, our institutions, and on the commitment to democracy written into the constitution. This episode was reported by Bethel Habte, with help from Tracie Hunte, and produced by Bethel Habte. Jeremy Bloom provided original music. Support Radiolab by becoming a member today at     You can read The Transition Integrity Project's report here.