Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T03:47:47.177Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Co-evolution of phylogeny and glossogeny: There is no “logical problem of language evolution”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 October 2008

W. Tecumseh Fitch
W. Tecumseh Fitch
Affiliation:
Centre for Social Learning and Cognitive Evolution, University of St. Andrews, St. Andrews, Fife, KY16 9JP, United Kingdomwtsf@st-andrews.ac.ukhttp://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~wtsf/
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Historical language change (“glossogeny”), like evolution itself, is a fact; and its implications for the biological evolution of the human capacity for language acquisition (“phylogeny”) have been ably explored by many contemporary theorists. However, Christiansen & Chater's (C&C's) revolutionary call for a replacement of phylogenetic models with glossogenetic cultural models is based on an inadequate understanding of either. The solution to their “logical problem of language evolution” lies before their eyes, but they mistakenly reject it due to a supposed “circularity trap.” Gene/;culture co-evolution poses a series of difficult theoretical and empirical problems that will be resolved by subtle thinking, adequate models, and careful cross-disciplinary research, not by oversimplified manifestos.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 31 , Issue 5 , October 2008 , pp. 521 - 522
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baker, M. C. & Cunningham, M. A. (1985) The biology of bird-song dialects. Behavioural Processes 8:85–133.Google Scholar
Boyd, R. & Richerson, P. J. (1985) Culture and the evolutionary process. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Catchpole, C. K. & Slater, P. L. B. (1995) Bird song: Themes and variations. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Christiansen, M. & Kirby, S., eds. (2003) Language evolution. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Deacon, T. W. (1997) The symbolic species: The co-evolution of language and the brain. W. W. Norton/Penguin.Google Scholar
Dunbar, R. I. M. (1993) Coevolution of neocortical size, group size and language in humans. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16:681–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durham, W. H. (1991) Coevolution: Genes, culture, and human diversity. Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, M. W. & Laland, K. N. (1996) Gene-culture coevolutionary theory. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 11:453–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fitch, W. T. (2005) The evolution of language: A comparative review. Biology and Philosophy 20:193–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fitch, W. T. (2007) Linguistics: An invisible hand. Nature 449:665–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gould, J. L. & Marler, P. (1987) Learning by instinct. Scientific American 256:74–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hurford, J. R. (1990) Nativist and functional explanations in language acquisition. In: Logical issues in language acquisition, ed. Roca, I. M., pp. 85–136. Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keller, R. (1994) On language change: The invisible hand in language. Routledge.Google Scholar
Kirby, S. (1999) Function, selection and innateness: The emergence of language universals. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirby, S., Dowman, M. & Griffiths, T. (2007) Innateness and culture in the evolution of language. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 104:5241–45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lieberman, E., Michel, J.-B., Jackson, J., Tang, T. & Nowak, M. A. (2007) Quantifying the evolutionary dynamics of language. Nature 449:713–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marler, P. (1991) The instinct to learn. In: The epigenesis of mind: Essays on biology and cognition, ed. Carey, S. & Gelman, R., pp. 37–66. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Marler, P. & Slabbekoorn, H. (2004) Nature's music: The science of birdsong. Academic Press.Google Scholar
Mayr, E. (1961) Cause and effect in biology. Science 134:1501–06.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mayr, E. (1982) The growth of biological thought: Diversity, evolution and inheritance. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Mayr, E. (1988) Toward a new philosophy of biology. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Moorhead, P. S. & Kaplan, M. M., eds. (1967) Mathematical challenges to the neo-Darwinian interpretation of evolution. Wistar Institute Press.Google Scholar
Nottebohm, F. (1972) The origins of vocal learning. American Naturalist 106:116–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pagel, M., Atkinson, Q. D. & Meade, A. (2007) Frequency of word-use predicts rates of lexical evolution throughout Indo-European history. Nature 449:717–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peters, R. H. (1976) Tautology in evolution and ecology. American Naturalist 110:1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stebbins, G. L. (1977) In defense of evolution: Tautology or theory? American Naturalist 111:386–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
West-Eberhard, M. J. (1989) Phenotypic plasticity and the origins of diversity. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 20:249–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar