Transcript of WSU Humanities Center, 9/17/13 Ljiljana Progovac progovac@wayne.edu.
- Slide 1
- WSU Humanities Center, 9/17/13 Ljiljana Progovac
progovac@wayne.edu
- Slide 2
- Acknowledgements For travel support, I am grateful for the WSU
Distinguished Faculty Award and the Humanities Center Grant for
Innovative Projects. For many good comments and discussions, my
sincere thanks go to Martha Ratliff, Eugenia Casielles, John L.
Locke, Pawe Rutkowski, David Gil, Jasmina Milievi, Draga Zec, Relja
Vulanovi, Tecumseh Fitch, Ana Progovac, Natasha Kondrashova, Steven
Franks, Fritz Newmeyer, Andrea Moro, Noa Ofen, Ray Jackendoff,
eljko Bokovi, Ellen Barton, Kate Paesani, Pat Siple, Walter
Edwards, Dan Seeley, Stephanie Harves, Igor Yanovich, Dan Everett,
Andrew Nevins, Juan Uriagereka, Rafaella Zanuttini, Stephanie
Harves, Richard Kayne, Brady Clark, Jim Hurford, Robert Henderson,
Geoff Nathan, Margaret Winters, Daniel Ross, Pat Schneider-Zioga,
as well as many (other) audiences at SLS (2006), MLS (2006, 2007),
GURT (2007), ILA in New York (2007), the Max Planck Workshop on
Complexity in Leipzig, Germany (2007), the ISU Conference on
Recursion (2007), FASL (2007, 2008, 2012), AATSEEL (2007), the DGfS
Workshop on Language Universals in Bamberg, Germany (2008),
EvoLang, Barcelona (2008), BALE in York, England (2008), Novi Sad,
Serbia (2008), Torn, Poland (2009), EvoLang, Utrecht, Netherlands
(2010), University of Virginia, Charlottesville (2012), University
of Washington, Seattle (2012), University of Western Ontario
(2012), Duke Institute for Brain Sciences (2013). All errors are
mine. 2
- Slide 3
- How did syntax evolve? Could it be via one single, minor
mutation? Berwick (1998) There is no possibility of an intermediate
syntax between a non-combinatorial one and full natural languageone
either has Merge in all its generative glory, or one has no
combinatorial syntax at all... Berwick and Chomsky (2011) the
simplest assumption, hence the one we adopt, is that the generative
procedure emerged suddenly as the result of a minor mutation.
Language is something like a snowflake, assuming its particular
form by virtue of laws of nature Optimally, recursion can be
reduced to Merge There is no room in this picture for any
precursors to languagesay a language-like system with only short
sentences. The same holds for language acquisition, despite
appearances see also Bickertons (1998) catastrophic evolution
3
- Slide 4
- Gradualist stance Pinker and Bloom (1990): natural selection of
complex systems Jackendoff (e.g. 1999, 2002): living fossils
Progovac (e.g. 2008; 2009a,b): using the theory of syntax
(Minimalism) to reconstruct stages of proto-grammar; reinforcing
internal reconstruction with living fossils found in various modern
languages ( see also Heine and Kuteva (2007) for reconstruction
based on the theory of grammaticalization) corroborating evidence
and testing grounds: language acquisition (spoken and signed),
aphasia, language disorders, genetics, neuroscience 4
- Slide 5
- Living fossils Jackendoff (2002): not only are previous stages
present in the brain, but also their fossils are present in the
grammar of modern language itself Progovac (2008, 2009a,b): not
only is fossil syntax still in use in certain modern language
constructions, but this fossil syntax is built into the very
foundation of more complex structures, providing evidence for
evolutionary tinkering with the language design 5
- Slide 6
- Gradualist approach is feasible Pinker and Bloom (1990) assume
the Baldwin Effect, the process whereby environmentally-induced
responses set up selection pressures for such responses to become
innate, triggering conventional Darwinian evolution. Tiny selective
advantages are sufficient for evolutionary change: a variant that
produces on average 1% more offspring than its alternative allele
would increase in frequency from 0.1% to 99.9% of the population in
just over 4,000 generations. This would still leave plenty of time
for language to have evolved: 3.5-5 million years, if early
Australopithecines were the first talkers, or, as an absolute
minimum, several hundred thousand years, in the unlikely event that
early Homo Sapiens was the first. Fixations of different genes can
go in parallel. Sexual selection can significantly speed up the
process. 6
- Slide 7
- In search for grammars producing short (and flat) sentences A
host of constructions across languages point to such grammars
So-called small clauses are used abundantly in adult languages
(theoretically recognized concept) Children language acquisition
proceeds through a two-word (arguably small clause) stage Verb-noun
and other compounds (two-word molds) Intransitive absolutive-like
structures (only one argument; no subject-object distinction)
Unaccusatives (only one argument; subject-object distinction
blurred) Middles (straddling the boundary btw. intransitivity and
transitivity; passive and active; subjecthood and objecthood)
Paratactic attachment of small clauses is binary (slides 22-24)
Merge (of Minimalism) is binary: can only combine two elements at a
time 7
- Slide 8
- Two-word intransitive stage Proposal: a two-word paratactic
intransitive stage predated more complex syntax A two-word stage
cannot accommodate both subjects and objects (with verbs); it must
have been intransitive and absolutive-like, in the sense that no
subject-object distinction was syntactically encoded Kegl et al.
(1999), the earliest (pidgin) stages of Nicaraguan Sign Language do
not use transitive NP V NP constructions, such as *WOMAN PUSH MAN.
Instead, they use two paratactically combined (intransitive)
clauses, an NP V NP V sequence: (i)WOMAN PUSH MAN REACT. (ii)WOMAN
PUSH MAN FALL. The only argument here is absolutive-like in the
sense above 8
- Slide 9
- Homesign absolutive-like? Goldin-Meadow (2005) The syntax of
Homesign languages also seems absolutive-like: both patients/themes
and intransitive agents tend to precede verbs, once again,
neutralizing the distinction between subjects and objects There is
typically only one argument per verb Both American and Chinese deaf
children are more likely to produce the sign for the eaten than for
the eater (real agents/subjects typically suppressed); this is also
the case with fossils compounds, nominals, etc. 9
- Slide 10
- Ergative/absolutive patterns In some ergative languages (e.g.
Tongan, Austronesian language), the subject of the intransitive
clause is not distinguishable from the object, both appearing in
the so- called absolutive case (Tchekhoff 1979, 409):
(i)okukaiaeik. PRESeatthefish The fish eats. Or: The fish is eaten.
The subject of a transitive verb carries ergative marking (next
slide), but the other two roles are collapsed into one, absolutive
role Some analyze ergative arguments as optional adjuncts (e.g.
Nash 1006; Alexiadou 2001) 10
- Slide 11
- Ergative added to absolutive base This intransitive absolutive
layer provides foundation upon which one can add an ergative agent
(one type of transition to transitivity): (i) Oku ui a Mele
(Tchekhoff 1973, 283) PREScallMary Mary calls. Or: Mary is called.
(ii) Oku ui e Sionea Mele PREScallby-John Mary John calls Mary.
Similar ergative-like patterns found in nominals (noun phrases)
across (non-ergative) languages (e.g. Alexiadou 2001) (iii)Johns
portrayal (by the media/of the media) was unfair (iv) Johns
painting/portrait (by the artist) (v)Johns observation took 2
hours. (optional by-phrase likened to the ergative case, e.g.
Comrie 1978) 11
- Slide 12
- Proposal: Absolutives as precursors to transitivity Specific
proposal: Intransitive absolutive-like grammars predated
transitivity in language evolution Such grammars involved a
predicate and only one argument (two-word grammar) There was no
distinction between subjects and objects Such absolutive-like
patterns are available in various guises in all modern-day
languages (fossils) They also serve as foundation for constructing
more complex (transitive) structures 12
- Slide 13
- Compound fossils: Todays morphology is yesterdays syntax (Givn)
Verb-Noun compounds are absolutive-like fossils: they fit into a
two-slot syntactic frame (Progovac 2012) scare-crow, kill-joy,
pick-pocket, cry-baby, cut-purse, busy- body, spoil-sport,
turn-coat, rattle-snake, hunch-back, dare-devil, wag-tail,
tattle-tale, saw-bones, cut-throat, Burn-house, Love-joy,
Pinch-penny (miser), sink-hole Typically, the noun is object-like,
but can also be subject- like, as in the underlined compounds No
differentiation between subjects and objects; as with Homesign,
preference for expressing the eaten, rather than the eater (Slide
9); see also nominals (Slide 11) 13
- Slide 14
- VN compounds across languages and times The same holds for
Serbian and other languages ispi-utura (drink.up-flaskdrunkard),
guli-koa (peel-skinwho rips you off), cepi-dlaka (split-hair who
splits hairs), muti-voda (muddy-watertrouble- maker), jebi-vetar
(screw-windcharlatan), vrti-guz (spin-buttfidget); tui-baba
(whine-old.woman; tattletale); pali-drvce (ignite-stick, matches)
These compounds are now fossils in most languages, but they used to
be productive and numbered in the thousands, e.g. in the medieval
times 14
- Slide 15
- Compounding the Insult These VN compounds specialize for
derogatory reference when referring to humans They provide evidence
of ritual insult, and are thus of potential sexual selection
significance (Progovac and Locke 2009) You can create many stunning
insults with two-word grammars, not possible by using single words;
also, you can create abstract vocabulary out of concrete concepts
The vast majority of these compounds have not been preserved in
dictionaries or grammar books, due to their unquotable coarseness
15
- Slide 16
- Syntactic reconstruction: Unraveling the syntactic layering
Minimalism (e.g. Chomsky 1995): to derive a transitive sentence
(i), the internal (object-like) argument starts in the VP (or Small
Clause (SC)) (ii a), and the external argument (e.g. agent) in the
outer vP shell (iib): (i) Maria will roll the ball. (ii)a.[ SC/VP
roll the ball] b.[ vP Maria [ SC/VP roll the ball]] Then Tense
Phrase (TP) projects on top, and attracts the highest argument to
become its subject (iic) c.[TP: Maria will [ vP Maria [ SC/VP roll
the ball]]] 16
- Slide 17
- Every sentence starts as a small clause Modern syntactic theory
(e.g. Minimalism and predecessors) analyzes every clause/sentence
as initially a small clause (SC) (e.g. Stowell 1981, 1983; Burzio
1981; Kitagawa 1986; Koopman & Sportiche 1991; Chomsky 1995,
and subsequent work) This is one of the most stable postulates of
syntactic theory The TP layer is superimposed upon the layer of SC,
as if the building of the modern sentence retraces its evolutionary
steps 17
- Slide 18
- Syntax without vP: Unaccusatives (and absolutives) But it is
possible to have syntax without a vP layer; according to e.g.
Chomsky (1995) and Kratzer (2000), unaccusatives do not have a vP
layer, i.e. transitivity layer: (i)The ball will roll/fall. (ii)a.[
SC/VP roll/fall the ball]] b.[TP: The ball will [ SC/VP roll/fall
the ball]] Unaccusatives analyzed as Merging their subject in the
object position (e.g. Burzio 1981; Perlmutter 1978) The highest
argument moves to TP to become subject Notice how the SC/VP
(absolutive layer) serves as foundation for transitive vP shells
(Slide 16) 18
- Slide 19
- But you can remove the TP layer, too: Bare small clauses With
unaccusative small clauses in Serbian, only one layer of structure
is there, the [SC/VP] layer (e.g. Progovac 2008); the subject stays
put, as there is no TP: (i)[SC/VP Pala vlada.] fall. PART
government The government collapsed. ( PART stands for a participle
form of the verb) Contrast full TPs: Vlada je pala. (same meaning
as above) (ii)a. Small clause: [ SC/VP pala vlada] b. [ TP je [ SC
pala vlada]] c. TP [ TP vlada [ T je [ SC pala vlada]]] Notice:
SC/VP provides a foundation for building TP Both clause types are
in productive use in Serbian 19
- Slide 20
- Gradual progression Gradual progression through 3 rough
syntactic stages towards increased syntactic complexity: from one
single layer of structure in TP-less, vP-less small clauses
(absolutive-like stage) (Slide 19) to 2 layers of structure in TP
unaccusatives (Slide 18) to 3 layers of structure with TP
transitives (Slide 16) Each new layer brings a clear and concrete
advantage, which could have been targeted by natural/sexual
selection (see below) There are even intermediate steps leading
from intransitives to vP transitives, so-called middles (slides
29-33) 20
- Slide 21
- Reconstruction based on syntax Proposed internal reconstruction
is based on the theory of syntax (Minimalism, e.g. Chomsky 1995): A
structure X is considered to be (evolutionary) primary relative to
a structure Y if X can be composed independently of Y, but Y can
only be built upon the foundation of X While small clauses/VPs can
be composed without the vP or TP layers, vPs and TPs need to be
built upon the foundation of a small clause/VP this hierarchy of
functional projections ( e.g. Abney 1987 ) is a theoretical
construct, with good empirical foundation 21
- Slide 22
- Converging with Heine and Kuteva (2007) This reconstruction,
based on the theory of syntax, converges with that of Heine and
Kuteva (2007), which is based on grammaticalization processes
Grammaticalization almost always creates a functional category out
of a lexical category, and almost never the other way around
Conclusion: functional categories emerged gradually at a later
stage of language evolution There could have existed a stage with
only nouns and verbs (enabling two-word grammars) 22
- Slide 23
- Are living fossils really that much simpler? Living fossils of
the simplest proto-syntax are rigid, non-moving, non-recursive
structures: Cannot embed (no recursion): (i) a. *Ja mislim [(da)
pala vlada]. I think (that)fell government b. Contrast full TP: Ja
mislim [da je pala vlada]. The same holds for the comparable
fossils in English: (ii) Problem solved. *I think that [problem
solved.] *I consider [problem solved.] You can be cognitively fully
capable of recursion, but if your syntax lacks the appropriate
functional categories and structures, you cannot express it.
23
- Slide 24
- Merge is not all you need No Move either: (i) a. *Kada pala
vlada? when fell government b. Contrast: Kada je pala vlada? (ii)a.
*When/*How problem solved? b. When/How was the problem solved? Move
and Recursion are not an automatic consequence of Merge ( as
claimed in e.g. Fitch, Hauser & Chomsky 2005 ); instead, one
also needs functional categories and layered/hierarchical syntax
24
- Slide 25
- More English fossils (i) a. Case closed. Crisis averted. Point
taken. Mission accomplished. Lesson learned. b. Me first! Family
first! Everybody out! Small clause flat grammars allow only
paratactic/ symmetric clause unions (ii)Nothing ventured, nothing
gained. Easy come, easy go. Monkey see, monkey do. Come one, come
all. No money, no come. (e.g. pidgin languages) 25
- Slide 26
- Similar fossils across languages Twi (spoken in Ghana);
Kingsley Okai (p.c.) (i)Wo dua,wo twa you sow you reap (ii)Wo
hwehwea,wo hu you seekyou find Serbian (iii) Preko pree, naokolo
blie. Across shorter, around closer. (iv) Koliko para, toliko i
muzike. how-much money, that-much music 26
- Slide 27
- More binary data Latin: (1) a. Bene diagnoscitur, bene curatur
well diagnosed, well cured b. Cito maturum, cito putridum early
ripe, early rotten Even deep wisdoms can be expressed, and often
are, with the simplest of grammars True living fossils: Such binary
combinations are productive in some languages, e.g. Hmong (Martha
Ratliff, p.c.) (2)a. ua noj ua haus make eat make drink 'to earn a
living b. kav teb kav chaw rule land rule place 'to rule a county'
Unaccusative small clauses in Serbian are also living fossils
27
- Slide 28
- Only binary unions But notice that these paratactic
(symmetric/non- hierarchical) unions are almost always binary (two-
slot grammars) (i) No shoes, no shirt, no service (exception) (ii)
??Nothing ventured, nothing gained, nothing lost. Our brains are at
a loss as to how to process e.g. (ii) Binary Merge in syntax may
have its roots in this processing limitation: Merge can only
combine 2 elements at a time 28
- Slide 29
- Evidence for an absolutive-like intransitive stage Recall:
Absolutive-like fossils found in all languages, including
nominative-accusative (e.g. compounds; nominals); provide common
ground for all language types Crosslinguistic variation reflects
different paths taken from there (ergative-absolutive vs.
nominative-accusative types) Nicaraguan Sign Language and Homesign
Further evidence: Middles: transitional structures, straddling the
boundary between intransitivity and transitivity Language
acquisition Potential testing grounds: neuroimaging 29
- Slide 30
- The middle ground According to e.g. Kemmer (1994, 181), the
reflexive and the middle [are] semantic categories intermediate in
transitivity between one-participant and two-participant events.
There is an amazing array of such ambivalent, transitional
structures across various languages, blurring the distinctions
between subjects and objects, passives and actives, transitivity
and intransitivity Exactly what one expects under a gradualist
approach to the evolution of syntax; puzzling otherwise 30
- Slide 31
- Unbearable vagueness of meaning Middle se in e.g. Serbian
exhibits astounding vagueness, reflexivity being only one of the
available interpretations: (i) Deca se tuku. children SE hit The
children are hitting each other/themselves. The children are
hitting somebody else. One hits/spanks children. (ii) Marko se
udara! Marko SE hits Marko is hitting me. [most salient discourse
participant] Marko is hitting somebody. Marko is hitting himself.
31
- Slide 32
- Se in Spanish Comparable vagueness also found with se
constructions in Spanish (Arce-Arenales, Axelrod, and Fox 1994, 5):
(i) Juan se mat. Juan SE killed Juan got killed. Juan killed
himself. See also English passive-like structure: (ii) The children
got dressed. This vagueness is reminiscent of absolutives in Tongan
(slide 9) 32
- Slide 33
- Se as a proto-transitive marker This is essentially the vague
absolutive-like pattern, to which se is added, analyzed here as a
proto-transitive marker (Progovac, to appear) Se just indicates
that there is one more participant involved in the event, but the
rest is left to context Se also occurs with dative subjects in
Serbian, another fossil with a hint of ergativity In syntax, se has
been analyzed as an expletive (meaningless) pronoun in the object
position (e.g. Franks 1995; Progovac 2005). 33
- Slide 34
- Many other hints of ergativity in nominative-accusative
languages DuBois (1987) has noted that the kind of pattern in which
the eaten is expressed more readily than the eater, is common in
the languages of the world: (i)a. John grew tomatoes. b. John grew.
(ii)a. John shook Bill.b. John shook. Fluidity of the concept
subject 34
- Slide 35
- Interim summary Method: internal reconstruction of syntax based
on the theory of syntax (Minimalism), coupled with the search for
fossils The initial stage of syntax -- protosyntax: Two-word
grammars (e.g. predicate + one argument) Intransitive and
absolutive-like No distinction between subjects and objects No
syntactic layering (no vP or TP); flat structure No move or
recursion A host of fossils in modern languages still show (at
least some) of these properties: VN compounds, absolutives,
unaccusatives; nominals, dative subjects 35
- Slide 36
- Summary cont. Supporting evidence: Living fossils used
alongside more complex constructions Fossils are built into the
very foundation of complex structures; e.g. an intransitive small
clause (VP) is built into transitive vP shells, as well as into TPs
This kind of tinkering is expected under a gradualist approach to
the evolution of syntax, but is puzzling otherwise Corroborating
evidence and testing grounds: language acquisition (spoken and
signed), aphasia, language disorders, language representation in
the brain 36
- Slide 37
- Analogy with the development of the heart My analysis of small
clauses intergrading into full sentences/TPs resembles the
development of the human heart (Garrett Mitchener, p.c.) The embryo
initially has only a simple, primitive precursor to the heart,
consisting only of two simple tubes, which merge, but even such
primitive heart can perform the necessary rudimentary function The
precursor gradually bulges and expands into a complex heart in the
course of fetal development 37
- Slide 38
- Are reversals and losses possible? Dawkins: body hair can
recede and reappear a number of times in the history of a species
Some recent genetic studies reveal that reversals and losses are
possible even in the evolution of multi-cellularity, a major
transition in the history of life. Schirrmeister, Antonelli, and
Bagheri (2011) report that the majority of extant cyanobacteria,
one of the oldest phyla still alive, including many single-celled
species, descend from multi-cellular ancestors, and that reversals
to unicellularity occurred at least five times. Languages can also
sometimes undress (McWhorter 2011) 38
- Slide 39
- Child syntax absolutive-like? Two-word stage in L-1 acquisition
(e.g. Bloom 1970) Children are claimed to delete arguments in their
speech Zheng and Goldin-Meadow (2002): such deletions follow an
ergative/absolutive pattern Children omit transitive subjects and
produce intransitive subjects and objects (absolutive-like
grammar); see Homesign and compounds (slides 9, 13) Zheng and
Goldin-Meadow (2002): the ergative/ absolutive pattern is more
robust; characterizes the speech of both hearing children and deaf
children 39
- Slide 40
- Can syntax be adaptive? Only if you can decompose it into
appropriate stages E.g. the capability to create 2-word insults
(compounds) increases fitness (Progovac & Locke 2009); sexual
selection vP introduces transitivity and with it more
precision/less vagueness; can grammatically distinguish subjects
from objects TP: break away from the prison of the here-and-now,
and from the prison of pragmatics in general Displacement only
possible with complex/hierarchical grammars Nested recursion (e.g.
embedding one viewpoint within another) only possible with
complex/hierarchical grammars (e.g. John believes that Peter knows
that Mary left town. vs. John believes that. Peter knows that. Mary
left town.) 40
- Slide 41
- Displacement and vP-less grammars Displacement (also recursion)
is one of the design features of human language (Hocket 1960) One
word (pre-syntactic) stage: (i) Apple. Eat. John. Two-word
(absolutive-like) stage: (ii) Apple eat. John go. Hierarchical
TP/vP stage: (iii)John will eat the apple. (iv)The apple will eat
John. Only elaborated grammars allow the depiction of non- present,
strange, or non-existent situations, because they can escape the
prison of context (imagination, innovation) 41
- Slide 42
- Displacement and TP-less grammars TP-less small clauses
typically rooted in the here and now: (i)Problem solved (*three
years ago). (ii)Me first (*three years ago). Full TPs can escape
into the past, the future, or the counterfactual (try expressing
these with 2-word grammars): (iii)The problem was solved three
years ago. (iv)The problem will be solved tomorrow. (v)The problem
would have been solved if it wasnt for a computer glitch. 42
- Slide 43
- Agrammatism Kolk (2006): with Dutch and German agrammatic
speakers, preventive adaptation results in a bias to use simpler
syntactic constructions, including root small clauses and root
infinitives Whereas control speakers produced 10% non-finite
clauses, aphasics produced about 60% In children, the overuse of
non-finite clauses decreased with age: from 83% in the 2-year-olds,
to 60% in the 2.5-year-olds, to 40% in the 3-year-olds A PET study
by Indefrey et al. (2001) shows that non- finite clauses require
less grammatical work 43
- Slide 44
- Specific Language Disorder Specific Language Disorder is
characterized, among other symptoms, by the delay or deficit in the
use of auxiliary verbs, tense and agreement (TP elements), as well
as of other functional categories A mutation on FOXP2 gene
responsible for the disorder (Lai et al. 2001); mutation underwent
selection Some recent experiments suggest that the specifically
human FOXP2 mutations are responsible for growing longer neurites
(axons and dendrites) in the brain, establishing better
connectivity among neurons ( Sonja Vernes, Max Planck Institute,
LSA Institute Workshop Lecture, New Insights from Genetics, June
29, 2013 ). This was established by copying human mutations into
the FOXP2 of mice. 44
- Slide 45
- Synergy While syntactic theory can help identify proto-
structures, and distinguish them from more complex structures,
neuroscience can test if these distinctions are correlated with a
different degree and distribution of brain activation, and genetics
can, among other possibilities, shed light on the role of some
specific genes in making such connections in the brain possible.
45
- Slide 46
- Correlations and subtractions Converging evidence in the
literature showing that increased syntactic complexity corresponds
to increased neural activity in certain specific areas of the brain
(see e.g. Caplan 2001; Indefrey et al. 2001; Just et al. 1996).
Pallier et al. (2011) found a positive correlation between the
levels of hierarchical structure and the degree of activation; used
12 word strings, varying whether these 12 words were a single
sentence, two or more shorter sentences, or just random strings.
Brennan et al. (2012): a naturalistic 12-minute story-telling
experiment. Each word in the story was analyzed for its level of
hierarchical embedding, and the degree of embedding was found to
correlate with the amount of activation in the anterior temporal
lobes, as well as in the left posterior temporal lobe, left IFG,
and medial prefrontal cortex. 46
- Slide 47
- Some predictions for proto-grammars ( joint work with Noa Ofen,
WSU Gerontology/Pediatrics ) While the processing of TPs and
transitives with vP shells is expected to show more clear
lateralization in the left hemisphere, with more extensive
activation of the Brocas areas, the processing of proto structures,
root small clauses and absolutive-type constructions, as well as
middles, is expected to show less lateralization, and less
involvement of the Brocas areas, but more reliance on both
hemispheres, as well as, possibly, more reliance on the subcortical
structures of the brain (e.g. Lieberman 2000) 47
- Slide 48
- Fossils are often formulaic (i) Noting ventured, nothing
gained. Easy come, easy go. (ii) Problem solved. Case closed. Point
taken. Mission accomplished. (iii) Pala karta. Card laid, card
played. (Serbian) fell. PART card (iv) Proo voz. The opportunity
has passed. gone. PART train (v) Preko pree, naokolo blie. Across
shorter, around closer. Code (2005: 317): stereotypical/formulaic
uses of language might represent fossilized clues to its
evolutionary origins they involve more ancient processing patterns,
including more involvement of the basal ganglia, thalamus, limbic
structures, and the right hemisphere (also van Lancker &
Cummings 1999; Bradshaw 2001) 48
- Slide 49
- Conclusion There is ample room for a language system with only
short and flat (intransitive, absolutive-like) sentences; such
(fossil) structures still live in various guises in all human
languages This approach combines a reconstruction method based on
syntactic theory with identification of syntactic fossils Fossil
structures are shown to be built into the very foundation of more
complex structures, thus explaining many properties of the language
design itself, as well as language variation This approach is
compatible with natural/sexual selection: each new layer of
structure brings concrete and tangible incremental advantages, at
least some of which could have been targeted by selection (e.g.
two-word insults; less vagueness; displacement; transitivity; the
expression of tense; nested recursion) This approach can mediate
among the fields of syntax, neuroscience, and genetics;
evolutionary considerations provide the point of contact 49
- Slide 50
- Thank you! 50