Following a synthesis of naturalistic and experimental studies of language creation, we propose a theoretical model that describes the process through which human communication systems might arise and evolve. Three key processes are proposed that give rise to effective, efficient and shared human communication systems: (1) motivated signs that directly resemble their meaning facilitate cognitive alignment, improving communication success; (2) behavioral alignment onto an inventory of shared sign-to-meaning mappings bolsters cognitive alignment between interacting partners; (3) sign refinement, through interactive feedback, enhances the efficiency of the evolving communication system. By integrating the findings across a range of diverse studies, we propose a theoretical model of the process through which the earliest human communication systems might have arisen and evolved. Importantly, because our model is not bound to a single modality it can describe the creation of shared sign systems across a range of contexts, informing theories of language creation and evolution.
(2005) From monkey-like action recognition to human language: An evolutionary framework for neurolinguistics. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 28(02), 105–124.
Arbib, M. A., Liebal, K., & Pika, S.
(2008) Primate vocalization, gesture, and the evolution of human language. Current Anthropology, 49(6), 1053–1076.
Atkinson, Q. D., Meade, A., Venditti, C., Greenhill, S. J., & Pagel, M.
(2008) Languages evolve in punctuational bursts. Science, 319(5863), 588.
Baus, C., Carreiras, M., & Emmorey, K.
(2013) When does iconicity in sign language matter?Language and Cognitive Processes, 28(3), 261–271.
Bavelas, J. B., Coates, L., & Johnson, T.
(2000) Listeners as co-narrators. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(6), 941–952.
Bellugi, U., & Klima, E. S.
(1976) Two faces of sign: Iconic and abstract. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 280(1), 514–538.
Bohn, M., Call, J., & Tomasello, M.
(2016) Comprehension of iconic gestures by chimpanzees and human children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 142(C), 1–17.
Brennan, S. E., & Clark, H. H.
(1996) Conceptual pacts and lexical choice in conversation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 22(6), 1482–1493.
Cangelosi, A., & Parisi, D.
(2002) Computer simulation: A new scientific approach to the study of language evolution. In Simulating the evolution of language (pp. 3–28). London: Springer London.
Clark, H. H., & Brennan, S. E.
(1991) Grounding in communication. Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition, 131, 127–149.
Clark, H. H., & Wilkes-Gibbs, D.
(1986) Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22(1), 1–39.
Deacon, T. W.
(1998) The symbolic species: The co-evolution of language and the brain. New York & London: W. W. Norton & Company.
Dediu, D., & Levinson, S. C.
(2013) On the antiquity of language: The reinterpretation of Neandertal linguistic capacities and its consequences. Frontiers in Psychology, 41, 397.
Fay, N., & Ellison, T. M.
(2013) The cultural evolution of human communication systems in different sized populations: Usability trumps learnability. PLoS ONE, 8(8), e71781–9.
(2013) How to bootstrap a human communication system. Cognitive Science, 37(7), 1356–1367.
Fay, N., Garrod, S., & Roberts, L.
(2008) The fitness and functionality of culturally evolved communication systems. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 363(1509), 3553–3561.
Fay, N., Garrod, S., Roberts, L., & Swoboda, N.
(2010) The interactive evolution of human communication systems. Cognitive Science, 34(3), 351–386.
Fay, N., Lister, C. J., Ellison, T. M., & Goldin-Meadow, S.
(2014) Creating a communication system from scratch: Gesture beats vocalization hands down. Frontiers in Psychology, 51, 1–12.
Fay, N., Walker, B., Swoboda, N., & Garrod, S.
(2016) How to create a shared symbol system: Observation, cognitive bias and social interaction. Manuscript under revision.
Fitch, W. T.
(2005) The evolution of language: A comparative review. Biology & Philosophy, 20(2–3), 193–203.
Frishberg, N.
(1975) Arbitrariness and iconicity: Historical change in American Sign Language. Language, 51(3), 696–719.
Fusaroli, R., Bahrami, B., Olsen, K., Roepstorff, A., Rees, G., Frith, C., & Tylen, K.
(2012) Coming to terms: Quantifying the benefits of linguistic coordination. Psychological Science, 23(8), 931–939.
Galantucci, B.
(2005) An experimental study of the emergence of human communication systems. Cognitive Science, 29(5), 737–767.
Garrod, S., & Anderson, A.
(1987) Saying what you mean in dialogue: A study in conceptual and semantic co-ordination. Cognition, 27(2), 181–218.
Garrod, S., & Pickering, M. J.
(2004) Why is conversation so easy?Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(1), 8–11.
(2004) The origins of arbitrariness in language. Presented at the Proceedings of the
26th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society
(pp. 434–439). Mahwah, NJ.
Goldin-Meadow, S.
(2010) Widening the lens on language learning: Language creation in deaf children and adults in Nicaragua. Human Development, 53(5), 303–311.
Harnad, S.
(1990) The symbol grounding problem. Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena, 42(1–3), 335–346.
Healey, P. G. T., Swoboda, N., Umata, I., & Katagiri, Y.
(2002) Graphical representation in graphical dialogue. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 57(4), 375–395.
Hockett, C. F.
(1978) In search of Jove's Brow. American Speech, 53(4), 243–313.
Hupet, M., & Chantraine, Y.
(1992) Changes in repeated references: Collaboration or repetition effects?Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 21(6), 485–496.
Hurford, J. R.
(2007) The origins of meaning (Vol. 1 of Languge in the light of evolution). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Imai, M., & Kita, S.
(2014) The sound symbolism bootstrapping hypothesis for language acquisition and language evolution. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 369(1651), 20130298.
Kirby, S.
(2001) Spontaneous evolution of linguistic structure-an iterated learning model of the emergence of regularity and irregularity. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 5(2), 102–110.
Lieberman, E., Michel, J.-B., Jackson, J., Tang, T., & Nowak, M. A.
(2007) Quantifying the evolutionary dynamics of language. Nature, 449(7163), 713–716.
Lister, C. J., Fay, N., Ellison, T. M., & Ohan, J.
(2015) Creating a new communication system: Gesture has the upper hand. In
Proceedings of the 37th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society
.
Monaghan, P., Shillcock, R. C., Christiansen, M. H., & Kirby, S.
(2014) How arbitrary is language?Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 369(1651), 20130299.
Oudgenoeg-Paz, O., Volman, M. C. J. M., & Leseman, P. P. M.
(2012) Attainment of sitting and walking predicts development of productive vocabulary between ages 16 and 28 months. Infant Behavior and Development, 35(4), 733–736.
Pagel, M., Atkinson, Q. D., Calude, A. S., & Meade, A.
(2013) Ultraconserved words point to deep language ancestry across Eurasia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(21), 8471–8476.
(2015) Iconicity can ground the creation of vocal symbols. Royal Society Open Science, 2(8), 150152–16.
Perniss, P., & Vigliocco, G.
(2014) The bridge of iconicity: From a world of experience to the experience of language. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 369(1651), 20130300.
Perniss, P., Thompson, R. L., & Vigliocco, G.
(2010) Iconicity as a General Property of Language: Evidence from Spoken and Signed Languages. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1–15.
Perry, L. K., Perlman, M., & Lupyan, G.
(2015) Iconicity in English and Spanish and its relation to lexical category and age of acquisition. PLoS ONE, 10(9), e0137147–17.
Pickering, M. J., & Garrod, S.
(2004) Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27(2), 169–190.
Peirce, C. S.
(1931–1958) Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Edited by C. Hathorne, P. Weiss, & A. Burks. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
Roberts, G., Lewandowski, J., & Galantucci, B.
(2015) How communication changes when we cannot mime the world: Experimental evidence for the effect of iconicity on combinatoriality. Cognition, 141(C), 52–66.
Rowe, M. L., & Goldin-Meadow, S.
(2009) Early gesture selectivelypredicts later language learning. Developmental Science, 12(1), 182–187.
Sandler, W., Aronoff, M., Meir, I., & Padden, C.
(2011) The gradual emergence of phonological form in a new language. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 29(2), 503–543.
Saussure, F. de
1916A course in general linguistics. New York: Philosophical Library.
Schober, M. F., & Clark, H. H.
(1989) Understanding by addressees and overhearers. Cognitive Psychology, 21(2), 211–232.
Scott-Phillips, T. C., Kirby, S., & Ritchie, G. R. S.
(2009) Signalling signalhood and the emergence of communication. Cognition, 113(2), 226–233.
Seyfarth, R. M., Cheney, D. L., & Bergman, T. J.
(2005) Primate social cognition and the origins of language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(6), 264–266.
Steels, L.
(2011) Modeling the cultural evolution of language. Physics of Life Reviews, 8(4), 339–356.
Gibson, K., & Tallerman, M.
(2012) The Oxford handbook of language evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2018. Universal Principles of Human Communication: Preliminary Evidence From a Cross‐cultural Communication Game. Cognitive Science 42:7 ► pp. 2397 ff.
Holler, Judith
2022. Visual bodily signals as core devices for coordinating minds in interaction. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 377:1859
Kempe, Vera, Nicolas Gauvrit, Nikolay Panayotov, Sheila Cunningham & Monica Tamariz
2021. Amount of Learning and Signal Stability Modulate Emergence of Structure and Iconicity in Novel Signaling Systems. Cognitive Science 45:11
Lister, C.J., B. Walker & N. Fay
2020. Innovation and enculturation in child communication: a cross-sectional study. Evolutionary Human Sciences 2
Żywiczyński, Przemysław, Marta Sibierska, Sławomir Wacewicz, Joost van de Weijer, Francesco Ferretti, Ines Adornetti, Alessandra Chiera & Valentina Deriu
2021. Evolution of conventional communication. A cross-cultural study of pantomimic re-enactments of transitive events. Language & Communication 80 ► pp. 191 ff.
2021. Pantomimic fossils in modern human communication. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 376:1824
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 february 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.