Article published in:
Holophrasis vs Compositionality in the Emergence of ProtolanguageEdited by Michael A. Arbib and Derek Bickerton
[Interaction Studies 9:1] 2008
► pp. 154–168
Holophrasis and the protolanguage spectrum
Michael A. Arbib | University of Southern California
Much of the debate concerning the question “Was Protolanguage Holophrastic?” assumes that protolanguage existed as a single, stable transitional form between communication systems akin to those of modern primates and human languages as we know them today. The present paper argues for a spectrum of protolanguages preceding modern languages emphasizing that (i) protospeech was intertwined with protosign and gesture; (ii) grammar emerged from a growing population of constructions; and (iii) an increasing protolexicon drove the emergence of phonological structure. This framework weakens arguments for the view that the earliest protolanguages were not holophrastic while advancing the claim that protolanguages became increasingly compositional over time en route to the emergence of true languages.
Published online: 07 March 2008
https://doi.org/10.1075/is.9.1.11arb
https://doi.org/10.1075/is.9.1.11arb
Cited by
Cited by 14 other publications
Arbib, Michael A.
Arbib, Michael A.
Arbib, Michael A., Brad Gasser & Victor Barrès
Gong, Tao & Lan Shuai
Gong, Tao & Lan Shuai
Gong, Tao, Lan Shuai & Philip Allen
Gong, Tao, Lan Shuai & Bernard Comrie
Gong, Tao, Lan Shuai & Xiaolong Yang
Gong, Tao, Lan Shuai & Menghan Zhang
Kendon, Adam
Pustejovsky, James
Pustejovsky, James
Putt, Shelby S. J., Zara Anwarzai, Chloe Holden, Lana Ruck & P. Thomas Schoenemann
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 april 2022. 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.