Linguagem, Cognio e Evoluo PUCRS JORGE CAMPOS

Metateoria das Interfaces

Interfaces Externas (IE) - Interdisciplinares Interfaces Internas (II) - Intradisciplinares Ex.: IE Lingstica e Psicologia Cognitiva Lingstica e Lgica Clssica Lingstica e Comunicao Social

II -

Fonologia Morfologia - Lexicologia Sintaxe Semntica - Pragmtica

Lingstica e Cognio
Chomsky Gerativismo/Biolingstica A faculdade da linguagem est enraizada no crebro/mente humano numa Gramtica Universal de base inata.

O Argumento da Pobreza de Estmulo

Lingstica e Psicologia Evolucionria

A Evoluo da Linguagem

Darwinismo e Seleo Natural Dawkins e Gene Egosta Pinker e Jackendoff Adaptao

Chomsky e Gould Exaptao

Susan Blackmore - Memes

Lingstica e Psicologia Evolucionria Lingstica Evolucionria Darwinismo e Seleo Natural Pinker and Bloom, 1990; Hauser, Chomsky, and Fitch, 2002; Jackendoff, 2002

Lingstica e Cincias Cognitivas

Linguagem e Crebro/Mente

Linguagem e Crebro Hemisfrios e Lateralidade

Lingstica Evolucionria
Hauser, Chomsky e Fitch (The Faculty of Language: What Is It, Who Has It, and How Did It Evolve?
Faculdade da Linguagem (FL) - propriedade Do crebro/mente FLB ( broad) / FLN (narrow) A investigao da FL deve ser interdisciplinar

We argue that an understanding of the faculty of language requires substantial interdisciplinary cooperation. We suggest how current developments in linguistics can be profitably wedded to work in evolutionary biology, anthropology, psychology, and neuroscience. We submit that a distinction should be made between the faculty of language in the broad sense (FLB)and in the narrow sense (FLN).

Hauser, Chomsky e Fitch

FLB: sistema sensrio-motor Sistema conceptual-intencional Mecanismos computacionais FLN: sistema recursivo
FLB includes a sensory-motor system, a conceptual-intentional system, and the computational mechanisms for recursion, providing the capacity to generate an infinite range of expressions from a finite set of elements. We hypothesize that FLN only includes recursion and is the only uniquely human component of the faculty of language. We further argue that FLN may have evolved for reasons other than language, hence comparative studies might look for evidence of such computations outside of the domain of communication (for example, number, navigation, and social relations).

Hauser, Chomsky e Fitch

Se marciamos observassem: cdigo universal no DNA / genes geram variaes ilimitadas de espcies - humanas e outras Ao contrrio, no parece haver cdigos universais de comunicao lnguas humanas so gerativas, recursivas, criativas, ilimitadas hierrquicas, muito diferentemente de outras espcies como os genes

Hauser, Chomsky e Fitch

Hauser, Chomsky e Fitch

A propriedade recursiva prpria da linguagem humana e o centro computacional da cognio.(FLN) o nico fator diferencial homem-animal. 1N Se a est em N, ento a+1 est em N Se a+1 est em N, ento a+1+1 tambm Joo viu Maria, que irm de Lus, que conhece Pedro, que gosta de Lcia, que foi para Porto Alegre, que a capital...

Hauser, Chomsky e Fitch

Se marcianos observassem: vendo as variaes ilimitadas de cdigos comunicativos incompreensveis entre si quereriam saber como os hunos desenvolveram a linguagem. A evoluo da linguagem humana poderia distinguir fatores computacionais de fatores comunicativos: os primeiros poderiam se desenvolver independentemente dos segundo que mais tarde viriam a se mostrar importantes.

1 Compartilhado versus nico 2 Gradual versus saltacional 3 Contnuo versus exaptativo No h consenso - noo de linguagem
Lnguagem E conceito scio-cultural Linguagem I conceito cognitivo

Trs Fatores Distintos na Evoluo

In informal usage, a language is understood as a culturally specific communication system (English, Navajo, etc.). In the varieties of modern linguistics that concern us here, the term language is used quite differently to refer to an internal component of the mind/brain (sometimes called internal language or I-language). We assume that this is the primary object of interest for the study of the evolution and function of the language faculty.

The faculty of language: whats special about it?*

Steven Pinker and Ray Jackendoff (PJ)

PJ consideram problemtica a hiptese de HCF sobre a recurso(HRO) como aspecto unicamente humano e unicamente para a linguagem. It ignores the many aspects of grammar that are not recursive, such as phonology, morphology, case, agreement, and many properties of words. It is inconsistent with the anatomy and neural control of the human vocal tract. And it is weakened by experiments suggesting that speech perception cannot be reduced to primate audition, that word learning cannot be reduced to fact learning, and that at least one gene involved in speech and language was evolutionarily selected in the human lineage but is not specific to recursion. (PJ)

Evoluo da Linguagem (Pinker and Jackendoff)

PJ rejeitam a hiptese de que a linguagem no seja uma adaptao, que ela seja perfeita, no-redundante, no necessariamente usvel, e mal desenhada para a comunicao.

The hypothesis that language is a complex adaptation for communication which evolved piecemeal avoids all these problems. (PJ)

Evoluo da Linguagem (Pinker and Jackendoff)

The most fundamental question in the study of the human language faculty is its place in the natural world: what kind of biological system it is, and how it relates to other systems in our own species and others 1 O que aprendido do ambiente 2 O que vem com o desenho do crebro 3 Que partes so especficas da linguaquais so gerais 4 Que aspectos so s humanos e quais so compartilhados com outro animais.

Evoluo da Linguagem (Pinker and Jackendoff)

A HRU anula a proposta de adaptao da linguagem para a comunicao defendida por PJ. As HCF note (p. 1572), the two of us have advanced a position rather different from theirs, namely that the language faculty, like other biological systems showing signs of complex adaptive design (Dawkins, 1986; Williams, 1966), is a system of co-adapted traits that evolved by natural selection (Jackendoff, 1992, 1994, 2002; Pinker, 1994b, 2003; Pinker & Bloom, 1990). Specifically, the language faculty evolved in the human lineage for the communication of complex propositions.

Evoluo da Linguagem (Pinker and Jackendoff)

PJ enfraquecem a HRU:
Conceptual structure: HCF plausibly suggest that human conceptual structure partly overlaps with that of other primates and partly incorporates newly evolved capacities. Speech perception. HCF suggest it is simply generic primate auditory perception. But the tasks given to monkeys are not comparable to the feats of human speech perception, and most of Libermans evidence for the Speech-isSpecial hypothesis, and more recent experimental demonstrations of humanmonkey differences in speech perception, are not discussed.

Evoluo da Linguagem (Pinker and Jackendoff)

Speech production. HCFs recursion-only hypothesis implies no selection forspeech production in the human lineage. But control of the supralaryngeal vocaltract is incomparably more complex in human language than in other primate vocalizations. Vocal imitation and vocal learning are uniquely human among primates (talents that are consistently manifested only in speech). And syllabic babbling emerges spontaneously in human infants. HCF further suggest that the distinctively human anatomy of the vocal tract may have been selected for size exaggeration rather than speech. Yet the evidence for the former in humans is weak, and does not account for the distinctive anatomy of the supralaryngeal parts of the vocal tract.

Evoluo da Linguagem (Pinker and Jackendoff)

Phonology. Not discussed by HCF. Lexicon. HCF discuss two ways in which words are a distinctively human ability, possibly unique to our species. But they assign words to the broad language faculty, which is shared by other human cognitive faculties, without discussing the ways in which words appear to be tailored to languagenamely that they consist in part (sometimes in large part) of grammatical information, and that they are bidirectional, shared, organized, and generic in reference, features that are experimental demonstrable in young childrens learning of words.

Evoluo da Linguagem (Pinker and Jackendoff)

Morphology: Not discussed by HCF. Syntax: Case, agreement, pronouns, predicate-argument structure, topic, focus, auxiliaries, question markers, and so on, are not discussed by HCF. Recursion is said to be human-specific, but no distinction is made between arbitrary recursive mathematical systems and the particular kinds of recursive phrase structure found in human languages. We conclude that the empirical case for the recursion-only hypothesis is extremely weak. S. Pinker, R. Jackendoff / Cognition 95 (2005) 201236 217

Evoluo da Linguagem (Pinker and Jackendoff)

1 Alguns dos fundamentos do sistema conceptual-intencional esto presentes em outros animais(espaciais, causais,..) H sistemas que dependem da linguagem, o conceito de semana e outros. 2 A percepo da fala humana especial (SiS H), diferente de primatas, tendo sido adaptaes para intenes articulatrias humanas. HCF recusam isso.

Evoluo da Linguagem (Pinker and Jackendoff)

PJ trazem muitas evidncias de que h mais aspectos da evoluo do que HCF Defendem: 1 Fala e som so fenmenos diferentes 2 Neuroimagem e desordens mostram diferentes reas envolvidas em fala e sons 3 Crianas recm-nascidos distinguem fala de sons semelhantes 4 Animais-primatas no so competentes para a distino de sons da fala

The nature of the language faculty and its implications for evolution of language (Reply to Fitch, Hauser, and Chomsky)* Ray Jackendoff, Steven Pinker In a continuation of the conversation with Fitch, Chomsky, and Hauser on the evolution of language, we examine their defense of the claim that the uniquely human, language-specific part of the language faculty (the narrow language faculty) consists only of recursion, and that this part cannot be considered an adaptation to communication. We argue that their characterization of the narrow language faculty is problematic for many reasons, including its dichotomization of cognitive capacities into those that are utterly unique and those that are identical to nonlinguistic or nonhuman capacities, omitting capacities that may have been substantially modified during human evolution

Evoluo da Linguagem (Pinker and Jackendoff)

We also question their dichotomy of the current utility versus original function of a trait, which omits traits that are adaptations for current use, and their dichotomy of humans and animals, which conflates similarity due to common function and similarity due to inheritance from a recent common ancestor. We show that recursion, though absent from other animals communications systems, is found in visual cognition, hence cannot be the sole evolutionary development that granted language to humans. Finally, we note that despite Fitch et al.s denial, their view of language evolution is tied to Chomskys conception of language itself, which identifies combinatorial productivity with a core of narrow syntax.

A Complexidade da Linguagem e a Evoluo

Dan Everett e o caso do Pirah

O Pirah, Cultura e Linguagem

Dan Everett 2005 article in CurrentAnthropology,"CulturalConstraints on Grammar and Cognition in Pirah," has caused a controversy in the field of linguistics.

Pirah: As Observaes de Everett

-O Pirah usa somente trs pronomes -Sem palavras para tempo -Sem conjugao de verbos de passado -Sem importncia para cores -No usam subordinao -No tm necessidade de nmeros -Sem quantificadores, todo, cada, ... -hi significa 1, ou pequena quantidade, ou pequeno Sem estrias simblicas ou fices

O Debate Everett / Chomsky

Everett: Interao linguagem-cultura Chomsky: interao linguagem-natureza Everett: Linguagem variao universal Chomsky: Gramtica Universal Everett: Linguagem expressa cultura Chomsky: Hiptese Inatista Everett: Princpio da Experincia Imediata Chomsky: FLN - Recurso

O Debate Everett / Chomsky

Everett: Pirah no tem recurso no tem matemtica, msica, computao, filosofia, etc.

Pinker: Se o Pirah no tem recurso, ento tal propriedade no universal; Se no universal, no explica a linguagem humana, e Chomsky est refuTado.

O Debate Everett / Chomsky

Everett defende a pesquisa de campo, a Antropolgica Lingstica como decisiva em termos de deduo, induo e abduo, recusando idias a priori sobre inatismo e gramtica universal

Chomsky tem uma concepo de Filosofia da Cincia em que a observao se segue para corroborar o programa de Investigao.

Pirah: Uma Viso Crtica

Nevins e Pezetsky: Contra tese / Everett 1 Pirah tem oraes encaixadas 2 Pirah tem quantificadores 3 Construes discutidas por Everett aparecem em lnguas sem as restries culturais do Pirah( alemo, chins,...) Princpio da Experincia Imediata nenhuma evidncia de relao causal cultura e estrutura gramatical

Pirah: uma Viso Crtica

Syntax
1. "the absence of embedding;

Lexicon/Semantics
2. "the absence of numbers or any kind or a concept of counting and of any terms for quantification; 3. "the absence of color terms; 4. "the simplest pronoun inventory known; 5. "the absence of 'relative tenses';

Pirah: uma Viso Crtica

Culture 6. "the absence of creation myths and fiction;3 7. "the absence of drawing or other art; 8. "the fact that the Pirah are monolingual after more than 200 years of regular contact with Brazilians; 9. "the absence of any individual or collective memory of more than two generations past; 10. "the simplest kinship system yet documented; 11. "one of the simplest material cultures documented;