Search

Language is a defining characteristic of our species, but the function, or functions, that it serves has been debated for centuries. Here we bring recent evidence from neuroscience and allied disciplines to argue that in modern humans, language is a tool for communication, contrary to a prominent view that we use language for thinking. We begin by introducing the brain network that supports linguistic ability in humans. We then review evidence for a double dissociation between language and thought, and discuss several properties of language that suggest that it is optimized for communication. We conclude that although the emergence of language has unquestionably transformed human culture, language does not appear to be a prerequisite for complex thought, including symbolic thought. Instead, language is a powerful tool for the transmission of cultural knowledge; it plausibly co-evolved with our thinking and reasoning capacities, and only reflects, rather than gives rise to, the signature sophistication of human cognition.Evidence from neuroscience and related fields suggests that language and thought processes operate in distinct networks in the human brain and that language is optimized for communication and not for complex thought. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examine the conceptual development of kinship through the lens of program induction. We present a computational model for the acquisition of kinship term concepts, resulting in the first computational model of kinship learning that is closely tied to developmental phenomena. We demonstrate that our model can learn several kinship systems of varying complexity using cross-linguistic data from English, Pukapuka, Turkish, and Yanomamö. More importantly, the behavioral patterns observed in children learning kinship terms, under-extension and over-generalization, fall out naturally from our learning model. We then conducted interviews to simulate realistic learning environments and demonstrate that the characteristic-to-defining shift is a consequence of our learning model in naturalistic contexts containing abstract and concrete features. We use model simulations to understand the influence of logical simplicity and children's learning environment on the order of acquisition of kinship terms, providing novel predictions for the learning trajectories of these words. We conclude with a discussion of how this model framework generalizes beyond kinship terms, as well as a discussion of its limitations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Each of our theories of mental representation provides some insight into how the mind works. However, these insights often seem incompatible, as the debates between symbolic, dynamical, emergentist, sub-symbolic, and grounded approaches to cognition attest. Mental representations—whatever they are—must share many features with each of our theories of representation, and yet there are few hypotheses about how a synthesis could be possible. Here, I develop a theory of the underpinnings of symbolic cognition that shows how sub-symbolic dynamics may give rise to higher-level cognitive representations of structures, systems of knowledge, and algorithmic processes. This theory implements a version of conceptual role semantics by positing an internal universal representation language in which learners may create mental models to capture dynamics they observe in the world. The theory formalizes one account of how truly novel conceptual content may arise, allowing us to explain how even elementary logical and computational operations may be learned from a more primitive basis. I provide an implementation that learns to represent a variety of structures, including logic, number, kinship trees, regular languages, context-free languages, domains of theories like magnetism, dominance hierarchies, list structures, quantification, and computational primitives like repetition, reversal, and recursion. This account is based on simple discrete dynamical processes that could be implemented in a variety of different physical or biological systems. In particular, I describe how the required dynamics can be directly implemented in a connectionist framework. The resulting theory provides an "assembly language" for cognition, where high-level theories of symbolic computation can be implemented in simple dynamics that themselves could be encoded in biologically plausible systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is now a common practice to compare models of human language processing by comparing how well they predict behavioral and neural measures of processing difficulty, such as reading times, on corpora of rich naturalistic linguistic materials. However, many of these corpora, which are based on naturally-occurring text, do not contain many of the low-frequency syntactic constructions that are often required to distinguish between processing theories. Here we describe a new corpus consisting of English texts edited to contain many low-frequency syntactic constructions while still sounding fluent to native speakers. The corpus is annotated with hand-corrected Penn Treebank-style parse trees and includes self-paced reading time data and aligned audio recordings. We give an overview of the content of the corpus, review recent work using the corpus, and release the data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]