"Why language really is not a communication system: a cognitive view of language evolution"

"Why language really is not a communication system: a cognitive view of language evolution"

The debate on whether language is a communication system or not has been a topic of interest for many researchers in the field of linguistics and cognitive science. In this article, we will explore the arguments presented by various scholars and delve into the idea that language first evolved as a cognitive tool before being exapted for communication.

One of the main arguments against language being a communication system is the lack of history argument. Linguistic creativity often leads to the production of one-off sentences, which lack the necessary history for the establishment of a proper function. While animal signals are holistic and serve as both semantic and communicative units, language separates these two functions. This raises questions about why humans need to be able to communicate an infinite number of different contents and how a communication system that incorporates decoupling could ever emerge.

Traditional views of communication systems, such as the code model, cannot fully account for the complexities of language evolution. The semantic meaning of an utterance often fails to correspond exactly to what the speaker intended to communicate. This discrepancy between sentence meaning and speaker meaning challenges the idea that language evolved solely for communication purposes.

An alternative view suggests that language first evolved as a cognitive tool, following Fodor's Language of Thought Hypothesis. Language was then exapted for communication, inheriting its core combination of features from the Language of Thought. This perspective emphasizes the role of human intelligence in the development of language, rather than solely focusing on social abilities.

The underdetermination of behavioral response argument further challenges the notion of language as a communication system. The automaticity and frequency of a response to a linguistic signal are largely underdetermined, undermining the pairing of signals and responses. This suggests that language may not function solely as a means of communication, but rather as a tool for thought and conceptualization.

The richness of the human conceptual system also sets language apart from other species. While some core conceptual mechanisms may be shared with other animals, the extent of the human conceptual system is unique. This raises questions about what led to the emergence of such different mechanisms of conceptualization in humans and suggests a major brain reorganization.

In conclusion, the idea that language is not solely a communication system challenges traditional views and highlights the role of cognition and human intelligence in its evolution. Language first evolved as a cognitive tool and was later exapted for communication. Understanding language as a cognitive tool rather than just a means of communication provides new insights into its unique features and the cognitive abilities necessary for its emergence.

Actionable Advice:

1. Emphasize the importance of understanding language as a cognitive tool rather than just a means of communication. This perspective can help researchers and language learners appreciate the complexities and unique features of language.

2. Investigate the role of human intelligence and cognitive abilities in the evolution of language. By studying the cognitive processes involved in language production and comprehension, we can gain a deeper understanding of how language evolved and its relationship to human cognition.

3. Explore alternative models of language evolution that go beyond traditional views of communication systems. By considering the cognitive aspects of language and its role as a tool for thought, we can develop new theories and approaches to studying language evolution.