Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

The evolution of syntactic communication

Abstract

Animal communication is typically non-syntactic, which means that signals refer to whole situations1,2,3,4,5,6,7. Human language is syntactic, and signals consist of discrete components that have their own meaning8. Syntax is a prerequisite for taking advantage of combinatorics, that is, “making infinite use of finite means”9,10,11. The vast expressive power of human language would be impossible without syntax, and the transition from non-syntactic to syntactic communication was an essential step in the evolution of human language12,13,14,15,16. We aim to understand the evolutionary dynamics of this transition and to analyse how natural selection can guide it. Here we present a model for the population dynamics of language evolution, define the basic reproductive ratio of words and calculate the maximum size of a lexicon. Syntax allows larger repertoires and the possibility to formulate messages that have not been learned beforehand. Nevertheless, according to our model natural selection can only favour the emergence of syntax if the number of required signals exceeds a threshold value. This result might explain why only humans evolved syntactic communication and hence complex language.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Figure 1: How many word-learning events per individual are required for a population to maintain a certain number of words in its combined lexicon assuming that word frequencies follow Zipf's law?
Figure 2: To understand the essence of the evolution of syntax, we imagine a world where each event consists of one object and one action.
Figure 3: The fitness of non-syntactic and syntactic communication, Fn and Fs, as function of the total number of word learning events per individual, b, for three different choices of the event rate matrix, Γ.
Figure 4: Numerical validation of the approximate threshold condition given by equation (3).

References

  1. 1

    Von Frisch, K. The Dance Language and Orientation of Bees (Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1967).

    Google Scholar 

  2. 2

    Marler, P. Birdsong and speech development: could there be parallels? Am. Sci. 58, 669–673 (1970).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  3. 3

    Wilson, E. O. Animal communication. Sci. Am. 227, 52– 60 (1972).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4

    Gould, J. L. & Marler, P. Learning by instinct. Sci. Am. 256, 74–85 ( 1987).

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5

    Burling, R. Primate calls, human language, and nonverbal communication. Curr. Anthropol. 34, 25–53 ( 1989).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6

    Cheney, D. L. & Seyfarth, R. M. How Monkeys See the World: Inside the Mind of Another Species (Chicago Univ. Press, 1990 ).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  7. 7

    Hauser, M. The Evolution of Communication (MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1996).

    Google Scholar 

  8. 8

    Bickerton, D. Species and Language (Chicago Univ. Press, Chicago, 1990).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  9. 9

    von Humboldt, W. Linguistic Variability and Intellectual Development (Pennsylvania Univ. Press, Philadelphia, 1972).

    Google Scholar 

  10. 10

    Chomsky, N. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax (MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1965).

    Google Scholar 

  11. 11

    Jackendoff, R. The Architecture of the Language Faculty (MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  12. 12

    Pinker, S. & Bloom, P. Natural language and natural selection. Behav. Brain Sci. 13, 707– 784 (1990).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13

    Pinker, S. The Language Instinct. (Harper Collins, New York, 1994 ).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  14. 14

    Maynard Smith, J. & Szathmary, E. The Major Transitions in Evolution (Freeman, Oxford, 1995).

    Google Scholar 

  15. 15

    Hurford, J. R., Studdert-Kennedy, M. & Knight, C. Approaches to the Evolution of Language (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK, 1998).

    Google Scholar 

  16. 16

    Nowak, M. A. & Krakauer, D. C. The evolution of language. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 96, 8028– 8033 (1999).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17

    Chomsky, N. Language and Mind (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, New York, 1972).

    Google Scholar 

  18. 18

    Chomsky, N. Language and Problems of Knowledge: The Managua Lectures (MIT Press, Cambridge, Masachusetts, 1988).

    Google Scholar 

  19. 19

    Premack, D. Gavagai! or the future history of the animal language controversy. Cognition 19, 207–296 ( 1985).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20

    Lieberman, P. The Biology and Evolution of Language (Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1984).

    Google Scholar 

  21. 21

    Bates, E., Thal, D. & Marchman, V. in Biological and Behavioural Determinants of Language Development (eds Krasnegor et al.) (Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, 1991).

    Google Scholar 

  22. 22

    Zipf, G. K. The Psychobiology of Language (Houghton-Mifflin, Boston, 1935).

    Google Scholar 

  23. 23

    Miller, G. A. & Chomsky, N. Handbook of Mathematical Psychology . Vol. 2 (eds Luce, R. D., Bush, R. & Galauter, E.) 419–491 (Wiley, New York, 1963).

    Google Scholar 

  24. 24

    Dunbar, R. Grooming, Gossip and the Evolution of Language (Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1996).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Leon Levy and Shelby White Initiatives Fund, the Florence Gould Foundation, the J. Seward Johnson Sr Charitable Trusts, the Ambrose Monell Foundation, the National Science Foundation, the Wellcome Trust and the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martin A. Nowak.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nowak, M., Plotkin, J. & Jansen, V. The evolution of syntactic communication. Nature 404, 495–498 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1038/35006635

Download citation

Further reading

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing