2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.cobeha.2018.03.015
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Combinatorial capacities in primates

Abstract: Do primates have syntax-like abilities? One line of enquiry is to test how subjects respond to different types of artificial grammars. Results have revealed neural structures responsible for processing combinatorial content, shared between nonhuman primates and humans. Another approach has been to study natural communication, which has revealed a wealth of organisational principles, including merged compounds and sequences with stochastic, permutated, hierarchical and crossmodal combinatorial utterances. There… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
45
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 38 publications
(46 citation statements)
references
References 71 publications
1
45
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Given the structural diversity combinatoriality can take, we propose that a crude division of vocal structures into combinatoriality/phonology versus compositionality/syntax might be an over‐simplification trivializing the intriguing complexity of animal vocal structures (c.f. Zuberbühler ()). Ultimately, distinctions and subsequent comparisons of combinatorial mechanisms appear to be central to resolving outstanding questions including (a) whether we can reveal universal principles that generally drive combinatoriality and (b) whether different combinatorial mechanisms might be the result of variations in social and ecological conditions or cognitive capacities.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Given the structural diversity combinatoriality can take, we propose that a crude division of vocal structures into combinatoriality/phonology versus compositionality/syntax might be an over‐simplification trivializing the intriguing complexity of animal vocal structures (c.f. Zuberbühler ()). Ultimately, distinctions and subsequent comparisons of combinatorial mechanisms appear to be central to resolving outstanding questions including (a) whether we can reveal universal principles that generally drive combinatoriality and (b) whether different combinatorial mechanisms might be the result of variations in social and ecological conditions or cognitive capacities.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Communicative behaviors consist of sequences of elements, and the sequencing of such elements can be learned and can provide various types of information 1,3,[53][54][55] . In contrast to the learning of the acoustic structure of individual elements (e.g., syllables in birdsong), relatively little is known about the acquisition of sequences of acoustic elements, especially for animals with complex sequence structures that resemble those observed in human language (e.g., songbirds like the Bengalese finch).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the study of language origins, comparative researchers have typically focused on these distinct cognitive building blocks and investigated their presence in the gestural, vocal or facial communicative acts of non‐human species. Here, we discuss cognitive mechanisms in gesture and vocalization which have been the focus of comparative studies in non‐human species and are thought to have played a major role in the evolution of language: intentionality, reference, iconicity, combinatoriality, turn‐taking, neural control and ontogenetic plasticity (Marler, Evans & Hauser, ; Liebal et al, ; Perniss & Vigliocco, ; Townsend et al, ; Zuberbühler, ). In particular, we ask whether each of these cognitive building blocks are found only in gestural communication, as claimed by proponents of the gestures‐first model of language origins (e.g.…”
Section: Cognitive Mechanisms Identified In Non‐human Gestures and Vomentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Taken together, at present there is much clearer evidence for combinatorial capacities in animal vocalizations than there is for gestures. Whether human syntax evolved gradually from animal combinatoriality, or emerged more recently as a functional change from non‐linguistic operations is still subject to debate (Fitch, ; Zuberbühler, ).…”
Section: Cognitive Mechanisms Identified In Non‐human Gestures and Vomentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation