Constructing a protolanguage: Reconstructing prehistoric languages in a usage-based construction grammar framework

Abstract

Construction grammar is an approach to language which posits that units and structures in language can be exhaustively described as pairings between form and meaning. These pairings are called constructions and can have different degrees of abstraction, i.e. they span the entire range from very concrete (Armadillo, avocado) to very abstract constructions such as the ditransitive construction (I gave her a book). This approach has been applied to a wide variety of different areas of research in linguistics, such as how new constructions emerge and change historically. It has also been applied to investigate the evolutionary emergence of modern fully-fledged language, i.e. the question of how systems of constructions can arise out of prelinguistic communication. In this paper we review the contribution of usage-based Construction grammar approaches to language change and language evolution to the questions of a) the structure and nature of prehistoric languages and b) how constructions in prehistoric languages emerged out of non-linguistic or protolinguistic communication. In particular, we discuss the possibilities of using constructions as the main unit of analysis both in reconstructing predecessors of existing languages (protolanguages) and in formulating theories of how a potential predecessor of human language in general (protolanguage) must have looked like.

Expression unleashed: The evolutionary and cognitive foundations of human communication

“…In particular, linguistic communication makes ubiquitous and multilayered use of communicative conventions: phonemes, morphemes, words, grammars, and so on, which function to associate particular behaviours (speech, gesture) with particular inferences that the communicator intends to trigger in the audience. This “pragmatics-first” perspective on the nature of languages aligns with usage- and construction-based approaches to grammar, which emphasise how linguistic constructions are used as a means to provide evidence of speaker meaning (e.g., Bybee & Beckner, 2010; Goldberg, 2003; Goldberg & Suttle, 2010; Hartmann & Pleyer, 2021; Schmid, 2020; Tomasello, 2003).…”

Reconstructing prehistoric languages

“…While two other papers touch on the properties of earliest grammars and vocabularies (Hartman & Pleyer [7] and Benítez-Burraco & Progovac [8]), the contributions by Calude [9] and by Gil [10] focus most directly on these questions. Calude provides an overview of the research on number words, concluding that numerals 1–5 are the most stable across cultures, often being preserved for thousands of years, and that they are thus the ones that should be reconstructed for prehistoric languages, while higher numerals have emerged as an innovative tool in more recent times.…”

“…This consideration is consistent with the postulated proxies of proto-syntax in Benítez-Burraco & Progovac [8] (more below), who offer some concrete examples of compounds serving as proxies or ‘living fossils' of the earliest grammars. Likewise, according to the framework of Construction Grammar, adopted and discussed by Hartman & Pleyer [7] (more below), there is some continuity as well between the grammar and the lexicon from prehistoric times to present days.…”

“…The contributions in this section do so more prominently and systematically, advancing a variety of new methods to model prehistoric languages. These include Hartman & Pleyer's [7] reliance on the framework of Construction Grammar; Ceolin et al . 's [14] reliance on a formal syntactic framework; Schreyer & Adger's [15] insights from languages constructed for popular culture media; and Wichmann & Rama's [16] statistical modelling of geographical homelands of language families.…”

“…'s [14] reliance on a formal syntactic framework; Schreyer & Adger's [15] insights from languages constructed for popular culture media; and Wichmann & Rama's [16] statistical modelling of geographical homelands of language families. Hartman & Pleyer [7] advocate using the framework of Construction Grammar to understand how new constructions can arise from prelinguistic systems, as this framework considers a continuum of constructions, ranging from single words to sentences, and from concrete to highly abstract, also positing continuity between the lexicon and the grammar. On the other hand, Ceolin et al .…”