Language Flashcards

1
Q

What are the 3 key hypotheses presented in lectures regarding the emergence of language?
Give a brief description of each

A

Why Only Us hypothesis (Berwick & Chomsky, 2016): language restricted to Homo sapiens and emerged in the last 300 000 years.

  • Gradual hypothesis: language emerged within Homo with Mode 2 technology around 1.75 Ma.
  • ‘The Much Older hypothesis’: before 1.75 Ma?
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What are the 3 key areas that can be explored in the fossil record which can be used to examine the emergence of language in detail

A

auditory capacity

cognition

vocal tract

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What do you call brain mapping

A

Brain parcellation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What are cortical areas

A

Cortical areas: regions defined by their microstructural architecture, functional specialization, connectivity or topographic organization (Brodmann’s areas, BA).

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What are the key parts of the brain associated with language?

Where are they located ?

A

Broca’s cap: located in the inferior frontal gyrus and formed by BA 44 (pars opercularis) and BA 45 (pars triangularis).

  • Wernicke’s area: located in the posterior part of the superior temporal gyrus, and part of BA 22.
  • Both located in the dominant cerebral hemisphere for language (right/left, left in 95% of living humans).
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What are the structural and shape characteristics of the Broca’s cap and the Wernicke’s area?

A

Broca’s cap: ascending and horizontal branches of the lateral fissure delineate BA 44 and 45.

Wernicke’s area: proximity of the lateral end of the lateral fissure.

Asymmetries: the Broca’s cap and the Wernicke’s area (represented by the planum temporale) are larger in the dominant hemisphere for language.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Can we see symmetries in Broca’s areas in non-human animals?

A

Asymmetries of the Broca’s cap and planum temporale in other great apes.

BUT a different organization of the Broca’s cap in other great apes (fronto-orbital sulcus).

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What is the organization of Broca’s cap in sediba

A

Australopithecus sediba (2.0 Ma) - chimpanzee-like pattern (fronto-orbital sulcus (Carlson et al., 2011))

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Do early Homo show human-like pattern

A
Homo rudolfensis
(2.1-1.8 Ma) - two branches (Falk, 1983)

Homo habilis - (2.6-1.7 Ma) - fronto-orbital sulcus (Falk, 1983)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What are the language centres like in later Homo brains

A

Neandertals
(0.197-0.039 Ma)
two branches
(Bruner et al., 2008)

Homo naledi
(0.3-0.2 Ma)
two branches
(Holloway et al., 2018)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Describe the pattern of asymmetries in hominin evolution

A

Gradual increase in the degree of expression of asymmetries of the Broca’s cap:
same pattern as in extant humans and great apes but different magnitude!

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Why is Wernicke’s area hard to track in human evolution?

What can we tell?

A

Temporo-parietal region poorly represented in the fossil record.

• Strong development of the inferior parietal lobule (including Wernicke’s area)
in Homo habilis? (Tobias, 1987)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Summarise the evidence for language from the endocast in australopithecines, early Homo, and later Homo

A

Australopithecus:
primitive Broca’s cap
some asymmetry of Broca’s cap
N/A regarding Wernicke’s area

early Homo: Broca’s cap organisation is a mix of primitive and derived
increased asymmetry of Broca’s cap
Wernicke’s area appears to be more derived (as seen in habilis skull)

later Homo:
derived Broca’s cap
pronounced asymmetry
little information on Wernicke’s area

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What is an audiogram

What does a modern human audiogram look like

Why is this important

A

Audible thresholds for specific frequencies.

• Modern human audiogram: lowered high-frequency cutoff and high sensitivity
in the low to mid-frequencies as compared to other primates

Hearing variability partly related to forms of vocalization

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What is interesting about earlier hominin ossicles

Why is this important

A

Australopithecus africanus and Paranthropus robustus ossicles: a derived malleus with primitive incus and stapes.

Primitive incus: decrease in auditory sensitivity shared with the other primates
except humans.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Describe Neanderthal ossicles

What does this suggest

A

same functional parameters of the ossicles than in anatomically modern humans but different morphology.

• Similar auditory sensitivity, same hearing capacities, same vocal communication?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

What was the bandwidth like in later Homo

A

Broad bandwith in Homo heidelbergensis and modern humans with similar means

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

What is interesting about Paranthropus’ inner ear

A

increase in the oval window area and specific cochlear shape.

• Functional adaptations for hearing sensitivity?

Very different to Homo - May need to distinguish between Paranthropines and humans

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Describe the Oval window and cochlea in Homo erectus and modern Homo

What does this suggest

A

large cochlea and oval window,

increased low frequency sensitivity emerged less than 2 Ma

Longer-range communication?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

What can cochlear length be used to estimate

A

a good estimate of low-frequency sensitivity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

How do Premodern (Homo erectus) and modern human cochleae differ from australopiths and catarrhines

why is this special

A

cochlear relative lengths and oval window areas
larger than expected for their body mass, two features corresponding to increased low-frequency sensitivity

uniqueness of the “hypertrophied” cochlea in the genus Homo (quotation from

22
Q

How does the Cochlea in Homo heidelbergensis compare to modern humans

What does this suggest functionally

A

small cochlear volume.

• Higher upper limit of hearing compared to modern humans (lower high frequency cutoff)?

Martinez et al., 2019

23
Q

What did Conde-Valverde et al., 2021 find in relation to the Neanderthal inner ear? What is the functional significance of this?

A

results show that the occupied bandwidth of Neanderthals was greater than the Sima de los Huesos hominins and similar to extant humans, implying that Neanderthals evolved the auditory capacities to support a vocal communication system as efficient as modern human speech

24
Q

Give a review of the auditory capacities of fossil hominins

Address middle and inner ear and how this will impact auditory capacity

A

early hominins:
primitive middle ear
specific inner ear to different species
capacity is primitive with some specificities

early Homo:
middle ear generally unclear
inner ear: derived
capacity: emergence of the lowered high-frequency cutoff

later Homo:
middle ear - derived
inner ear - derived
capacity - same vocal communication?

25
Q

What does the vocal tract consist of

What is its structure in extant humans

A

supralaryngeal vocal tract composed of the oral cavity (OC) and the pharynx (P).

OC and P should be the same lenght for producing some vowels: short OC and
low position of the P in extant humans

26
Q

How can we reconstruct the pharynx from fossils

A

Proxy for reconstructing P in fossil hominins: flexion of the cranial base, neck length, position of the hyoid bone.

27
Q

What has been suggested about the vocal tract in Neanderthals

A

Human-like proportions of the neck and position of the hyoid bone.

• Basicranial flexion? (Lieberman, 2012)

28
Q

What does the hyoid bone suggest about speech in afarensis

A

Australopithecus afarensis: chimpanzee-like bulla (middle of hyoid) (presence of laryngeal air sacs attached to the vocal apparatus?).

Presence of laryngeal air sac which would prevent language/ speech like ours

29
Q

What do Homo hyoid bones suggest about speech capabilities in Homo

A

Homo heidelbergensis and Neandertals: same shape and size as in modern
humans (characteristics involved in speak presence emerged at least 500, 000
years ago?)

30
Q

Summarise the evidence of speech from the reconstruction of the vocal tract from hominin fossils

A

structure of vocal tract unknown in australopithecus and early homo but derived in later homo

hyoid is primitive in australopiths, unclear in early homo, and derived in later Homo

31
Q

How can we use molecular data to assess speech capabilities of hominins

A

FOXP2 gene related to language: evolutionary changes shared by Neandertals
and extant humans (Krause et al., 2007).

Also have to be aware FOXP2 is present in a range of non-human species including mice

32
Q

How can stone tool tech be used to support emergence of language

A

Morgan (2015) tested the efficacy of transmission of Oldowan tool-making skills along chains of adult human participants (n= 184) using five different transmission mechanisms.

They found transmission improves with teaching, and particularly with language, but not with imitation or emulation

They concluded:
(i) low-fidelity social transmission, such as imitation/emulation, may have contributed to the B700,000 year stasis of the Oldowan technocomplex, and (ii) teaching or proto-language may have been pre-requisites for the appearance of Acheulean technology

This work supports a gradual evolution of language,
with simple symbolic communication preceding behavioural modernity by hundreds of thousands of years

33
Q

What did (Martínez et al., 2013) find with regards to bandwidth in Homo heidelbergensis from Atapuerca

A

Atapuerca SH hominins were similar to modern humans in this aspect, falling within the lower half of the range of variation, and clearly distinct from chimpanzees

The presence of a complete cervical segment of the spinal column associated with Cranium 5 from the Sima de los Huesos Middle Pleistocene site (Sierra de Atapuerca, Spain) makes it possible to estimate the vocal tract proportions in H. heidelbergensis - found to be similar to the reconstructed vocal tract in the La Ferrassie 1 Neandertal individual, which has been suggested to have been capable of producing the full range of sounds emitted during modern human spoken language. These results in the Atapuerca (SH) hominins are consistent with other recent suggestions for an ancient origin for human speech capacity.

34
Q

Give examples of scholars who believed language is too amazing to have evolved

A

Alfred Russel Wallace invoked divine intervention

Chomsky declared give the complexity of language that it could not possibky have evolved via natural selection

35
Q

Summarise Ramachandran’s theory for the evolution of language

A

the representation of certain lip and tongue movements in motor brain maps may be mapped in non-arbitrary ways onto certain sound inflections and phonemic representations in auditory regions and the latter in turn may have non-arbitrary links to an external object’s visual appearance

The stage is then set for a sort of ‘resonance’ or bootstrapping in the co-evolution of these factors, thereby making the origin of proto-language seem much less mysterious than people have assumed

lip and tongue movements and other vocalizations may be
synaesthetically linked to objects and events they refer to in closer ways than we usually assume and this may have been especially true early in the evolution of the proto-language of ancestral hominids

an important factor may be synaesthesia caused by cross-activation between two motor maps rather than between two sensory maps

36
Q

When did Darwin note synkinaesia

How did Ramachandran link this to the evolution of proto-language

A

Darwin (1872) noted that when cutting something with a pair of scissors we often
unconsciously clench and unclench our jaws, as if to sympathetically mimic the
hand movements

could perhaps be synkinaesia between the motor maps for the mouth and hand, which are right next to each other in the Penfield motor homunculus of the pre-central gyrus

when pointing I use my index finger to point outward to you. I also produce a partial outward pout with my lips (as in English ‘you’, French ‘tu’ or ‘vous’ and Tamil ‘thoo’), whereas when I point inward to myself, my lips and tongue move inwards (as in English ‘me’, French ‘moi’ and Tamil ‘naan’) In this manner a primitive vocabulary of gesture and pantomime could evolve through
synkinaesia into a corresponding vocabulary of tongue/palate/lip movements (causing vocalizations, especially if accompanied by guttural utterances).

37
Q

What is the key take away from Ramachandran’s theory of evolution of proto-language

A

each of these different effects (synaesthesia between object appearance and sound contour, between sound contour and vocalizations, and synkinaesia) in isolation may have been too small to have exerted adequate selection pressure for the emergence of proto-language, but a bootstrapping between all of them acting together may have indeed been sufficient

38
Q

Give an example of non-human primates can learn language

A

Washoe was a female common chimpanzee who was the first non-human to learn to communicate using American Sign Language (ASL) as part of an animal research experiment on animal language acquisition

However, subsequent experiments to perform similar results with other chimps have failed - suggesting it may have been a ‘Clever Hans’ effect

39
Q

Give an example of Washoe understanding ASL using quotes

A

Washoe: “You, Me out go”.

Human: ‘OK but first clothes’

(Washoe puts on jacket.)

40
Q

Give an example of Washoe understanding language and human emotion

A

People who should be there for her and aren’t are often given the cold shoulder—her way of informing them that she’s miffed at them. Washoe greeted Kat [the caretaker] in just this way when she finally returned to work with the chimps. Kat made her apologies to Washoe, then decided to tell her the truth, signing “MY BABY DIED”. Washoe stared at her, then looked down. She finally peered into Kat’s eyes again and carefully signed “CRY”, touching her cheek and drawing her finger down the path a tear would make on a human (Chimpanzees don’t shed tears). Kat later remarked that one sign told her more about Washoe and her mental capabilities than all her longer, grammatically perfect sentences

41
Q

Give quote about biology and evolution

A

As Dobzhansky (1973) put it, “Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.”

42
Q

How does the outer/middle ear in Neanderthals and Australopiths compare to humans

A

• no statisti-cally significant differences between the Neanderthal (from 130kya, Krapina sample) and modern human means in any of the anatomical variables based on estimates of middle and outer ear such as concha, middle ear cavity, and ear canal

o not similar in the early hominin taxa Australopithecus africanus and Paranthropus robustus from South Africa
showed that the OBW in the early hominins was quite similar to Pan troglodyte

43
Q

Describe the cochlear of H. hiedelbergensis

What about Australopiths

A

 SH hominins differ from modern humans in two aspects of their hearing pattern: a slightly narrower band of maximum sensitivity in the midrange frequencies (1e5 kHz) and a slightly higher upper limit of the audible frequency range. Both of these aspects would appear to be primitive features of the hearing abilities in the SH hominins.

o Length in Australopithecus and Paranthropus are well-predicted for their estimated BM and, thus, show the primitive condition for hominids.

o Ear evolved in a mosaic pattern in Homo

44
Q

When did 1:1 vocal tract emerge

A

• Lieberman stresses that Skhul did not have 1:1 so therefore even ‘modern’ humans did not have our speech capabilities
o This maybe true but see below – different type of speech – Lieberman also stresses that language arose before human vocal tract
 Perhaps with different species being able to communicate, there was a greater selective pressure to develop more efficient speech, even at the cost of greater choking risk

45
Q

Could hiedelbergensis speak

What did their anatomy for the evolution of speech

A
  • Although SH humans did not have the 1:1 SVT proportion characteristic of adult modern humans, their vocal tracts were fully capable of producing the human quantal vowels
  • the first step, already present H. heidelbergensis, represents a clear improvement beyond the communicative capacities of a chimpanzee. In turn, modern humans may represent a further specialization in the efficiency of oral communication - Although a ratio of SVTv:SVTh less than 1.0 does not prevent the production of human quantal vowels

o Absence of air sacs and presence of humanlike hyoid

46
Q

Why might language have evolved before human vocal tract

A

o Language may have begun to develop before presence of humanlike low larynx due to risk of choking

47
Q

Give a study linking language and tool-making skills in evolution

A

increased demands for effective visuomotor coordination and hierarchical action organization in more advanced toolmaking.

This includes an increased activation of ventral premotor and inferior parietal elements of the parieto-frontal praxis circuits in both the hemispheres and of the right hemisphere homologue of Broca’s area.

The observed patterns of activation and of overlap with language circuits suggest that toolmaking and language share a basis in more general human capacities for complex, goal-directed action.

Stout (2008)

48
Q

What did Haekel call the hypothetical ‘missing link’

A

Pithecanthropus alalus

instructed his students such as Richard and Oskar Hertwig to go and find it.

49
Q

How does Turkana Boy (KNM-WT 15000) compare to Lucy in vertebrae

A

Vertebrae: speech requires a complex coordination of breathing muscles to vary pitch and produce long sentences.
Lucy and Turkana boy’s relatively narrow spinal cord compared to modern humans indicates that they lacked the nerves responsible for this fine control of the muscles that coordinate breathing during speech.

50
Q

Evidence of language in chimps

A

chimps in Tai national park were able to organise vocal units into different structured sequences, possibly indicating different meanings - similar to sentence construction

51
Q

Describe the ossicles in Australopiths and Paranthropus

Inner ear?

A

all have human-like malleus –> deep origin

robustus’ incus is shaped so functionally has similar sensitivity to non-human haplorrhines

cochlear length predicted by body mass (ape-like)

52
Q

Describe the ossicles of Neanderthals

How does the middle ear differ for SH and Krapina Neanderthals

A

humans and N have different ossicle morphology but same functional outcome
different brain evolution but pressure to keep function same for language?

SH -> smaller CL suggests higher upper limit than humans but still shift away from chimps
Krapina (130kya) -> no significant difference between middle ear here and in humans