Language in Language Evolution Research

Many controversies in language evolution research derive from the fact that language is itself a natural language word, which makes the underlying concept fuzzy and cumbersome, and a common perception is that progress in language evolution research is hindered because researchers do not ‘talk about...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Slawomir Wacewicz, Przemyslaw Zywiczynski, Stefan Hartmann, Michael Pleyer, Antonio Benítez-Burraco
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Biolinguistics 2020-10-01
Series:Biolinguistics
Subjects:
FLN
Online Access:https://www.biolinguistics.eu/index.php/biolinguistics/article/view/739
id doaj-91d014b64a564f8db24be0d22d122a71
record_format Article
spelling doaj-91d014b64a564f8db24be0d22d122a712020-11-25T02:02:26ZengBiolinguisticsBiolinguistics1450-34172020-10-0114SILanguage in Language Evolution ResearchSlawomir Wacewicz0Przemyslaw Zywiczynski1Stefan Hartmann2Michael Pleyer3Antonio Benítez-Burraco4Nicolaus Copernicus University in TorunNicolaus Copernicus University in TorunUniversität DüsseldorfUniversität Koblenz LandauUniversidad de Sevilla Many controversies in language evolution research derive from the fact that language is itself a natural language word, which makes the underlying concept fuzzy and cumbersome, and a common perception is that progress in language evolution research is hindered because researchers do not ‘talk about the same thing’. In this article, we claim that agreement on a single, top-down definition of language is not a sine qua non for good and productive research in the field of language evolution. First, we use the example of the notion FLN (‘faculty of language in the narrow sense’) to demonstrate how the specific wording of an important top-down definition of (the faculty of) language can—surprisingly—be inconsequential to actual research practice. We then review four approaches to language evolution that we estimate to be particularly influential in the last decade. We show how their breadth precludes a single common conceptualization of language but instead leads to a family resemblance pattern, which underwrites fruitful communication between these approaches, leading to cross-fertilisation and synergies. https://www.biolinguistics.eu/index.php/biolinguistics/article/view/739languagelanguage evolutionevolutionary linguisticsconceptual diversityFLNfaculty of language
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Slawomir Wacewicz
Przemyslaw Zywiczynski
Stefan Hartmann
Michael Pleyer
Antonio Benítez-Burraco
spellingShingle Slawomir Wacewicz
Przemyslaw Zywiczynski
Stefan Hartmann
Michael Pleyer
Antonio Benítez-Burraco
Language in Language Evolution Research
Biolinguistics
language
language evolution
evolutionary linguistics
conceptual diversity
FLN
faculty of language
author_facet Slawomir Wacewicz
Przemyslaw Zywiczynski
Stefan Hartmann
Michael Pleyer
Antonio Benítez-Burraco
author_sort Slawomir Wacewicz
title Language in Language Evolution Research
title_short Language in Language Evolution Research
title_full Language in Language Evolution Research
title_fullStr Language in Language Evolution Research
title_full_unstemmed Language in Language Evolution Research
title_sort language in language evolution research
publisher Biolinguistics
series Biolinguistics
issn 1450-3417
publishDate 2020-10-01
description Many controversies in language evolution research derive from the fact that language is itself a natural language word, which makes the underlying concept fuzzy and cumbersome, and a common perception is that progress in language evolution research is hindered because researchers do not ‘talk about the same thing’. In this article, we claim that agreement on a single, top-down definition of language is not a sine qua non for good and productive research in the field of language evolution. First, we use the example of the notion FLN (‘faculty of language in the narrow sense’) to demonstrate how the specific wording of an important top-down definition of (the faculty of) language can—surprisingly—be inconsequential to actual research practice. We then review four approaches to language evolution that we estimate to be particularly influential in the last decade. We show how their breadth precludes a single common conceptualization of language but instead leads to a family resemblance pattern, which underwrites fruitful communication between these approaches, leading to cross-fertilisation and synergies.
topic language
language evolution
evolutionary linguistics
conceptual diversity
FLN
faculty of language
url https://www.biolinguistics.eu/index.php/biolinguistics/article/view/739
work_keys_str_mv AT slawomirwacewicz languageinlanguageevolutionresearch
AT przemyslawzywiczynski languageinlanguageevolutionresearch
AT stefanhartmann languageinlanguageevolutionresearch
AT michaelpleyer languageinlanguageevolutionresearch
AT antoniobenitezburraco languageinlanguageevolutionresearch
_version_ 1724953054977982464