Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Linguistics Vanguard

A Multimodal Journal for the Language Sciences

Editor-in-Chief: Bergs, Alexander / Cohn, Abigail C. / Good, Jeff

1 Issue per year

Online
ISSN
2199-174X
See all formats and pricing
More options …

What we talk about when we talk about biolinguistics

Pedro Tiago Martins / Cedric Boeckx
  • Section of General Linguistics, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
  • ICREA, Barcelona, Spain
  • UB Institute for Complex Systems, Barcelona Spain
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2016-08-27 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2016-0007

Abstract

The study of the biological foundations of language is sometimes called biolinguistics. This particular term finds its historical origins in the 1950s, and for various reasons it has also gained considerable traction in recent years. While its increasing use apparently signals an equally increasing interest in biology, apart from a few exceptions not much is added to and beyond standard linguistic theorizing by those linguists who use it, resulting in a complex and confusing literature. This state of affairs has led, on the one hand, to the perpetuation of proposals that are hard to relate to the biological literature and, on the other, to ill-placed criticism on the progress and even the very legitimacy of a biologically-informed study of language. By reviewing different ways in which research under the biolinguistics label has been carried out, as well as some common criticisms, we hope to dispel some misconceptions about what constitutes a biolinguistic approach, as well as point out what we contend is real progress in the study of the biological bases and evolution of the human language faculty, to which the term is better and rightly applied.

Keywords: biolinguistics; generative grammar; interdisciplinarity; language faculty

References

  • Anderson, S. R. & D. W. Lightfoot. 2000. The human language faculty as an organ. Annual Review of Physiology 62(1). 697–722.Google Scholar

  • Behme, C. 2015. Is the ontology of biolinguistics coherent?. Language Sciences 47. 32–42.Google Scholar

  • Bickerton, D. 2014. Some problems for biolinguistics. Biolinguistics 8. 73–96.Google Scholar

  • Boeckx, C. 2013. Biolinguistics: Forays into human cognitive biology. Journal of Anthropological Sciences 91. 63–89.Google Scholar

  • Boeckx, C. 2016. The language-ready head: Evolutionary considerations. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, doi: .Crossref

  • Boeckx, C. & K. K. Grohmann. 2007. The biolinguistics manifesto. Biolinguistics 1(1). 1–8.Google Scholar

  • Chakraborty, M. & E. D. Jarvis. 2015. Brain evolution by brain pathway duplication. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 370(1684). 20150056.Google Scholar

  • Chomsky, N. 1957. Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar

  • Chomsky, N. 1959. Review of Verbal Behavior, by B. F. Skinner. Language 35(1). 26–57.Google Scholar

  • Chomsky, N. 1965. Aspects of the theory of syntax. Camdribdge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

  • Chomsky, N. 2000. The architecture of language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Chomsky, N. 2007. Approaching UG from below. In U. Sauerland & H.-M. Gärtner (eds.), Interfaces+recursion=language? Chomsky’s minimalism and the view from semantics, 1–30. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

  • Chomsky, N. 2012. The science of language: Interviews with James McGilvray. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Cvijovic, M., T. Höfer, J. Acimovic, L. Alberghina, E. Almaas, D. Besozzi, A. Blomberg, T. Bretschneider, M. Cascante, O. Collin et al. 2016. Strategies for structuring interdisciplinary education in systems biology: An European perspective. NPJ Systems Biology and Applications 2. 16011.Google Scholar

  • de Waal, F. & P. F. Ferrari. 2010. Towards a bottom-up perspective on animal and human cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 14(5). 201–207.Google Scholar

  • Di Sciullo, A. M. 2011. A biolinguistic approach to variation, 305–326. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Di Sciullo, A. M. 2012. Interfaces in a biolinguistic perspective. In A. M. Di Sciullo (ed.), Towards a biolinguistic understanding of grammar: Essays on interfaces. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.Google Scholar

  • Di Sciullo, A. M. & S. Somesfalean. 2015. Object pronouns in the evolution of Romanian: A biolinguistic perspective, 269–289. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar

  • Ding, N., L. Melloni, H. Zhang, X. Tian & D. Poeppel. 2016. Cortical tracking of hierarchical linguistic structures in connected speech. Nature Neuroscience 19(1). 158–164.Google Scholar

  • Embick, D. & D. Poeppel. 2015. Towards a computational (IST) neurobiology of language: Correlational, integrated and explanatory neurolinguistics. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 30(5). 357–366.Google Scholar

  • Fisher, S. E. & S. C. Vernes. 2015. Genetics and the language sciences. Annual Review of Linguistics 1(1). 289–310.Google Scholar

  • Fitch, W. T. 2009. Prolegomena to a future science of biolinguistics. Biolinguistics 3(4). 283–320.Google Scholar

  • Fitch, W. T. 2010. The evolution of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Fitch, W. T. 2011. Unity and diversity in human language. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences 366(1563). 376–388.Google Scholar

  • Fitch, W. T., M. D. Hauser & N. Chomsky. 2005. The evolution of the language faculty: Clarifications and implications. Cognition 97. 179–210.Google Scholar

  • Fitch, W. T. & E. D. Jarvis. 2013. Birdsong and other animal models for human speech, song, and vocal learning. In M. Arbib (ed.), Language, music, and the brain, 499–539. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

  • Giraud, A.-L. & D. Poeppel. 2012. Cortical oscillations and speech processing: Emerging computational principles and operations . Nature Neuroscience 15. 511–517.Google Scholar

  • Givón, T. 2002. Bio-linguistics: The Santa Barbara lectures. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Hauser, M. D., N. Chomsky & W. T. Fitch. 2002. The faculty of language: What is it, who has it and how did it evolve?. Science 298. 1569–1579.Google Scholar

  • Hauser, M. D., C. Yang, R. C. Berwick, I. Tattersall, M. Ryan, J. Watumull, N. Chomsky & R. Lewontin. 2014. The mystery of language evolution. Frontiers in Psychology 5. 401).Google Scholar

  • Jackendoff, R. 2011. What is the human language faculty?: Two views. Language 87(3). 586–624.Google Scholar

  • Kos, M., D. van den Brink, T. M. Snijders, M. Rijpkema, B. Franke, G. Fernandez & P. Hagoort. 2012. Cntnap2 and language processing in healthy individuals as measured with erps. PloS one 7(10). e46995.Google Scholar

  • Le Floch, É., C. Lalanne, V. Frouin, P. Pinel, L. Trinchera, A. Tenenhaus, A. Moreno, M. Zilbovicius, T. Bourgeron, S. Dehaene et al. 2012. Significant correlation between a set of genetic polymorphisms and a functional brain network revealed by feature selection and sparse partial least squares. Neuroimage. 63(1). 11–24.Google Scholar

  • Lenneberg, E. H. 1964. A biological perspective of language. In E. H. Lenneberg (ed.), New directions in the study of language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

  • Lenneberg, E. H. 1967. Biological foundations of language. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar

  • Martins, P. T. & C. Boeckx. 2016. Language evolution: Insisting on making it a mystery or turning it into a problem?. In L. Dupuy, A. Grabizna, N. Foudon & P. Saint-Germier (eds.), Papers dedicated to Anne Reboul, 1–8. Lyon: Institut des Sciences Cognitives.Google Scholar

  • Meader, C. L. & J. H. Muyskens. 1950. Handbook of biolinguistics., volume 1 Toledo: HC Weller.Google Scholar

  • Moczek, A. P. 2008. On the origins of novelty in development and evolution. BioEssays 30(5). 432–447.Google Scholar

  • Mukherji, N. 2010. The primacy of grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

  • Muller, G. B. & G. P. Wagner. 1991. Novelty in evolution: Restructuring the concept. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 22, 229–256.Google Scholar

  • Okanoya, K. 2015. Evolution of song complexity in bengalese finches could mirror the emergence of human language. Journal of Ornithology 156(1). 65–72.Google Scholar

  • Pigliucci, M. & G. B. Müller. 2010. Evolution: The extended synthesis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

  • Pillsbury, W. B. & C. L. Meader. 1928. The psychology of language. New York: D. Appleton & Co.Google Scholar

  • Poeppel, D. & D. Embick. 2005. Defining the relation between linguistics and neuroscience. In A. Cutler (ed.), Twenty-First Century Psycholinguistics: Four Cornerstones, 103–118. Mahwah, NJ/London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  • Prud’homme, B., C. Minervino, M. Hocine, J. D. Cande, A. Aouane, H. D. Dufour, V. A. Kassner & N. Gompel. 2011. Body plan innovation in treehoppers through the evolution of an extra wing-like appendage. Nature 473(7345). 83–86.Google Scholar

  • QJS. 1925. Laboratory and research. Quarterly Journal of Speech 11(3). 274–285.Google Scholar

  • Raimy, E. 2012. Phonological architecture: A biolinguistic perspective. BioScience 62(10). 925–927.Google Scholar

  • Ramchand, G. 2015. Statement. Roundtable discussion. Generative Syntax in the Twenty-first Century: The Road Ahead, Athens, Greece. Also posted as On being a generative linguist at http://generativelinguist.blogspot.com./2015/04/i-am-generative-linguist-a.html.

  • Rodenas-Cuadrado, P., X. S. Chen, L. Wiegrebe, U. Firzlaff & S. C. Vernes. 2015. A novel approach identifies the first transcriptome networks in bats: A new genetic model for vocal communication. BMC Genomics 16(1). 836.Google Scholar

  • Vernes, S. C. & S. E. Fisher. 2013. Genetic pathways implicated in speech and language. In S. A. Helekar (ed.), Animal models of speech and language disorders, 13–40. Springer.

About the article

Received: 2016-04-05

Accepted: 2016-07-26

Published Online: 2016-08-27

Published in Print: 2016-12-01


Preparation of this work was supported by funds from the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (grants FFI2013-43823-P and FFI2014-61888-EXP), as well as funds from a Marie Curie International Reintegration Grant from the European Union (PIRG-GA-2009-256413), research funds from the Fundació Bosch i Gimpera, and from the Generalitat de Catalunya (2014-SGR-200).


Citation Information: Linguistics Vanguard, Volume 2, Issue 1, 20160007, ISSN (Online) 2199-174X, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2016-0007.

Export Citation

© 2016 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston. Copyright Clearance Center

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in