Formal monkey linguistics

Bibliographic Data

ID19035653
AuthorsPhilippe Schlenker (0000-0001-9489-9325, Institut Jean-Nicod (ENS, EHESS, CNRS), Département d’Etudes Cognitives, Ecole Normale Supérieure, PSL Research University, 29 rue d’Ulm, 75011 Paris, France, corresponding author), Emmanuel Chemla (0000-0002-8423-5880, Laboratoire de Sciences Cognitives et Psycholinguistique (ENS, EHESS, CNRS), Département d’Etudes Cognitives, Ecole Normale Supérieure, PSL Research University, 29 rue d’Ulm, 75011 Paris, France), Anne Marijke Schel (0000-0001-5985-3858), James Fuller (0000-0003-0095-2338, Columbia University), James L Fuller (0000-0002-4774-3368), Jean‐Pierre Gautier, Jean-Pierre Gautier (Former DR CNRS, Station biologique de Paimpont, Université de Rennes 1, Rennes, France), J Kuhn (0000-0001-9644-8560, Institut Jean-Nicod (ENS, EHESS, CNRS), Département d’Etudes Cognitives, Ecole Normale Supérieure, PSL Research University, 29 rue d’Ulm, 75011 Paris, France), Dunja Veselinović (0000-0002-7686-066X, New York University), Kate Arnold (0000-0002-5598-2174, University of St Andrews), Cristiane Cäsar (0000-0003-2135-2462, University of St Andrews), Sumir Keenan (University of St Andrews), Alban Lemasson (0000-0001-8418-5601, Université de Rennes 1, Ethologie animale et humaine (UMR 6552 – CNRS), Station Biologique, Paimpont, France), Karim Ouattara (0000-0002-0796-5978, Laboratory of Zoology and Animal Biology, University Félix Houphouet Boigny, Abidjan, Ivory Coast), Robin Ryder (0000-0002-7467-0467, Centre de Recherche en Mathématiques de la Décision, CNRS, UMR 7534, Université Paris-Dauphine, PSL Research University, Paris, France), Klaus Zuberbühler (0000-0001-8378-088X, University of Neuchâtel)
Year2016
Volume42
Issue1-2
Pages1-90
Publication date2016-07-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueTheoretical Linguistics (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0301-4428 • E-ISSN: 1613-4060
PublisherDe Gruyter (PUBLISHER • DE)
DOI10.1515/tl-2016-0001
OpenAlexW2473499653
LanguageEN
Citations received24
References cited55

We argue that rich data gathered in experimental primatology in the last 40 years can benefit from analytical methods used in contemporary linguistics. Focusing on the syntactic and especially semantic side, we suggest that these methods could help clarify five questions: (i) what morphology and syntax, if any, do monkey calls have? (ii) what is the ‘lexical meaning’ of individual calls? (iii) how are the meanings of individual calls combined? (iv) how do calls or call sequences compete with each other when several are appropriate in a given situation? (v) how did the form and meaning of calls evolve? We address these questions in five case studies pertaining to cercopithecines (Putty-nosed monkeys, Blue monkeys, and Campbell’s monkeys), colobinae (Guereza monkeys and King Colobus monkeys), and New World monkeys (Titi monkeys). The morphology mostly involves simple calls, but in at least one case (Campbell’s -oo ) we find a root-suffix structure, possibly with a compositional semantics. The syntax is in all clear cases simple and finite-state. With respect to meaning , nearly all cases of call concatenation can be analyzed as conjunction. But a key question concerns the division of labor between semantics, pragmatics and the environmental context (‘world’ knowledge and context change) . An apparent case of dialectal variation in the semantics (Campbell’s krak ) can arguably be analyzed away if one posits sufficiently powerful mechanisms of competition among calls, akin to scalar implicatures. An apparent case of non-compositionality (Putty-nosed pyow-hack sequences) can be analyzed away if one further posits a pragmatic principle of ‘urgency’, whereby threat-related calls must come early in sequences (another potential case of non-compositionality – Colobus snort-roar sequences – might justify assigning non-compositional meanings to complex calls, but results are tentative). Finally, rich Titi sequences in which two calls are re-arranged in complex ways so as to reflect information about both predator identity and location are argued not to involve a complex syntax/semantics interface, but rather a fine-grained interaction between simple call meanings and the environmental context. With respect to call evolution , we suggest that the remarkable preservation of call form and function over millions of years should make it possible to lay the groundwork for an evolutionary monkey linguistics , which we illustrate with cercopithecine booms , and with a comparative analysis of Blue monkey and Putty-nosed monkey repertoires. Throughout, we aim to compare possible theories rather than to fully adjudicate between them, and our claims are correspondingly modest. But we hope that our methods could lay the groundwork for a formal monkey linguistics combining data from primatology with formal techniques from linguistics (from which it does not follow that the calls under study share non-trivial properties, let alone an evolutionary history, with human language)

Linguistics · Pragmatics · Principle of compositionality · Syntax · Animal Vocal Communication and Behavior · Computer Science · History · Language and cultural evolution · Philosophy · Primate Behavior and Ecology · Psychology

Tools

Open DOISci-HubOpen Access