Ten Cate Carel
Behavioural Biology, Institute of Biology Leiden and Leiden Institute for Brain and Cognition, Leiden University, P.O. Box 9505, 2300 RA, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Psychon Bull Rev. 2017 Feb;24(1):91-96. doi: 10.3758/s13423-016-1091-9.
Questions related to the uniqueness of language can only be addressed properly by referring to sound knowledge of the relevant cognitive abilities of nonhuman animals. A key question concerns the nature and extent of animal rule-learning abilities. I discuss two approaches used to assess these abilities. One is comparing the structures of animal vocalizations to linguistic ones, and another is addressing the grammatical rule- and pattern-learning abilities of animals through experiments using artificial grammars. Neither of these approaches has so far provided unambiguous evidence of advanced animal abilities. However, when we consider how animal vocalizations are analyzed, the types of stimuli and tasks that are used in artificial grammar learning experiments, the limited number of species examined, and the groups to which these belong, I argue that the currently available evidence is insufficient to arrive at firm conclusions concerning the limitations of animal grammatical abilities. As a consequence, the gap between human linguistic rule-learning abilities and those of nonhuman animals may be smaller and less clear than is currently assumed. This means that it is still an open question whether a difference in the rule-learning and rule abstraction abilities between animals and humans played the key role in the evolution of language.
与语言独特性相关的问题,只有通过参考关于非人类动物相关认知能力的扎实知识才能得到恰当解决。一个关键问题涉及动物规则学习能力的性质和程度。我将讨论用于评估这些能力的两种方法。一种是将动物发声的结构与语言结构进行比较,另一种是通过使用人工语法的实验来研究动物的语法规则和模式学习能力。到目前为止,这两种方法都没有提供动物具有高级能力的明确证据。然而,当我们考虑如何分析动物发声、人工语法学习实验中使用的刺激类型和任务、所研究物种的数量有限以及它们所属的类别时,我认为目前可用的证据不足以就动物语法能力的局限性得出确凿结论。因此,人类语言规则学习能力与非人类动物的语言规则学习能力之间的差距可能比目前所认为的更小且不那么明显。这意味着动物和人类在规则学习和规则抽象能力上的差异是否在语言进化中起关键作用仍是一个悬而未决的问题。