What do you think?
Rate this book
Lingua ex Machina: Reconciling Darwin and Chomsky with the Human Brain
A neuroscientist and a linguist show how evolution could have given rise to structured language. A machine for language? Certainly, say the neurophysiologists, busy studying the language specializations of the human brain and trying to identify their evolutionary antecedents. Linguists such as Noam Chomsky talk about machinelike "modules" in the brain for syntax, arguing that language is more an instinct (a complex behavior triggered by simple environmental stimuli) than an acquired skill like riding a bicycle. But structured language presents the same evolutionary problems as feathered forelimbs for you need a lot of specializations to fly even a little bit. How do you get them, if evolution has no foresight and the intermediate stages do not have intermediate payoffs? Some say that the Darwinian scheme for gradual species self-improvement cannot explain our most valued human capability, the one that sets us so far above the apes, language itself. William Calvin and Derek Bickerton suggest that other evolutionary developments, not directly related to language, allowed language to evolve in a way that eventually promoted a Chomskian syntax. They compare these intermediate behaviors to the curb-cuts originally intended for wheelchair users. Their usefulness was soon discovered by users of strollers, shopping carts, rollerblades, and so on. The authors argue that reciprocal altruism and ballistic movement planning were "curb-cuts" that indirectly promoted the formation of structured language. Written in the form of a dialogue set in Bellagio, Italy, Lingua ex Machina presents an engaging challenge to those who view the human capacity for language as a winner-take-all war between Chomsky and Darwin.
312 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2000
5 people are currently reading
148 people want to read
About the author
William H. Calvin
36 books36 followersWilliam H. Calvin, Ph.D., is a theoretical neurobiologist, Affiliate Professor of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at the University of Washington in Seattle. He is the author of a dozen books, mostly for general readers, about brains and evolution.
(source)
(source)
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
January 12, 2025
Very interesting. Learned a little about neuron patterns which is cool, will have to read more about that. I liked Bickerton's theory of binding based on order of attachment.
August 29, 2016
As a linguist I found this a nice introduction to the puzzles of language origin and evolution. I have next to no background in genetics, evolutionary biology, brain structure, but I learned a lot by reading this. I would recommend this book to those interested in the question of "when did language start", but a basic background in one of linguistics or biology is necessary. I'm considering assigning Chapter 5 "Language in the Brain" to my intro linguistics class to have them read about where language is located in the brain. I'd recommend reading Chapters 9-11 if you want a discussion of the key, general-interest questions like: "where in time did language probably appear" and "what were the preconditions and selective pressures leading to language?"
The typesetting is adorable. This is a truly "co"-authored book; the whole book is written like a dialogue where the authors are writing chapters to each other, using different fonts to distinguish their voices.
I also thought the treatment of endnotes in the book was interesting: in the main text, there are no superscripts at all indicating an endnote is to be found. Instead, there are simply endnotes with references to the page number of the main text. I usually find endnote superscripts distracting and rarely flip to them, but the few times I was reading and wanted elaboration or a citation, I flipped to the back and did find a note. Probably not the best format for a research-intensive book but for this kind of book it worked, and worked well.
I had trouble following William Calvin's chapters - the neurophysiologist. In fact, I think I missed the book's core points about the special organization of neurons in the brain. But I blame that on my inadequate background. I think a non-linguist would find the linguist Derek Bickerton's chapters difficult too. It's a challenging but rewarding book! I think there's some room for improvement here - although a helpful Glossary is provided for some terms, not nearly enough diagrams of the brain are provided to follow the discussion.
There is also an interesting reconceptualization of Minimalist Syntax in the appendix, which basis Binding, Reference Resolution, etc on "order of attachment" rather than linear precedence / c-command. An interesting theory, but I've never seen it used in the literature.
The typesetting is adorable. This is a truly "co"-authored book; the whole book is written like a dialogue where the authors are writing chapters to each other, using different fonts to distinguish their voices.
I also thought the treatment of endnotes in the book was interesting: in the main text, there are no superscripts at all indicating an endnote is to be found. Instead, there are simply endnotes with references to the page number of the main text. I usually find endnote superscripts distracting and rarely flip to them, but the few times I was reading and wanted elaboration or a citation, I flipped to the back and did find a note. Probably not the best format for a research-intensive book but for this kind of book it worked, and worked well.
I had trouble following William Calvin's chapters - the neurophysiologist. In fact, I think I missed the book's core points about the special organization of neurons in the brain. But I blame that on my inadequate background. I think a non-linguist would find the linguist Derek Bickerton's chapters difficult too. It's a challenging but rewarding book! I think there's some room for improvement here - although a helpful Glossary is provided for some terms, not nearly enough diagrams of the brain are provided to follow the discussion.
There is also an interesting reconceptualization of Minimalist Syntax in the appendix, which basis Binding, Reference Resolution, etc on "order of attachment" rather than linear precedence / c-command. An interesting theory, but I've never seen it used in the literature.
August 22, 2024
A DIALOGUE BETWEEN A NEUROPHYSIOLOGIST AND A LINGUIST ABOUT THE ORIGINS OF LANGUAGE
William H. Calvin [author of Inside the Brain, Conversations With Neil's Brain, etc.] wrote in the opening chapter of this 2001 book, "We're not trying to write THE book about language origins, one that covers the landscape of interesting ideas that float around at conferences on language origins. We'll be happy just to show several powerful ways of getting from ape behaviors to syntax without relying on the usefulness of communication per se. We're after invention, not improvement... with some examples in hand, we ought to discuss what would constitute a really satisfying explanation, covering the whole spectrum of such questions about language and the rest of the higher intellectual functions that separate us from the smartest apes." (Pg. 7-8)
They suggest, "So the selective pressure for language had to come from something that was unique to hominids and something that required the exchange of factual information." (Pg. 110) Later, Calvin says, "I have assumed throughout... that language began in the form of a structureless protolanguage, something like an early stage pidgin, without any formal structure---just handfuls of words or gestures strung together." (Pg. 137)
Calvin states, "My general answer to why the brain enlarged is simply by analogy to economics: doing experiments is a lot easier in an expanding economy than in a zero-sum game... And a hominid had to become a jack of all trades to survive the abrupt climate changes superimposed on the ice ages, which were too sudden for slow adaptations to help. Size, about the only thing that can be measured about ancient brains, might have helped, but it can't be the main story." (Pg. 164)
Calvin argues, "There's no doubt but that human genes combined with human culture give the infant a big leg up on acquiring phonemes, then words, then protolanguage, then structuring long sentences and narratives... But apes might have the circuitry without having such epigenetic aspects as acquisitiveness; we'll never know how much of advanced language they can master until we try hard to rear infant apes with lots of enrichment... Until we know better, it might be best to view Universal Grammar genes as affecting the predisposition to softwire in certain patterns via experience or invention, not via some innate hardwiring present at birth." (Pg. 181-182)
They summarize, "The evidence that language is an innate, species-specific, biological attribute that must possess a specialized neural infrastructure is so overwhelming, one might think that only those driven by some ideological agenda could fail to accept that, too. It ought to have been obvious that a blending of the Chomskyian approach and the Darwinian approach could go a long way towards explaining what we are and resolving the apparent paradox... that we were produced by the same forces as other species, yet behave so differently from other species. This book, then, is an attempt ... to show... that the approaches pioneered by Darwin and Chomsky are fully reconcilable." (Pg. 195)
The "dialogue" format in which the book is written---with frequent interspersed comments from one or the other writer---is not very effective, in my view; but the engaging ideas with which the book is filled more than make up for this stylistic defect.
William H. Calvin [author of Inside the Brain, Conversations With Neil's Brain, etc.] wrote in the opening chapter of this 2001 book, "We're not trying to write THE book about language origins, one that covers the landscape of interesting ideas that float around at conferences on language origins. We'll be happy just to show several powerful ways of getting from ape behaviors to syntax without relying on the usefulness of communication per se. We're after invention, not improvement... with some examples in hand, we ought to discuss what would constitute a really satisfying explanation, covering the whole spectrum of such questions about language and the rest of the higher intellectual functions that separate us from the smartest apes." (Pg. 7-8)
They suggest, "So the selective pressure for language had to come from something that was unique to hominids and something that required the exchange of factual information." (Pg. 110) Later, Calvin says, "I have assumed throughout... that language began in the form of a structureless protolanguage, something like an early stage pidgin, without any formal structure---just handfuls of words or gestures strung together." (Pg. 137)
Calvin states, "My general answer to why the brain enlarged is simply by analogy to economics: doing experiments is a lot easier in an expanding economy than in a zero-sum game... And a hominid had to become a jack of all trades to survive the abrupt climate changes superimposed on the ice ages, which were too sudden for slow adaptations to help. Size, about the only thing that can be measured about ancient brains, might have helped, but it can't be the main story." (Pg. 164)
Calvin argues, "There's no doubt but that human genes combined with human culture give the infant a big leg up on acquiring phonemes, then words, then protolanguage, then structuring long sentences and narratives... But apes might have the circuitry without having such epigenetic aspects as acquisitiveness; we'll never know how much of advanced language they can master until we try hard to rear infant apes with lots of enrichment... Until we know better, it might be best to view Universal Grammar genes as affecting the predisposition to softwire in certain patterns via experience or invention, not via some innate hardwiring present at birth." (Pg. 181-182)
They summarize, "The evidence that language is an innate, species-specific, biological attribute that must possess a specialized neural infrastructure is so overwhelming, one might think that only those driven by some ideological agenda could fail to accept that, too. It ought to have been obvious that a blending of the Chomskyian approach and the Darwinian approach could go a long way towards explaining what we are and resolving the apparent paradox... that we were produced by the same forces as other species, yet behave so differently from other species. This book, then, is an attempt ... to show... that the approaches pioneered by Darwin and Chomsky are fully reconcilable." (Pg. 195)
The "dialogue" format in which the book is written---with frequent interspersed comments from one or the other writer---is not very effective, in my view; but the engaging ideas with which the book is filled more than make up for this stylistic defect.
January 5, 2023
Told as a collaborative thesis between a evolutionary neuroscientist and a linguist this book argues for the marriage of Darwinism and a Chomsky lead theory of Language acquisition. Many of the neuroscience chapters went way over my head as I struggled to remember and track the different lobes of the brain and the exact process of firing neurons. But I was fascinated by the multi-million year journey from animal calls to protolanguage to modern language. It's one of those books where you feel yourself understanding the world more and more with each chapter.
June 20, 2010
I reviewed this one too in the Journal of Human Evolution.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews