Music, Language, and the Brain by Aniruddh D. Patel

This chapter explores how animal communication, often referred to as "song," differs fundamentally from human music.
Investigates the animal capacity for musicality, its evolutionary context, and implications for understanding human musical capabilities.
Argues that while animals may exhibit musical-like behaviors, these behaviors stem from general auditory processing rather than adaptations for music.

Studies of animals can elucidate uniquely human aspects of music processing that require evolutionary explanation.
Previous research in animal studies has parallels in studies about speech and language.
- Example 1: Kuhl and Miller (1975) demonstrated chinchillas exhibit categorical perception for speech sounds, previously believed to be unique to humans.
- Example 2: Hauser et al. (2001) found that cotton-top tamarin monkeys can learn syllable transition probabilities like human infants.
In contrast, Fitch and Hauser (2004) indicated these monkeys cannot learn recursively structured sequences, suggesting recursion is a uniquely human language ability.
- Related hypotheses include Hauser et al. (2002) and counterarguments by Gentner et al. (2006) on birds' learning abilities.

The next sections review three main research topics related to animal responses to music, focusing particularly on pitch, consonance vs. dissonance, and tonality.
- Note: Discussion on rhythm is reserved for a later section.

Anecdotes abound regarding animals responding to music, including a linguist's dog that showed a preference for Beethoven's middle-period compositions over later works.
Though charming, the reliance on anecdotes does not provide the robust evidence required in scientific inquiry.

Research indicates that absolute pitch (AP) is not exclusive to humans and is favored by some bird species.
- Study 1: Weisman et al. (2004) trained birds (such as zebra finches) to categorize pitched tones without verbal labels, indicating birds can classify pitches into categories unassisted by external references.
- Humans, particularly non-musicians, performed poorly on similar tasks, emphasizing non-human AP does not rely on human brain capabilities.
Relative Pitch Comparison: Animals show limited ability compared to humans in using relative pitch cues.
- Animals often need extensive training to recognize pitch sequences as rising or falling, while infants naturally perceive these contours (Trehub et al., 1984).
- Suggests human auditory systems may have evolved to favor relative pitch processing, likely originating in speech intonation (cf. section 7.3.3).

Research shows nonhuman animals can discriminate between consonant and dissonant pitches, contrary to assumptions that this capacity is uniquely human.
- Study Example: Izumi (2000) confirmed that Japanese macaques could differentiate consonant intervals (octaves) from dissonant intervals (e.g., major sevenths).
- This aptitude may arise from general mechanisms in sound segregation rather than music-specific adaptations.
Neural Research Correlation: Fishman et al. (2001) discovered distinct neural responses in monkey auditory cortex for consonantly versus dissonantly sounding intervals.
Behavioral preferences of monkeys for consonant sounds suggest potential uniquely human traits.
Study by McDermott & Hauser (2004): Examined preferences through a maze where cotton-top tamarins did not show a preference for consonant over dissonant intervals, indicating that consonance appreciation might be uniquely human.
- Further studies needed, particularly with chimpanzees, closer relatives to humans, and songbirds known for complex communication.

Evidence indicates Western adults process tonal melodies more effectively than atonal ones, though infants do not exhibit this asymmetry but show better detection of specific pitch changes (Trainor & Trehub, 1992; Schellenberg & Trehub, 1996).
Infants display octave equivalence, recognizing pitches separated by an octave as similar (Demany & Armand, 1984).
Study by Wright et al. (2000): Investigated whether rhesus monkeys recognize octave transpositions as similar using clever reward-based paradigms, yielding significant insights about octave equivalence.
- Monkeys showed a preference for octave transpositions over 1/2 and 1.5-octave changes, suggesting underlying auditory processing similarities.
Their study with tonal versus atonal melodies indicated that while some response patterns hinted at tonality, monkeys still struggled with atonal melodies, possibly due to prior exposure to tonal music in captivity.
Future Research Directions: Follow-up studies should control acoustic environments of animals from birth and explore tonal preferences further, potentially with other cultural music systems to glean broader insights on human music cognition.

The universality of human music and its neural correlates do not inherently prove that musical abilities are a direct outcome of natural selection.
Current evidence does not convincingly support that music serves as a biological adaptation; instead, music may be a product of human culture rather than innate selection pressures.
The ongoing discourse around music's role as either an adaptation or a frill proposes an alternative view of music as a transformative technology integral to human experience.
Examples include other transformative inventions like written language and internet technology, which have fundamentally changed human interaction and knowledge sharing.
Music's universality suggests it fulfills valuable roles in emotional expression, cultural identity, and social bonding.
Archaeological findings, like 36,000-year-old musical instruments, hint at the longstanding significance of music in human evolution, with ongoing discoveries anticipated to reveal more about this relationship.