LCC - Full Summary of Articles Language, Cognition & Computation by Albert Major

Title: The Faculty of Language: What Is It, Who Has It, and How Did It Evolve?
Authors: Marc D. Hauser, Noam Chomsky, W. Tecumseh Fitch
Asks the core components of human language faculty, how they evolved, and which aspects are uniquely human.
Distinguishes between:
- Faculty of Language in the Broad Sense (FLB): Includes sensory-motor and conceptual-intentional systems.
- Faculty of Language in the Narrow Sense (FLN): Consists solely of recursion (the ability to generate infinite expressions from finite elements).
Integrates insights from linguistics, neuroscience, psychology, and evolutionary biology.
Uses comparative studies of animals and humans as the primary evidence base to trace the evolutionary pathways of language-related capacities.

Synthesizes many studies comparing humans to nonhuman animals (primates, birds, dolphins).
Focuses on their ability to process communication signals, learn vocalizations, and represent abstract concepts.
Key capacities tested: recursion, vocal imitation, and intentional communication.
Tamarins learn finite-state grammars (e.g., ABAB) but fail to learn phrase-structure grammars (e.g., AⁿBⁿ), whereas human adults master it easily.
EEG or fMRI were not directly used in the studies reviewed.
Emphasizes comparative behavioral evidence & neurobiological parallels (mirror neurons, vocal imitation circuits).
Animals taught symbol systems show limited combinatorial flexibility and no spontaneous recursion, unlike human children.
Birdsong learning and vocal imitation in dolphins paralleled human speech development in some respects but lacked full FLN-level syntax.

Recursion definition: ability to embed structures within similar structures, enabling infinite expressions.
Animals share many FLB components but only humans exhibit FLN capacities.
Recursion is missing or extremely limited in nonhumans.
Tamarins could not generalize recursive rules, even after extensive training.
Human infants acquire recursive structure rapidly and spontaneously.
Recursion may have evolved for other tasks and later co-opted into communication.
FLB = sensory-motor + conceptual-intentional + recursion
FLN = recursion only; possibly the only uniquely human trait
Recursion = combining finite elements into infinite expressions
Animals can imitate, signal, and categorize, but don’t generalize recursion
Tamarins learn ABAB patterns, but fail at AⁿBⁿ (recursive grammar)
Birdsong learning resembles human infant babbling but lacks true syntax
Vocal imitation is rare in primates but present in birds and dolphins
Mirror neurons exist in macaques but don’t enable vocal imitation

Reframes language evolution search by arguing that recursion is the defining human linguistic trait.
Isolates FLN from FLB to clarify which traits are unique and shared.
Challenges adaptationist views by suggesting recursion may be a cognitive spandrel.
Opens new questions about why only humans applied recursion to communication.
Promotes an interdisciplinary approach, uniting linguistics with biology to study cognition across species.

FLB (Faculty of Language—Broad Sense): Full language system including perception and thought systems
FLN (Faculty of Language—Narrow Sense): Core computational system of recursion
Recursion: A rule allowing phrases to be embedded within phrases infinitely
Finite-State Grammar: Rule system with local dependencies (e.g., ABAB)
Phrase-Structure Grammar: Hierarchical grammar requiring recursive rules (e.g., AⁿBⁿ)
Mirror Neurons: Neurons firing during both action and observation, linked to imitation
Vocal Imitation: Ability to learn and reproduce novel sounds from others
Spandrel: A trait that arises as a side-effect of other evolutionary changes

Title: Evolution, brain, and the nature of language
Authors: Robert C. Berwick, Angela D. Friederici, Noam Chomsky, Johan J. Bolhuis
Question: What is the biological basis of human language, and how did it evolve?
Language uniquely defines human cognition and has no close analogue in other species.
A species-specific neural mechanism called Merge is the key innovation.
Merge builds hierarchical syntactic structures.
Evidence comes from comparative neuroanatomy, fMRI studies, and language learning in humans and animals.

Human language relies on Merge, combining two elements into a hierarchical structure.
fMRI studies used flat sequences (ABAB) and nested dependencies (AAABBB, or AⁿBⁿ).
The nested type activates Broca’s area (BA 44), while flat sequences do not.
Broca’s area is specialized for hierarchical syntax.
Only grammars consistent with universal grammar increased BA 44 activation.
The brain is tuned to specific linguistic principles.
Dorsal pathway (STC–BA 44) matures ~7 years old; before that, children can’t fully process complex sentences.
A separate dorsal auditory–motor pathway (STC to premotor cortex) is present at birth and helps infants learn sounds—externalization, not full grammar.
Songbirds can learn sequences, but they don’t build hierarchical structures.
Chimps don’t grasp that “apple” means a kind of object; they just associate it with situations.
Human words and syntax are qualitatively unique, not just quantitatively more advanced.

Merge = basic operation for building linguistic hierarchy; unique to humans
Broca’s area (BA 44) = builds syntactic structure; activated by nested grammar
Posterior STC = helps interpret sentence meaning via syntax–semantics integration
Dorsal pathway (STC–BA 44) = supports complex syntax; matures ~7 years old
Ventral pathway (BA 45/47–temporal cortex) = processes word and sentence meaning
Songbirds show auditory–vocal learning but lack human-like syntax
Left hemisphere dominance seen in both birdsong learning and human language
Externalization ≠ core function of language; internal thought is primary

Redefines language not as a communication system, but as an internal cognitive tool for structuring thought.
Syntax is not learned but rooted in specific brain circuits and possibly genetically hardwired.
Animal research on