Cargando…

Communicative Efficiency or Iconic Learning: Do Acquisition and Communicative Pressures Interact to Shape Colour- Naming Systems?

Language evolution is driven by pressures for simplicity and informativity; however, the timescale on which these pressures operate is debated. Over several generations, learners’ biases for simple and informative systems can guide language evolution. Over repeated instances of dyadic communication,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gyevnar, Balint, Dagan, Gautier, Haley, Coleman, Guo, Shangmin, Mollica, Frank
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9689105/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36359632
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/e24111542
Descripción
Sumario:Language evolution is driven by pressures for simplicity and informativity; however, the timescale on which these pressures operate is debated. Over several generations, learners’ biases for simple and informative systems can guide language evolution. Over repeated instances of dyadic communication, the principle of least effort dictates that speakers should bias systems towards simplicity and listeners towards informativity, similarly guiding language evolution. At the same time, it has been argued that learners only provide a bias for simplicity and, thus, language users must provide a bias for informativity. To what extent do languages evolve during acquisition versus use? We address this question by formally defining and investigating the communicative efficiency of acquisition trajectories. We illustrate our approach using colour-naming systems, replicating a communicative efficiency model based on the information bottleneck problem, and an acquisition model based on self-organising maps. We find that to the extent that language is iconic, learning alone is sufficient to shape language evolution. Regarding colour-naming systems specifically, we find that incorporating learning biases into communicative efficiency accounts might explain how speakers and listeners trade off communicative effort.