Progress in the Simulation of Emergent Communication and Language

How can the semantic interpretation of a formal symbol system be made intrinsic to the system, rather than just parasitic on the meanings in our heads? How can the meanings of the meaningless symbol tokens, manipulated solely on the basis of their (arbitrary) shapes, be grounded in anything but other meaningless symbols? The problem is analogous to trying to learn Chinese from a Chinese/Chinese dictionary alone. A candidate solution is sketched: Symbolic representations must be grounded bottom-up in nonsymbolic representations of two kinds: (1) "iconic representations," which are analogs of the proximal sensory projections of distal objects and events, and (2) "categorical representations," which are learned and innate feature-detectors that pick out the invariant features of object and event categories from their sensory projections. Elementary symbols are the names of these object and event categories, assigned on the basis of their (nonsymbolic) categorical representations. Higher-order (3) "symbolic representations," grounded in these elementary symbols, consist of symbol strings describing category membership relations (e.g., "An X is a Y that is Z").

The variation in the acoustic structure of alarm calls appears to convey information about the level of response urgency in some species, while in others it seems to denote the type of predator. While theoretical models and studies on species with functionally referential calls have emphasized that any animal signal considered to have an external referent also includes motivational content, to our knowledge, no empirical study has been able to show this. In this paper, I present an example of a graded alarm call system that combines referential information and also information on the level of urgency. Acoustically different alarm calls in the social mongoose Suricata suricatta are given in response to different predator types, but their call structure also varies depending on the level of urgency. Low urgency calls tend to be harmonic across all predator types, while high urgency calls are noisier. There was less evidence for consistency in the acoustic parameters assigned to particular predator types across different levels of urgency. This suggests that, while suricates convey information about the level of urgency along a general rule, the referential information about each category of predator type is not encoded in an obvious way.

Language is our legacy. It is the main evolutionary contribution of humans, and perhaps the most interesting trait that has emerged in the past 500 million years. Understanding how darwinian evolution gives rise to human language requires the integration of formal language theory, learning theory and evolutionary dynamics. Formal language theory provides a mathematical description of language and grammar. Learning theory formalizes the task of language acquisition it can be shown that no procedure can learn an unrestricted set of languages. Universal grammar specifies the restricted set of languages learnable by the human brain. Evolutionary dynamics can be formulated to describe the cultural evolution of language and the biological evolution of universal grammar.