How Have Dynamical Systems Approaches Influenced Contemporary Linguistics?

In summary, the article discusses how recent work in linguistics has drawn parallels between certain linguistic structures and physical systems. It discusses how this work could lead to new avenues of inquiry in the field.
  • #1
Auto-Didact
751
562
A few years ago I read two pretty groundbreaking linguistic papers from the 90s arguing that natural languages are networks which can be conceptualized from the perspective of nonlinear dynamical systems theory, with a lexicon being a state space and grammatical rules being attractors in that state space.

The first paper was by Elman and was called 'Langauge as a Dynamical System', here is a link: Elman 1996
The second paper was by Niyogi and was called 'A Dynamical Systems Model for Langauge Change', here is a link: Niyogi 1997

I know much of this research was inspired by a 1989 work of linguist John Hawkins and Physics Nobel Laureate, Murray Gell-Mann, titled 'The Evolution of Human Languages', but I am more interested in how they have influenced the contemporary situation and the future, not how it was influenced from the past. Does anyone here have any experience with and/or perhaps in-depth knowledge of what became of such dynamical systems approaches in linguistics?
 
Science news on Phys.org
  • #2
Piatelli-Palmarini et al. 2015, Linguistics and some aspects of its underlying dynamics
Abstract said:
In recent years, central components of a new approach to linguistics, the Minimalist Program (MP) have come closer to physics. Features of the Minimalist Program, such as the unconstrained nature of recursive Merge, the operation of the Labeling Algorithm that only operates at the interface of Narrow Syntax with the Conceptual-Intentional and the Sensory-Motor interfaces, the difference between pronounced and un-pronounced copies of elements in a sentence and the build-up of the Fibonacci sequence in the syntactic derivation of sentence structures, are directly accessible to representation in terms of algebraic formalism. Although in our scheme linguistic structures are classical ones, we find that an interesting and productive isomorphism can be established between the MP structure, algebraic structures and many-body field theory opening new avenues of inquiry on the dynamics underlying some central aspects of linguistics.
 
  • #3
Something related: a recent review of the field of comparative studies of language evolution in animals.

Pepperberg 2017, Animal language studies: What happened?
Abstract said:
The extent to which nonhuman animals can learn actual human language is a controversial question, but many nonhuman species have acquired elements of a two-way communication system that is, and was, sophisticated enough to enable its use in evaluating cognitive capacities. This article is a personal view of the history of these animal language studies.
 
  • #4
The link doesn’t lead to Niyogi but Elman had offered interesting interpretations. Further suggestions could include,

For some more recent modal linguistic texts (e.g. Kaufmann et al, Mouton de Gruyter, 2006, Yagasawa, 2012).

For biolinguistics (e.g. Corballis, 2018 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10339-018-0878-1 incorporates Nobel spatial mapping research) and there is other e.g. primate comparison in other papers in that text.

For more historic change examples, Barry agued creation of equally weighted vowel and consonant alphabet, recording verse (e.g. Barry, Cambridge University Press, 1991), and scientific interpretation has been discussed (e.g. Anaximander, Rovelli, Westholme, 2011, https://www.amazon.com/dp/159416262X/?tag=pfamazon01-20).

For modifications to alphabetic language use, Whiteheadian and functional linguistics, e.g. Halliday and verb nounification.

Possibly different linguistic comparisons can include CL, e.g. Sinha, 2014.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Auto-Didact
  • #5
A correction- it was not Barry, but Barry B Powell, given as an example of argument on the creation of the alphabet: Barry B Powell, Cambridge University Press, 1991, (in Powell’s case in favour of Wade-Gery’s further suggestion of an aim in the recording of verse).
 
  • #6
*now* said:
The link doesn’t lead to Niyogi but Elman had offered interesting interpretations. [snip]

The Elman link leads to text; the figures collected as end notes. MIT website search found relevant papers and lecture transcriptions. http://web.mit.edu/search/?q=nyogi
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes *now*
  • #7
Thanks, Klystron.
 
  • Like
Likes Klystron
  • #9
*now* said:
Interesting article that will require time to digest and to update some, perhaps outdated, ideas I learned years back. The research described in this paper seems to support @Auto-Didact 's references to the minimalist program (post #3). Measuring duration in animal gestures seems clever, though I need to study the authors' use of expressions from computer science such as compression.
 
  • Like
Likes Auto-Didact and *now*
  • #10
Yes, thanks Klystron, the patterns might agree or offer alternatives to some of the suggestions, and these do seem clever measures.
 
  • Like
Likes Klystron and Auto-Didact
  • #11
*now* said:
I have a bit too much on my plate at the moment to read this paper indepth (and reread the rest), but just the abstract alone is already very exciting. I need to clear my back log (writing three different papers atm) and then get back to this stuff asap; I will give a proper response once that is done.
 
  • Like
Likes Klystron and *now*
  • #12
Thanks, Auto-Didact, I look forward to your thoughts in time.
 

FAQ: How Have Dynamical Systems Approaches Influenced Contemporary Linguistics?

What is a dynamical system?

A dynamical system is a mathematical model that describes the behavior of a system over time. It involves the study of how a system changes and evolves over time, based on its initial conditions and the rules that govern its behavior.

How is language considered a dynamical system?

Language is considered a dynamical system because it is constantly evolving and changing over time. Its structure and use are influenced by a variety of factors, such as cultural and social norms, individual experiences, and technological advancements. This results in a complex and dynamic system that is constantly adapting to its environment.

What are the benefits of viewing language as a dynamical system?

Viewing language as a dynamical system allows for a more comprehensive understanding of its complexity and evolution. It helps explain how language is learned, used, and changed by individuals and communities. This perspective also allows for the development of more accurate and effective language models and theories.

How does the dynamical system approach differ from traditional linguistic approaches?

The dynamical system approach differs from traditional linguistic approaches in that it focuses on the dynamic and complex nature of language, rather than on fixed rules and structures. It also takes into account the influence of external factors, such as culture and social context, on language use and evolution.

What are some practical applications of understanding language as a dynamical system?

Understanding language as a dynamical system has several practical applications, such as in natural language processing, machine learning, and language teaching. It can also help improve communication and language understanding in various fields, such as healthcare, education, and business.

Similar threads

Back
Top