↓ Skip to main content

The mystery of language evolution

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
214 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
588 Mendeley
Title
The mystery of language evolution
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, May 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00401
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marc D. Hauser, Charles Yang, Robert C. Berwick, Ian Tattersall, Michael J. Ryan, Jeffrey Watumull, Noam Chomsky, Richard C. Lewontin

Abstract

Understanding the evolution of language requires evidence regarding origins and processes that led to change. In the last 40 years, there has been an explosion of research on this problem as well as a sense that considerable progress has been made. We argue instead that the richness of ideas is accompanied by a poverty of evidence, with essentially no explanation of how and why our linguistic computations and representations evolved. We show that, to date, (1) studies of nonhuman animals provide virtually no relevant parallels to human linguistic communication, and none to the underlying biological capacity; (2) the fossil and archaeological evidence does not inform our understanding of the computations and representations of our earliest ancestors, leaving details of origins and selective pressure unresolved; (3) our understanding of the genetics of language is so impoverished that there is little hope of connecting genes to linguistic processes any time soon; (4) all modeling attempts have made unfounded assumptions, and have provided no empirical tests, thus leaving any insights into language's origins unverifiable. Based on the current state of evidence, we submit that the most fundamental questions about the origins and evolution of our linguistic capacity remain as mysterious as ever, with considerable uncertainty about the discovery of either relevant or conclusive evidence that can adjudicate among the many open hypotheses. We conclude by presenting some suggestions about possible paths forward.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 170 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 588 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 8 1%
Germany 6 1%
United Kingdom 5 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
France 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Peru 2 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Other 8 1%
Unknown 551 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 124 21%
Researcher 78 13%
Student > Master 75 13%
Student > Bachelor 71 12%
Professor 52 9%
Other 109 19%
Unknown 79 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 110 19%
Linguistics 103 18%
Psychology 92 16%
Social Sciences 35 6%
Neuroscience 28 5%
Other 116 20%
Unknown 104 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 296. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 March 2024.
All research outputs
#119,026
of 25,593,129 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#244
of 34,680 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#916
of 242,349 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#7
of 333 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,593,129 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,680 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 242,349 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 333 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.