Simple rules can explain discrimination of putative recursive syntactic structures by a songbird species

According to a controversial hypothesis, a characteristic unique to human language is recursion. Contradicting this hypothesis, it has been claimed that the starling, one of the two animal species tested for this ability to date, is able to distinguish acoustic stimuli based on the presence or absence of a center-embedded recursive structure. In our experiment we show that another songbird species, the zebra finch, can also discriminate between artificial song stimuli with these structures. Zebra finches are able to generalize this discrimination to new songs constructed using novel elements belonging to the same categories, similar to starlings. However, to demonstrate that this is based on the ability to detect the putative recursive structure, it is critical to test whether the birds can also distinguish songs with the same structure consisting of elements belonging to unfamiliar categories. We performed this test and show that seven out of eight zebra finches failed it. This suggests that the acquired discrimination was based on phonetic rather than syntactic generalization. The eighth bird, however, must have used more abstract, structural cues. Nevertheless, further probe testing showed that the results of this bird, as well as those of others, could be explained by simpler rules than recursive ones. Although our study casts doubts on whether the rules used by starlings and zebra finches really provide evidence for the ability to detect recursion as present in “context-free” syntax, it also provides evidence for abstract learning of vocal structure in a songbird.

[1]  J. Scharf [Language evolution]. , 1973, Gegenbaurs morphologisches Jahrbuch.

[2]  Philip H. Price Developmental determinants of structure in zebra finch song. , 1979 .

[3]  Neil A. Macmillan,et al.  Detection Theory: A User's Guide , 1991 .

[4]  F. Nottebohm,et al.  A comparative study of the behavioral deficits following lesions of various parts of the zebra finch song system: implications for vocal learning , 1991, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[5]  H. Williams,et al.  Syllable chunking in zebra finch (Taeniopygia guttata) song. , 1992, Journal of comparative psychology.

[6]  Variation in song structure within and among populations of Australian Zebra Finches , 1993 .

[7]  M. Eens Understanding the complex song of the European starling: an integrated ethological approach , 1997 .

[8]  R. Weisman,et al.  NOTE TYPES, HARMONIC STRUCTURE, AND NOTE ORDER IN THE SONGS OF ZEBRA FINCHES (TAENIOPYGIA GUTTATA) , 1999 .

[9]  Jenny R. Saffran,et al.  Does Grammar Start Where Statistics Stop? , 2002, Science.

[10]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  The faculty of language: what is it, who has it, and how did it evolve? , 2002, Science.

[11]  Peter Walter,et al.  Computational Constraints on Syntactic Processing in a Nonhuman Primate , 2004 .

[12]  W. Fitch,et al.  Computational Constraints on Syntactic Processing in a Nonhuman Primate , 2004, Science.

[13]  A. Rey,et al.  Does the mastery of center-embedded linguistic structures distinguish humans from nonhuman primates? , 2005, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[14]  F. Goller,et al.  Unusual phonation, covarying song characteristics and song preferences in female zebra finches , 2005, Animal Behaviour.

[15]  Willem Zuidema,et al.  The major transitions in the evolution of language , 2005 .

[16]  S. Pinker,et al.  The faculty of language: what's special about it? , 2005, Cognition.

[17]  M. Yip The search for phonology in other species , 2006, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[18]  Gary F. Marcus,et al.  Language: Startling starlings , 2006, Nature.

[19]  Timothy Q. Gentner,et al.  Recursive syntactic pattern learning by songbirds , 2006, Nature.

[20]  Angela D. Friederici,et al.  Hierarchical and Linear Sequence Processing: An Electrophysiological Exploration of Two Different Grammar Types , 2006, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[21]  C. ten Cate,et al.  Song discrimination learning in zebra finches induces highly divergent responses to novel songs , 2007, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[22]  Michael C. Corballis On Phrase Structure and Brain Responses: A Comment on Bahlmann, Gunter, and Friederici (2006) , 2007, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[23]  Michael C. Corballis,et al.  Recursion, Language, and Starlings , 2007, Cogn. Sci..

[24]  Denise Brandão de Oliveira e Britto,et al.  The faculty of language , 2007 .

[25]  Yoshihiko Suhara,et al.  A simple computational model for classifying small string sets , 2007 .

[26]  D. Premack Human and animal cognition: Continuity and discontinuity , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[27]  R. Lachlan,et al.  Accuracy of song syntax learning and singing consistency signal early condition in zebra finches , 2008 .

[28]  Jacques Mehler,et al.  Do Humans Really Learn AnBn Artificial Grammars From Exemplars? , 2008, Cogn. Sci..

[29]  Pienie Zwitserlood,et al.  Syntactic structure and artificial grammar learning: The learnability of embedded hierarchical structures , 2008, Cognition.

[30]  A. Verhagen What Do You Think is the Proper Place of Recursion? Conceptual and Empirical Issues , 2009 .