Biolinguistics and biological systems: a complex systems analysis of language

Abstract

In their recent book, Ladyman and Wiesner (What is a complex system?, Yale University Press, 2020) delineate the bounds of the exciting interdisciplinary field of complexity science. In this work, they provide examples of generally accepted complex systems and common features which these possess to varying degrees. In this paper, I plan to extend their list to include the formal study of natural language, i.e. linguistics. In fact, I will argue that language exhibits many of the hallmarks of a complex system, specifically a complex biological system. Thus, my aim is to advocate contra the the ‘Minimalist Program’ (Chomsky, The minimalist program, MIT Press, Cambridge, 1995), which motivates simple underlying mechanisms (i.e. Merge) in their idealisations, that biolinguistics should embrace a ‘Maximalist Program’ in which multiple subfields contribute component explanations to an emerging whole.

Bridging brain and language: enhancing language learning and communication through neurolinguistic insights

“…For instance, individuals with aphasia may exhibit highly varied speech patterns based on the type and severity of their impairment, as well as individual idiosyncrasies. Additionally, neurolinguistics must consider the diversity of world languages and their specific characteristics when studying the relationship between language and the brain (Nefdt, 2023).…”

Untitled

“…For instance, individuals with aphasia may exhibit highly varied speech patterns based on the type and severity of their impairment, as well as individual idiosyncrasies. Additionally, neurolinguistics must consider the diversity of world languages and their specific characteristics when studying the relationship between language and the brain (Nefdt, 2023).…”

The Artificial Third: A Broad View of the Effects of Introducing Generative Artificial Intelligence on Psychotherapy

“…These paradigm shifts, although jarring, catalyzed tremendous societal advancement [ 13 ]. First, the “cosmological” blow came from Copernicus who taught us that the earth orbits the sun and not the other way around [ 14 15 ]. Second, Darwin’s “biological” revelation presented humans as just another evolutionary link and not a divine culmination [ 14 15 ].…”

“…First, the “cosmological” blow came from Copernicus who taught us that the earth orbits the sun and not the other way around [ 14 15 ]. Second, Darwin’s “biological” revelation presented humans as just another evolutionary link and not a divine culmination [ 14 15 ]. Third, Freud himself introduced the “psychological” blow with his psychoanalytic theory suggesting that beneath our perceived rationality lays unconscious drives and conflicts that are beyond the control of our “ego” [ 13 14 ]; by asserting that one is not the master of one’s own house, he implied our limited control over our inner selves [ 13 ].…”

“…Building on Freud’s framework, modern computer science appears to be delivering a fourth potent blow to human narcissism, which we suggest conceptualizing as the “linguistic narcissistic blow.” This blow is historically profound: after understanding that the earth is not the center of the universe (the “cosmological” blow), recognizing our nonexceptionalism in nature (the “biological” blow), and confronting the turbulent undercurrents of our psyche (the “psychological” blow), we are now also faced with the prospect of sharing our linguistic domain. What was once an exclusive human domain might now be shared with ever more sophisticated artificial entities [ 15 ]. It is difficult to exaggerate the drama of the possible loss of human monopoly on language since the natural and primary characteristic of humanity was the ability to control and play with language, namely, to produce signs and symbols that indicate things as well as to ever alter the meanings of these symbols.…”