Can iterated learning explain the emergence of graphical symbols?

Garrod, Simon; Fay, Nicolas; Rogers, Shane L.; Walker, Bradley; Swoboda, Nik

doi:10.1075/is.11.1.04gar

Cited by 61 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some of the results of this work are relevant to current concerns. For example, where a graphical communication system is used repeatedly among the same individuals, it evolves towards economy of expression, whereas when it often has to be transmitted to novel learners, it retains iconicity, and thus is laborious to produce but easy to learn [51]. These experiments point the way to possible experimental tests of the kinds of mechanisms outlined in §4.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social scale and structural complexity in human languages

Nettle

2012

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

128

138

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The complexity of different components of the grammars of human languages can be quantified. For example, languages vary greatly in the size of their phonological inventories, and in the degree to which they make use of inflectional morphology. Recent studies have shown that there are relationships between these types of grammatical complexity and the number of speakers a language has. Languages spoken by large populations have been found to have larger phonological inventories, but simpler morphology, than languages spoken by small populations. The results require further investigation, and, most importantly, the mechanism whereby the social context of learning and use affects the grammatical evolution of a language needs elucidation.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social scale and structural complexity in human languages

Nettle

2012

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

128

138

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although improvisations can emerge between thoroughly unfamiliar players, research focused on such a scenario (e.g., Schober & Spiro, 2014) excludes a significant component of improvisation as it is practiced: interactions may build through sustained interpersonal engagement and evaluation over periods of years or even decades (Canonne & Garnier, 2011). Development of shared understandings through repeated nonverbal interaction would be consistent with the evolution of language observed in groups through gestural or graphic improvisation (Fay, Garrod, & Roberts, 2008;Garrod, Fay, Rogers, Walker, & Swoboda, 2010) and the shared mental models argued to coordinate socially improvised activity in team sports (Eccles & Tenenbaum, 2004;Reimer et al, 2006). Canonne and Aucouturier (2015) have recently found closer mental models of improvising among free improvisers with more playing experience together than among those with less.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

The construction of meaning within free improvising groups: A qualitative psychological investigation.

Wilson¹,

MacDonald²

2017

Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Improvisation represents a unique process of social creativity in real time, practiced in widely varying musical contexts with different levels of experience. Yet psychologist have mostly studied the practices of individual jazz soloists with an expectation that shared understanding, knowledge and technical abilities are a prerequisite for group improvising. A qualitative study interviewed six trios of free improvisers (n=18) to illuminate the processes of shared musical improvisation across a range of contemporary artistic practice. Comparison of different members' accounts of events during recorded free improvisations indicated that their understandings of who did what and why converged at some points, notably during relative stasis, and diverged at others. Improvisers anticipated and interpreted musical behaviors of their collaborators with reference to previous shared social or musical experience, but considered that such expectations could, and should, be confounded. Familiarity between improvisers could be seen as helpful in building trust within dynamic and highly uncertain musical contexts, and in allowing a less conscious approach to interaction. Improvisers individually assumed that their group shared certain tastes and asserted that others recognized certain musical material as connected to previous practice together. These ideas of shared tastes and practices could best be understood as constructions within this particular social context, since they were not necessarily consistent across the ensemble. The findings emphasize the fundamentally social nature of improvising: shared understanding is not a prerequisite for participation, but shared experience over time enriches the resources of meaning an individual can bring to their interaction in an improvising group.

show abstract

“…Once the sign-meaning mappings have been grounded, interlocutors can reduce the complexity of the signs—causing them to evolve into more symbol-like forms (Garrod et al, 2007, 2010)—and align their signs. Both processes reduce the cost of sign production and comprehension (Pickering and Garrod, 2004, 2013).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Creating a communication system from scratch: gesture beats vocalization hands down

Fay¹,

Lister²,

Ellison³

et al. 2014

Front. Psychol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How does modality affect people's ability to create a communication system from scratch? The present study experimentally tests this question by having pairs of participants communicate a range of pre-specified items (emotions, actions, objects) over a series of trials to a partner using either non-linguistic vocalization, gesture or a combination of the two. Gesture-alone outperformed vocalization-alone, both in terms of successful communication and in terms of the creation of an inventory of sign-meaning mappings shared within a dyad (i.e., sign alignment). Combining vocalization with gesture did not improve performance beyond gesture-alone. In fact, for action items, gesture-alone was a more successful means of communication than the combined modalities. When people do not share a system for communication they can quickly create one, and gesture is the best means of doing so.

show abstract

Can iterated learning explain the emergence of graphical symbols?

Cited by 61 publications

References 21 publications

Social scale and structural complexity in human languages

Social scale and structural complexity in human languages

The construction of meaning within free improvising groups: A qualitative psychological investigation.

Creating a communication system from scratch: gesture beats vocalization hands down

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About