Results 1 - 10
of
24
Working Memory: A Cognitive Limit to Non-Human Primate Recursive Thinking Prior to Hominid Evolution?
"... In this paper I explore the possibility that recursion is not part of the cognitive repertoire of non-human primates due to a limitation on the size of working memory in non-human primates such as the chimpanzees. Multiple lines of data imply that chimpanzee working memory may be of size 2. If so, t ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 2 (0 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
In this paper I explore the possibility that recursion is not part of the cognitive repertoire of non-human primates due to a limitation on the size of working memory in non-human primates such as the chimpanzees. Multiple lines of data imply that chimpanzee working memory may be of size 2. If so, they lack the cognitive capacity for recursive thinking. Implications that change in working memory size during hominid evolution may have had for changes in the basis for constructing social cohesion, and whether the cognitive difference between Homo sapiens and non-human primates is one of degree or kind, are discussed.
Shared Brain Lateralization Patterns in Language and Acheulean Stone Tool Production: A Functional Transcranial Doppler Ultrasound Study
, 2013
"... Background: The popular theory that complex tool-making and language co-evolved in the human lineage rests on the hypothesis that both skills share underlying brain processes and systems. However, language and stone tool-making have so far only been studied separately using a range of neuroimaging t ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 1 (0 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Background: The popular theory that complex tool-making and language co-evolved in the human lineage rests on the hypothesis that both skills share underlying brain processes and systems. However, language and stone tool-making have so far only been studied separately using a range of neuroimaging techniques and diverse paradigms. Methodology/Principal Findings: We present the first-ever study of brain activation that directly compares active Acheulean tool-making and language. Using functional transcranial Doppler ultrasonography (fTCD), we measured brain blood flow lateralization patterns (hemodynamics) in subjects who performed two tasks designed to isolate the planning component of Acheulean stone tool-making and cued word generation as a language task. We show highly correlated hemodynamics in the initial 10 seconds of task execution. Conclusions/Significance: Stone tool-making and cued word generation cause common cerebral blood flow lateralization signatures in our participants. This is consistent with a shared neural substrate for prehistoric stone tool-making and language, and is compatible with language evolution theories that posit a co-evolution of language and manual praxis. In turn, our results support the hypothesis that aspects of language might have emerged as early as 1.75 million years ago, with the start of Acheulean technology.
Middle Palaeolithic scraper morphology, flaking mechanics and imposed form: revisiting Bisson’s ‘Interview with a Neanderthal’. Cambridge Archaeol
- J
, 2007
"... Bisson’s paper is thought-provoking and well researched. His attempt to discover ‘rules of scraper production’, in many ways a refinement of Dibble’s model of scraper reduction (Dibble 1987; 1995), is innovative. He is also to be credited for designing a testable, replicable experiment and for his i ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 1 (0 self)
- Add to MetaCart
Bisson’s paper is thought-provoking and well researched. His attempt to discover ‘rules of scraper production’, in many ways a refinement of Dibble’s model of scraper reduction (Dibble 1987; 1995), is innovative. He is also to be credited for designing a testable, replicable experiment and for his insightful focus on tool edges rather than overall tool shapes. Unfortunately, there are a number of problems concerning his methodology and underlying as-sumptions. The following critique will argue that: 1) Bisson’s scraper production rules reflect flaking mechanics and elements of the experimental design, rather than Neanderthals ’ functional needs; 2) meth-odological flaws in his analysis of Middle Palaeolithic tools undermine his arguments that archaeological
« FORUM « Neanderthals between Man and Beast:
"... provided some insightful comments on and pertinent criticisms of my previous article ‘The talking Neanderthals ’ (Johansson 2013; henceforth J13). First, I appreciate their kind words about my review of the evidence. It appears that we largely agree on the facts of the matter, and also that we agree ..."
Abstract
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
provided some insightful comments on and pertinent criticisms of my previous article ‘The talking Neanderthals ’ (Johansson 2013; henceforth J13). First, I appreciate their kind words about my review of the evidence. It appears that we largely agree on the facts of the matter, and also that we agree on the main conclusion of J13, that, as they express it, “Neanderthals had to count on some form of language ” (BB13: 199). Our disagreements are more a matter of perspective, interpretation, and methodology. BB13 have two main criticisms: (1) They believe it is possible to infer “that the Neanderthal language was not like AMH’s [anatomically modern human’s] because it lacked modern syntax ” (BB13: 199–200, original emphasis), and imply that I am too timid in refraining from drawing that conclusion in J13. (2) They disagree with my interpretation or methodology on a number of specific points throughout J13. It is also interesting to read J13 and BB13 in the light of another recent re-view of the same topic by Dediu & Levinson (2013), published shortly after BB13. Dediu & Levinson reach largely the same conclusions as J13 (but along slightly different routes) and go one step further in that they (like BB13) do take a stand on whether Neanderthals had modern language. But their conclusion is the op-posite from BB13: Neanderthals did have “essentially modern language ” (Dediu
Neanderthals between Man and Beast: A Comment on the Comments by Barceló-Coblijn & Benítez-Burraco (2013)
, 2013
"... ..."
(Show Context)
� FORUM � Disentangling the Neanderthal Net: A Comment on
"... Sverker Johansson provided a very useful piece of work in which he skillfully reviews most aspects and scientific areas that have dealt with the Neanderthal language issue, including (but not limited to) genetics, archaeology, linguistics and modeling. Johansson’s main conclusion is that Homo neande ..."
Abstract
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Sverker Johansson provided a very useful piece of work in which he skillfully reviews most aspects and scientific areas that have dealt with the Neanderthal language issue, including (but not limited to) genetics, archaeology, linguistics and modeling. Johansson’s main conclusion is that Homo neanderthalensis had some form of language, at the very least, a proto-language, which he understands as “a system possessing lexical semantics but not syntax ” (Johansson 2013: 6). At the same time, he notes that many aspects are still obscure, and that the data reported until now is still not conclusive. In particular, “whether they had syntactic language can be neither confirmed nor refuted ” (p. 23). We agree with Johansson when he says that Neanderthals had to count on some form of language. The amount of evidence he has reviewed points in this direction without doubt. We also agree with him in conceding Neanderthals a much more sophisticated capacity for oral production than as sometimes been depicted in the past. Nevertheless, we think that the real, productive debate is whether or not Neanderthals had the same faculty of language that anatomically
Context & Challenge
"... • Emergence of modern cognition; modern abilities in humans since at least 100,000 years (d’Errico & Stringer, 2011) Present and past judgments of value The emergence of photography • Quest for a precise and conform representation of reality • Divorce between the truth of a representation & ..."
Abstract
- Add to MetaCart
• Emergence of modern cognition; modern abilities in humans since at least 100,000 years (d’Errico & Stringer, 2011) Present and past judgments of value The emergence of photography • Quest for a precise and conform representation of reality • Divorce between the truth of a representation & its authenticity induced by N. gibbosulus shell beads from Es-Skhul (A & B), Oued Djebbana (C), and a present-day shore (D). (E to G) Macrophotos of the perforations on the archaeological specimens. From (Vanhaeren et al., 2006) • Increase in archaeological studies pointing toward early use of symbolic representations in H. sapiens (d’Errico et al., 2001; d’Errico et al., 2008) i. the autonomous process of production of the picture ii. the cheap mechanical reproduction of this initial image. Contrary to a painted masterpiece, the value of a picture cannot come from its authenticity and unicity (Benjamin, 1936) • Understand early traces of symbolism & collective agreement on meaning, e.g. social identity (Kuhn & Stiner, 2007a) • Shift from material artefacts to cognitive functions, reasoning and culture Approach Existing approaches in cognitive archaeology • Relate early symbols to cognitive components and abilities (Coolidge & Wynn, 2005; Henshilwood & Dubreuil, 2009) • Consider how different categories of signs apply to artifacts (Rossano, 2010) Our own approach • Depart from Peirce (1935)’s distinction between icons, indexes and symbols Value- an elaborated property- is derived from primary properties Application to prehistoric R-media • Assumption: our ancestors had similar experience and judgments of value Body alterations Body painting Beads, ornaments Language
