Cited by 941Language and cultural evolutionLanguage Development and DisordersSyntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation

Cumulative cultural evolution in the laboratory: An experimental approach to the origins of structure in human language

Open access
Kirby, Simon, Cornish, Hannah, Smith, Kenny·2008·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

We introduce an experimental paradigm for studying the cumulative cultural evolution of language. In doing so we provide the first experimental validation for the idea that cultural transmission can lead to the appearance of design without a designer. Our experiments involve the iterated learning of artificial languages by human participants. We show that languages transmitted culturally evolve in such a way as to maximize their own transmissibility: over time, the languages in our experiments become easier to learn and increasingly structured. Furthermore, this structure emerges purely as a consequence of the transmission of language over generations, without any intentional design on the part of individual language learners. Previous computational and mathematical models suggest that iterated learning provides an explanation for the structure of human language and link particular aspects of linguistic structure with particular constraints acting on language during its transmission. The experimental work presented here shows that the predictions of these models, and models of cultural evolution more generally, can be tested in the laboratory.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.0707835105

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 10

  1. Maynard Smith J, Szathmary E (1997) The Major Transitions in Evolution (Oxford Univ Press, Oxford, UK).
  2. Christiansen MH, Chater N (2008) Language as shaped by the brain. Behav Brain Sci, in press.
  3. Kirby S (1999) Function, Selection and Innateness: The Emergence of Language Universals (Oxford Univ Press, Oxford UK).
  4. Hurford JR (2000) Social transmission favours linguistic generalization, The Evolutionary Emergence of Language: Social Function and the Origins of Linguistic Form, eds Knight C, Studdert-Kennedy M, Hurford JR (Cambridge Univ Press, Cambridge, UK), pp 324 -352.
  5. Kirby S (2000) Syntax without natural selection, The Evolutionary Emergence of Language: Social Function and the Origins of Linguistic Form, eds Knight C, Studdert- Kennedy M, Hurford JR (Cambridge Univ Press, Cambridge, UK), pp 303-323.
  6. Zuidema W (2003) How the poverty of the stimulus solves the poverty of the stimulus, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 15 (Proceedings of NIPS'02), eds
  7. Becker S, Thrun S, Obermayer K (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA), pp 51-58.
  8. Keller R (1994) On Language Change: The Invisible Hand in Language (Routledge, London).
  9. Batali J (2002) The negotiation and acquisition of recursive grammars as a result of competition among exemplars, Linguistic Evolution through Language Acquisition: Formal and Computational Models, ed Briscoe EJ (Cambridge Univ Press, Cambridge, UK), pp 111-172.
  10. Bartlett FC (1932) On Remembering (Macmillan, Oxford).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kirby, S., Cornish, H., & Smith, K.
Affiliations
  • University of Edinburgh (GB)
  • Northumbria University (GB)
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2008-08-05
Volume
105
Issue
31
Pages
10681-10686
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2104563567
Cited by
941
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 40 · 2025: 68 · 2024: 53 · 2023: 55 · 2022: 81 · 2021: 59 · 2020: 56 · 2019: 88 · 2018: 83 · 2017: 56 · 2016: 57 · 2015: 45 · 2014: 54 · 2013: 36 · 2012: 34
FWCI
659.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Northumbria Research Link (Northumbria University) (submittedVersion)
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Cultural Studies › Language and cultural evolution
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
Keywords
cumulative cultural evolution, origin of language, iterated learning, artificial languages, language transmission, transmissibility, language structure, experimental paradigms
MeSH terms
Cultural Evolution, Humans, Language, Learning, Linguistics, Models, Theoretical, Photic Stimulation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review