Linguistic Relevance in Hominidae Politics

jean louis Dessalles

Abstract

If we look at the pragmatic structure of the linguistic exchange, we observe that it is designed to convey useful information (Dessalles 1998) : information that is linguistically relevant has, with a good probability, some biological significance. We present here linguistic relevance as a good indicator of biological relevance, perhaps the best we may think of. This property of linguistic relevance, besides many other highly sophisticated features of language, indicates that language must have been the result of a strong selection pressure.

Traditional evolutionary accounts that merely insist on the usefulness of language in wild life fail to explain why other primates do not talk. It has been suggested that language is the way through which we establish contacts and form coalitions (Dunbar 1996). In hominid life, a coalition is supposed to mean a "life insurance" for its members. Dunbar’s suggestion points out an important characteristic that makes our species unique : we live in large groups, where kinship and proximity are no longer sufficient criteria for coalition formation. This new context may be a precondition for the emergence of language. However, the genetic stability of our linguistic ability in this scenario is yet to be established.

Computer simulations, indeed, suggest that the mute listener strategy is viable when speakers are numerous : pure listeners receive information from others and do not give away the information they hold. The emergence of a selection pressure towards complex language is thus difficult to explain. This negative result still holds in a context of competition between coalitions where friends share somewhat the same fate.

To escape from this difficulty, we shall give evidence showing that language performs a signalling function. Relevant individuals are more likely to attract attention. This advantage is not limited to a higher probability to be chosen as a coalition fellow. We suggest that linguistic relevance emerged in the context of a continuous elective process. Inside a coalition, the interest of each member is that the best leaders are chosen. To put it crudely, it is preferable to be subordinate in a winning coalition than being leader of a loosing one. In this account, language appears as a display of leadership ability. This may explain why language conveys biologically useful information : the ability of coalition leaders to hold and produce valuable information, be it social or factual, must have been correlated with the coalition’s success in inter-coalition competition. Relevant information, among hominidae, is thus presented as playing roughly the role that physical strength plays in primate coalitions.

It should be stressed that such an account, designed to be self-consistent, is of course oversimplified. In human relationships, leadership is gradual and context-dependent. Language may rather be considered as a way to delineate the area of competence of each coalition member.

Dessalles, J-L (1998). "Altruism, status, and the origin of relevance". In J. R. Hurford, M. Studdert-Kennedy & C. Knight (ed.), Approaches to the Evolution of Language: Social and Cognitive Bases. Cambridge University Press. _____ Abstract

Dunbar, Robin I.M. (1996). Grooming, Gossip, and the Evolution of Language. Cambridge : Harvard University Press.