Cover not available

Article published In: Interaction Studies
Vol. 25:1 (2024) ► pp.100–117

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
authorization required

Delineating the field of language evolution research

A quantitative analysis of peer-review patterns at the Joint Conference on Language Evolution (JCoLE 2022)

 | Heinrich-Heine-Universität DüsseldorfDusseldorf
 | Nicolaus Copernicus UniversityTorun
 | Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics6525 XD Nijmegen | Sapienza University of RomeRome
 | University of TurinTurin
 | ISPA–Instituto UniversitárioLisbon
 | Teikyo UniversityTokyo
 | Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics6525 XD Nijmegen | Sapienza University of RomeRome | Vrije Universiteit Brussel1050 Elsene/Ixelles
Published online: 7 June 2024
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/is.00024.har
Abstract
Research on language evolution is an established subject area yet permeated by terminological controversies about which topics should be considered pertinent to the field and which not. By consequence, scholars focusing on language evolution struggle in providing precise demarcations of the discipline, where even the very central notions of evolution and language are elusive. We aimed at providing a data-driven characterisation of language evolution as a field of research by relying on quantitative analysis of data drawn from 697 reviews on 255 submissions from the Joint Conference on Language Evolution 2022 (Kanazawa, Japan). Our results delineate a field characterized by a core of main research topics such as iconicity, sign language, multimodality. Despite being explored within the framework of language evolution research, only very recently these topics became popular in linguistics. As a result, language evolution has the potential to emerge as a forefront of linguistic research, bringing innovation to the study of language. We also see the emergence of more recent topics like rhythm, music, and vocal learning. Furthermore, the community identifies cognitive science, primatology, archaeology, palaeoanthropology, and genetics as key areas, encouraging empirical rather than theoretical work. With new themes, models, and methodologies emerging, our results depict an intrinsically multidisciplinary and evolving research field, likely adapting as language itself.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Related research
  • 3.The JCoLE 2022 conference
  • 4.The study
    • 4.1Dataset
    • 4.2Analyses and results
      • 4.2.1Fields of research
      • 4.2.2Topics of research
      • 4.2.3Topic modelling and community detection
      • 4.2.4Further analyses
        • Submissions with the highest and lowest relevance scores
        • Rejections by the scientific committee
        • Topic relevance and overall evaluation
        • Empirical vs. theoretical submissions
  • 5.Discussion and conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
References (23)
References
Bergmann, T. & Dale, R. (2016). A Scientometric Analysis Of Evolang: Intersections And Authorships. In S. G. Roberts, C. Cuskley, L. McCrohon, L. Barceló-Coblijn, O. Fehér & T. Verhoef (Eds.), The Evolution of Language (pp. 79–87). Proceedings of the 11th International Conference.
Bird, S., Klein, E., & Loper, E. (2009). Natural Language Processing with Python: analyzing text with the natural language toolkit. O’ Reilly Media, Inc.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cuskley, C., Roberts, S. G., Politzer-Ahles, S., & Verhoef, T. (2020). Double-blind reviewing and gender biases at EvoLang conferences: An update. Journal of Language Evolution, 5(1), 92–99. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dediu, D., & de Boer, B. (2016). Language evolution needs its own journal. Journal of Language Evolution, 1(1), 1–6. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fitch, W. T. (2017). Empirical approaches to the study of language evolution. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 24(1). 3–33. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gibson, K. R., & Tallerman, M. (Eds.). (2011). The Oxford Handbook of Language Evolution. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gong, Y., Chen, X., & Zhang, M. (2014). Evolutionary linguistics in the past two decades: The 10the international conference on language evolution. Journal of Chinese Linguistics, 421, 499–530.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gould, S. J., & Lewontin, R. C. (1979). The spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: A critique of the adaptationist programme. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences, 205(1161), 581–598. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hagberg, A. A., Schult, D. A., & Swart, P. J. (2008). Exploring network structure, dynamics, and function using NetworkX. In Varoquaux, G., Vaught, T., & Millman, J. (Eds.), (pp. 11–15). Proceedings of the 7th Python in Science Conference (SciPy2008)
Hartmann, S. (2020). Language change and language evolution: Cousins, siblings, twins? Glottotheory, 11(1), 15–39. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haspelmath, M. (2016). The evolution (or diachrony) of “language evolution” [Billet]. Diversity Linguistics Comment. [URL]
Jackendoff, R. (2010). Your theory of language evolution depends on your theory of language. In Larson, R. K., Déprez, V. & Yamakido, H. (eds.), The evolution of human language: Biolinguistic perspectives, 63–72. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lewontin, R. C. (1998). The evolution of cognition: Questions we will never answer. In Methods, models, and conceptual issues: An invitation to cognitive science, Vol. 4. (pp. 106–132). The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mendívil-Giró, J. L. (2019). Did language evolve through language change? On language change, language evolution and grammaticalization theory. Glossa: A journal of general linguistics, 4(1), 124. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Miller, G. A. (2003). The cognitive revolution: A historical perspective. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 71, 141–144. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Porter, M. F. (1980). An algorithm for suffix stripping. Program, 14(3), 130–137. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ravignani, A., Asano, R., Valente, D., Ferretti, F., Hartmann, S., Hayashi, M., Jadoul, Y., Martins, M., Oseki, Y., Rodrigues, E. D., Vasileva, O., & Wacewicz, S. (Eds.). (2022). The evolution of language: Proceedings of the Joint Conference on Language Evolution (JCoLE). The Joint Conference on Language Evolution (JCoLE). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Scott-Phillips, T. C., & Kirby, S. (2010). Language evolution in the laboratory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14(9), 411–417. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Silge, J. & Robinson, D. (2017). Text mining with R. A Tidy approach. O’Reilly.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wacewicz, S., Żywiczyński, P., Hartmann, S., Pleyer, M., & Benítez-Burraco, A. (2020). Language in Language Evolution Research: Biolinguistics, 141, 59–101. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wacewicz, S., Sibierska, M., Placiński, M., Szczepańska, A., Poniewierska, A., Ng, Y. Y., & Żywiczyński, P. (2023). The scientometric landscape of Evolang: A comprehensive database of the Evolang conference. Journal of Language Evolution. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Żywiczyński, P. (2018). Language Origins: From Mythology to Science. Peter Lang. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue