Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Phylogenetic Foundations of Discourse Coherence: A Pragmatic Account of the Evolution of Language

  • Published:
Biosemiotics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper we propose a pragmatic approach to the evolution of language based on analysis of a particular element of human communication: discourse coherence. We show that coherence is essential for effective communication. Through analysis of a collection of neuropsychological and neurolinguistic studies, we maintain that the proper functioning of executive processes responsible for planning and executing actions plays a key role in the construction of coherent discourses. Studies that tested the discursive and conversational abilities of bonobos have showed that apes are unable to construct a flow of discourse governed by coherence, and therefore, apes’ conversational interactions are quite different from those of humans. We then propose that the emergence of coherence in communication occurred after the split between great apes’ and humans’ lines of descendants and that this emergence might have been the result of a specific gradual development in the course of hominin evolution of the executive functions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. In the transcript from Pedersen and Fields (2009) capitalized words signify a word spoken by pointing to the lexigram on the keyboard;

    ((…)) is the description of behaviour carried out by the participants;

    [] are overlaps

    1. (0.0)

      are pauses, indicating the length;

    (.) is a short pause;

    ? is rising intonation;

    . is falling intonation;

    , is continuing intonation;

    = are latches.

  2. I would like to thank an anonymous reviewer to have suggested this very relevant connection.

  3. It has to be acknowledged that Donald’s position allows reversing our argument and speculate that, with a cultural network, exapation of executive control for communicative and actional purposes led to selection of skills and processes that give global coherence to discourse (cf. Donald 2007). I thank an anonymous reviewer for this comment.

References

  • Adornetti, I. (2013). Il farsi e il disfarsi del discorso. Pragmatica del linguaggio e processi cognitivi. Florence: Le Lettere.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adornetti, I. (2014). A neuro-cognitive perspective on the production and comprehension of discourse coherence. In P. Chruszczewski, J. Rickford, K. Buczek, A. Knapik, J. Mianowski, S. Wacewicz, & P. Zywiczyiski (Eds.), Ways to protolanguage 3 (pp. 9–24). Wrlowlac: Wydawnictwo WSF.

    Google Scholar 

  • Agar, M., & Hobbs, J. R. (1982). Interpreting discourse: coherence and the analysis of ethnographic interviews. Discourse Processes, 5(1), 1–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alvarez, J. A., & Emory, E. (2006). Executive function and the frontal lobes: a meta-analytic review. Neuropsychology Review, 16, 17–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Badre, D., & D’Esposito, M. (2007). FMRI evidence for a hierarchical organization of the prefrontal cortex. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19(12), 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banich, M. T. (2009). Executive function: the search for an integrated account. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(2), 89–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bara, B. G. (2010). Cognitive pragmatics: The mental processes of communication. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Barkley, R. (2012). Executive functions. What they are, how they work and how they evolved. New York: The Guildford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benson, J., & Greaves, W. (Eds.). (2002). Functional dimensions of ape–human discourse. London-Oakville: Equinox.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benson, J., Fries, P., Greaves, W., Iwamoto, K., Savage-Rumbaugh, S., & Taglialatela, J. (2002). Confrontation and support in bonobo–human discourse. In J. Benson & W. Greaves (Eds.), Functional dimensions of ape–human discourse (pp. 4–45). London- Oakville: Equinox.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berzlánovich, I. (2008). Lexical cohesion and the organization of discourse. http://www.rug.nl/let/onderzoek/onderzoekinstituten/clcg/berzlanovich.Pdf (accessed 4 November 2014).

  • Bickerton, D. (1990). Language & species. Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biddle, K. R., McCabe, A., & Bliss, L. S. (1996). Narrative skills following traumatic brain injury in children and adults. Journal of Communication Disorders, 29(6), 447–469.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Body, R., & Perkins, M. R. (2004). Validation of linguistic analyses in narrative discourse after traumatic brain injury. Brain Injury, 18(7), 707–724.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bolhuis, J. J., Tattersall, I., Chomsky, N., & Berwick, R. C. (2014). How could language have evolved? PLoS Biology, 12(8), e1001934.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brakke, K. E., & Savage-Rumbaugh, S. (1996). The development of language skills in Pan: II. Production. Language and Communication, 16, 361–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brakke, K. E., & Savage–Rumbaugh, S. (1995). The development of language skills in bonobo and chimpanzee—I. Comprehension. Language and Communication, 15(2), 121–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bublitz, W. (2011). Cohesion and coherence. In J. Zienkowski, J. Ostman, & J. Verschueren (Eds.), Discursive pragmatics (pp. 37–49). Amsterdam–Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, M., & Call, J. (2013). How joint is the joint attention of apes and human infants? In J. Metcalfe & H. S. Terrace (Eds.), Agency and joint attention (pp. 49–61). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Chan, R. C., Shum, D., Toulopoulou, T., & Chen, E. Y. (2008). Assessment of executive functions: Review of instruments and identification of critical issues. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 23(2), 201–216.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, N. (2005). Language and mind (3rd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coelho, C. (2002). Story narratives of adults with closed head injury and non–brain injured adults: Influence of socioeconomic status, elicitation task, and executive functioning. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 45(6), 1232–1248.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Coelho, C., Lê, K., Mozeiko, J., Krueger, F., & Grafman, J. (2012). Discourse production following injury to the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Neuropsychologia, 50(14), 3564–3572.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Darwin, C. (1871). The descent of man; and selection in relation to sex. London: Murray.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, G. A. (2007). Cognitive pragmatics of language disorders in adults. Seminars in Speech and Language, 28(2), 111–121.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, A. G., & Coelho, C. (2004). Referential cohesion and logical coherence of narration after closed head injury. Brain and Language, 89, 508–523.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, G. A., O’Neil–Pirozzi, T. M., & Coon, M. (1997). Referential cohesion and logical coherence of narration after right hemisphere stroke. Brain and Language, 56(2), 183–210.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • de Beaunne, S., Coolidge, F., & Wynn, T. (Eds.). (2009). Cognitive archaeology and human evolution. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deacon, T. (1997). The symbolic species. London: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deacon, T. (2003). Universal grammar and semiotic constraints. In M. Christiansen & K. Simon (Eds.), Language evolution (pp. 111–139). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Deacon, T. (2012). The symbol concept. In M. Tallerman & K. R. Gibson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of language evolution (pp. 393–405). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donald, M. (1991). Origins of the modern mind: Three stages in the evolution of human culture. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donald, M. (2001). A mind so rare: The evolution of human consciousness. New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donald, M. (2007). The slow process: a hypothetical cognitive adaptation for distributed cognitive networks. Journal of Physiology–Paris, 101(4), 214–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donald, M. (2012). The mimetic origins of language. In M. Tallerman & K. R. Gibson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of language evolution (pp. 180–183). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Enqvist, N.L. (1978). Coherence, pseudo-coherence, and non-coherence. In J. Ostman (Ed.), Semantics and cohesion. (pp. 109–130). Abo Akademi.

  • Faisal, A. A., Stout, D., Apel, J., & Bradley, B. (2010). The manipulative complexity of Lower Paleolithic stone toolmaking. PLoS ONE, 5(11), e13718.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ferretti, F. (2007). Perché non siamo speciali. Rome-Bari: Laterza.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferretti, F., & Adornetti, I. (2012). Dalla comunicazione al linguaggio. Scimmie, ominidi e umani in una prospettiva darwiniana. Milan: Mondadori Università.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferretti, F., & Adornetti, I. (2014). Against linguistic Cartesianism: toward a naturalistic model of human language origins and functioning. Language and Communication, 37, 29–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferretti, F., Adornetti, I., Cosentino, E., & Marini, A. (2013). Keeping the route and speaking coherently: the hidden link between spatial navigation and discourse processing. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 26(2), 327–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fitch, W. T. (2010). The evolution of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fouts, R., & Mills, S. T. (1997). Next of kin: What chimpanzees have taught me about who we are. New York: William Morrow.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuster, J. (2008). The prefrontal cortex (4th ed.). London: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galetto, V., Andreetta, S., Zettin, M., & Marini, A. (2013). Patterns of impairment of narrative language in mild traumatic brain injury. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 26(6), 649–661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, R. A., & Gardner, B. (1969). Teaching sign language to a chimpanzee. Science, 165, 664–672.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, K. R. (2012). Language or protolanguage? A review of the ape language literature. In M. Tallerman & K. R. Gibson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of language evolution (pp. 46–58). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, S., & Burgess, P. (2008). Executive function. Current Biology, 18, R110–R114.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gioia, G. A., & Isquith, P. K. (2004). Ecological assessment of executive function in traumatic brain injury. Developmental Neuropsychology, 25, 135–158.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Giora, R. (1985). Notes towards a theory of text coherence. Poetics Today, 6(4), 699–715.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giora, R. (2014). Cognitive and social aspects of coherence. In T. HoltGreaves (Ed.), Handbook of language and social psychology (pp. 141–153). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glosser, G. (1993). Discourse production patterns in neurologically impaired and aged populations. In H. H. Brownell & Y. Joanette (Eds.), Narrative discourse in neurologically impaired and normal aging adults (pp. 191–211). San Diego: Singular.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glosser, G., & Deser, T. (1990). Patterns of discourse production among neurological patients with fluent language disorders. Brain and Language, 40, 67–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenfield, P., & Savage–Rumbaugh, S. (1990). Grammatical combination in Pan paniscus: Process of learning and invention in the evolution and development of language. In S. T. Parker & K. R. Gibson (Eds.), Language and intelligence in monkeys and apes (pp. 540–579). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Halliday, M. K. A., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in english. London: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hauser, M. D., Yang, C., Berwick, R. C., Tattersall, I., Ryan, M. J., Watumull, J., Chomsky, N., & Lewontin, R. C. (2014). The mystery of language evolution. Frontiers in Psychology 5. Article 401.

  • Hofmann, W., Schmeichel, B. J., & Baddeley, A. D. (2012). Executive functions and self–regulation. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16(3), 174–180.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Humphreys, G. W., & Forde, E. M. (1998). Disordered action schema and action disorganisation syndrome. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 15, 771–811.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurford, J. R. (2003). The language mosaic and its evolution. In M. Christiansen & K. Simon (Eds.), Language evolution (pp. 38–57). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hurford, J. R. (2007). The origins of meaning: Language in the light of evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnstone, B., Hexum, C. L., & Ashkanazi, G. (1995). Extent of cognitive decline based on estimates of premorbid intelligence. Brain Injury, 9, 377–384.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jurado, M. B., & Rosselli, M. (2007). The elusive nature of executive functions: a review of our current understanding. Neuropsychological Review, 17, 213–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koechlin, E., & Jubault, T. (2006). Broca’s area and the hierarchical organization of human behavior. Neuron, 50(6), 963–974.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Le, K., Coelho, C. A., Mozeiko, J., Krueger, F., & Grafman, J. (2011). Measuring goodness of story narratives: implications for traumatic brain injury. Aphasiology, 25, 748–760.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Le, K., Coelho, C., Mozeiko, J., Krueger, F., & Grafman, J. (2012). Predicting story goodness performance from cognitive measures following traumatic brain injury. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 21(2), S115–S125.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Leitten, L., Jensvold, M. L. A., Fouts, R. S., & Wallin, J. M. (2012). Contingency in requests of signing chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Interaction Studies, 13(2), 147–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lepre, C. J., Roche, H., Kent, D. V., Harmand, S., Quinn, R. L., Brugal, J. P., et al. (2011). An earlier origin for the Acheulian. Nature, 477, 82–85.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Linell, P. (1998). Approaching dialogue: Talk, interaction and contexts in dialogical perspectives. Benjamins: Amsterdam– Philadelphia.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Louwerse, M. M., & Graesser, A. C. (2005). Coherence in discourse. In P. Strazny (Ed.), Encyclopedia of linguistics (pp. 216–218). Chicago: Fitzroy Dearborn.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyn, H., & Savage–Rumbaugh, S. (2000). Observational word learning in two bonobos (Pan paniscus): ostensive and non–ostensive contexts. Language and Communication, 20, 255–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyn, H., Greenfield, P. M., & Savage–Rumbaugh, E. S. (2011a). Semiotic combinations in Pan: a cross–species comparison of communication in a chimpanzee and a bonobo. First Language, 31(3), 300–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyn, H., Greenfield, P. M., Savage–Rumbaugh, S., Gillespie–Lynch, K., & Hopkins, W. D. (2011b). Nonhuman primates do declare! A comparison of declarative symbol and gesture use in two children, two bonobos, and a chimpanzee. Language and Communication, 31, 63–74.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Marini, A., Spoletini, I., Rubino, I. A., Ciuffa, M., Bria, P., Martinotti, G., Banfi, G., Boccascino, R., Strom, P., Siracusano, A., Caltagirone, C., & Spalletta, G. (2008). The language of schizophrenia: an analysis of micro and macrolinguistic abilities and their neuropsychological correlates. Schizophrenia Research, 105(1), 144–155.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Marini, A., Galetto, V., Zampieri, E., Vorano, L., Zettin, M., & Carlomagno, S. (2011). Narrative language in traumatic brain injury. Neuropsychologia, 49, 2904–2910.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Marini, A., Zettin, M., & Galetto, V. (2014). Cognitive correlates of narrative impairment in moderate traumatic brain injury. Neuropsychologia, 64, 282–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDonald, S. (2008). Communication and language disturbances following traumatic brain injury. In B. Stemmer & H. Whitaker (Eds.), Handbook of neurolinguistics (pp. 485–494). San Diego: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDonald, S., Togher, L., & Code, C. (Eds.). (1999). Communication disorders following Traumatic Brain Injury. New York: Psychological Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mozeiko, J., Le, K., Coelho, C., Krueger, F., & Grafman, J. (2011). The relationship of story grammar and executive function following TBI. Aphasiology, 25(6–7), 826–835.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pedersen, J., & Fields, W. (2009). Aspects of repetition in bonobo-human conversation: creating cohesion in a conversation between species. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 43, 22–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Peirce, C. S. (1955). Logic as semiotics: The theory of signs. In J. Buehler (Ed.), The philosophical writing of Peirce (pp. 98–119). New York: Dover Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, M. (2007). Pragmatic impairment. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, M., Body, R., & Parker, M. (1995). Closed head injury: assessment and remediation of topic bias and repetitiveness. In M. Perkins & S. Howard (Eds.), Case studies in clinical linguistics (pp. 293–320). London: Whurr.

    Google Scholar 

  • Premack, D. (1977). Intelligence in ape and man. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinhart, T. (1980). Conditions for text coherence. Poetics Today, 1(4), 161–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, M. B., & Parfitt, S. A. (1999). Boxgrove: A middle Pleistocene hominid site at Eartham Quarry, Boxgrove. West Sussex: English Heritage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rumbaugh, D. (Ed.). (1977). Language learning by a chimpanzee. The Lana project. New York: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saussure, F. D. (1983). Cours de Linguistique Générale/ Course in general linguistics. Paris/London: Payot/Duckworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Savage-Rumbaugh, S., & Lewin, R. (1994). Kanzi: The ape at the brink of the human mind. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Savage-Rumbaugh, S., McDonald, K., Sevcik, R. A., Hopkins, W. D., & Rupert, E. (1986). Spontaneous symbol acquisition and communicative use by Pygmy chimpanzees (Pan Paniscus). Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 115, 211–235.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Savage-Rumbaugh, S., Shanker, S. G., & Taylor, T. J. (1998). Apes, language, and the human mind. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schenker, N. M., Desgouttes, A. M., & Semendeferi, K. (2005). Neural connectivity and cortical substrates of cognition in hominoids. Journal of Human Evolution, 49(5), 547–569.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sebeok, T. A. (1994). Signs. An introduction to semiotic (2nd ed.). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Semaw, S., Renne, P., Harris, J. W. K., Feibel, C. S., Bernor, R. L., Fesseha, N., & Mowbray, K. (1997). 2.5–million–year–old stone tools from Gona, Ethiopia. Nature, 385, 333–336.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Semendeferi, K., Damasio, H., Frank, R., & Van Hoesen, G. W. (1997). The evolution of the frontal lobes: a volumetric analysis based on three–dimensional reconstructions of magnetic resonance scans of human and ape brains. Journal of Human Evolution, 32(4), 375–388.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Semendeferi, K., Armstrong, E., Schleicher, A., Zilles, K., & Van Hoesen, G. W. (2001). Prefrontal cortex in humans and apes: a comparative study of area 10. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 114(3), 224–241.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Seyfarth, R. M., Cheney, D. L., & Marler, P. (1980). Vervet monkey alarm calls: semantic communication in a free–ranging primate. Animal Behaviour, 28(4), 1070–1094.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smaers, J. B. (2013). How humans stand out in frontal lobe scaling. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(39), E3682–E3682.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Smaers, J. B., Schleicher, A., Zilles, K., & Vinicius, L. (2010). Frontal white matter volume is associated with brain enlargement and higher structural connectivity in anthropoid primates. PLoS ONE, 5(2), e9123.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Stout, D. (2010). The evolution of cognitive control. Topics in Cognitive Science, 2(4), 614–630.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stout, D. (2011). Stone toolmaking and the evolution of human culture and cognition. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B, 366, 1050–1059.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stout, D., & Chaminade, T. (2007). The evolutionary neuroscience of tool making. Neuropsychologia, 45(5), 1091–1100.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stout, D., & Chaminade, T. (2009). Making tools and making sense: complex, intentional behavior in human evolution. Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 19(1), 85–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stout, D., & Chaminade, T. (2012). Stone tools, language and the brain in human evolution. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 367(1585), 75–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stout, D., Toth, N., Schick, K., & Chaminade, T. (2008). Neural correlates of early stone age toolmaking: technology, language and cognition in human evolution. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 363(1499), 1939–1949.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strauss Hough, M., & Barrow, I. (2003). Descriptive discourse abilities of traumatic brain-injured adults. Aphasiology, 17(2), 183–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tanskanen, S. K. (2006). Collaborating towards coherence. Lexical cohesion in english discourse. Amsterdam–Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Terrace, H. S. (1979). Nim. New York: Alfred Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Terrace, H. S., Petitto, L. A., Sanders, R. J., & Bever, T. G. (1979). Can an ape create a sentence? Science, 206(4421), 891–902.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tomasello, M. (2008). Origins of human communication. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uomini, N. T., & Meyer, G. F. (2013). Shared brain lateralization patterns in language and Acheulean stone tool production: a functional transcranial doppler ultrasound study. PLoS ONE, 8(8), e72693.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wynn, T. (2002). Archaeology and cognitive evolution. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 25(03), 389–402.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zalla, T., Plassiart, C., Pillon, B., Grafman, J., & Sirigu, A. (2001). Action planning in a virtual context after prefrontal cortex damage. Neuropsychologia, 39, 759–770.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zalla, T., Pradat-Diehl, P., & Sirigu, A. (2003). Perception of action boundaries in patients with frontal lobe damage. Neuropsychologia, 41(12), 1619–1627.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zasler, N., Katz, D., & Zafonte, R. (2012). Brain injury medicine with access code: Principles and practice. New York: Demos Medical Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zlatev, J. (2008). From proto–mimesis to language: evidence from primatology and social neuroscience. Journal of Physiology – Paris, 102, 137–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zlatev, J. (2014). Bodily mimesis and the transition to speech. In M. Pina & N. Gontier (Eds.), The evolution of social communication in primates (pp. 165–178). Berlin: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

I want to thank the editorial team of Biosemiotics and two anonymous reviewers for valuable and helpful comments and suggestions. I also thank Francesco Ferretti and the research group on language evolution at Roma Tre University for very stimulating discussions.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Philosophy, Communication and Visual Arts, Roma Tre University, Via Ostiense, 234-00146, Rome, Italy

    Ines Adornetti

  2. Department of Human Sciences, University of L’Aquila, Viale Nizza, 14-67100, L’Aquila, Italy

    Ines Adornetti

Authors
  1. Ines Adornetti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ines Adornetti.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Adornetti, I. The Phylogenetic Foundations of Discourse Coherence: A Pragmatic Account of the Evolution of Language. Biosemiotics 8, 421–441 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12304-015-9230-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12304-015-9230-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation