When do languages use the same word for different meanings? The Goldilocks principle in colexification

Lexical ambiguity is pervasive in language, and often systematic. For instance, the Spanish word dedo can refer to a toe or a finger, that is, these two meanings colexify in Spanish; and they do so as well in over one hundred other languages. Previous work shows that related meanings are more likely...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Authors: Brochhagen, Thomas, Boleda, Gemma
Format: article
Status:Published version
Publication Date:2022
Country:España
Institution:Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya)
Repository:Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya
OAI Identifier:oai:recercat.cat:10230/56229
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/10230/56229
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2022.105179
Access Level:Open access
Keyword:Language universals
Colexification
Cognitive effort
Ambiguity
Efficient communication
id ES_4cda89f5cc6bb2e7f6007bdd191bf457
oai_identifier_str oai:recercat.cat:10230/56229
network_acronym_str ES
network_name_str España
repository_id_str
spelling When do languages use the same word for different meanings? The Goldilocks principle in colexificationBrochhagen, ThomasBoleda, GemmaLanguage universalsColexificationCognitive effortAmbiguityEfficient communicationLexical ambiguity is pervasive in language, and often systematic. For instance, the Spanish word dedo can refer to a toe or a finger, that is, these two meanings colexify in Spanish; and they do so as well in over one hundred other languages. Previous work shows that related meanings are more likely to colexify. This is attributed to cognitive pressure towards simplicity in language, as it makes lexicons easier to learn and use. The present study examines the interplay between this pressure and the competing pressure for languages to support accurate information transfer. We hypothesize that colexification follows a Goldilocks principle that balances the two pressures: meanings are more likely to attach to the same word when they are related to an optimal degree—neither too much, nor too little. We find support for this principle in data from over 1200 languages and 1400 meanings. Our results thus suggest that universal forces shape the lexicons of natural languages. More broadly, they contribute to the growing body of evidence suggesting that languages evolve to strike a balance between competing functional and cognitive pressures.This project has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant agreement No 715154).Elsevier202320232022info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10230/56229http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2022.105179reponame:Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunyainstname:Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya)InglésCognition. 2022;226:105179.https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S0010027722001676-mmc1.docxhttps://osf.io/hjvm5info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/EC/H2020/715154© 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessoai:recercat.cat:10230/562292026-05-29T05:05:01Z
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv When do languages use the same word for different meanings? The Goldilocks principle in colexification
title When do languages use the same word for different meanings? The Goldilocks principle in colexification
spellingShingle When do languages use the same word for different meanings? The Goldilocks principle in colexification
Brochhagen, Thomas
Language universals
Colexification
Cognitive effort
Ambiguity
Efficient communication
title_short When do languages use the same word for different meanings? The Goldilocks principle in colexification
title_full When do languages use the same word for different meanings? The Goldilocks principle in colexification
title_fullStr When do languages use the same word for different meanings? The Goldilocks principle in colexification
title_full_unstemmed When do languages use the same word for different meanings? The Goldilocks principle in colexification
title_sort When do languages use the same word for different meanings? The Goldilocks principle in colexification
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Brochhagen, Thomas
Boleda, Gemma
author Brochhagen, Thomas
author_facet Brochhagen, Thomas
Boleda, Gemma
author_role author
author2 Boleda, Gemma
author2_role author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Language universals
Colexification
Cognitive effort
Ambiguity
Efficient communication
topic Language universals
Colexification
Cognitive effort
Ambiguity
Efficient communication
description Lexical ambiguity is pervasive in language, and often systematic. For instance, the Spanish word dedo can refer to a toe or a finger, that is, these two meanings colexify in Spanish; and they do so as well in over one hundred other languages. Previous work shows that related meanings are more likely to colexify. This is attributed to cognitive pressure towards simplicity in language, as it makes lexicons easier to learn and use. The present study examines the interplay between this pressure and the competing pressure for languages to support accurate information transfer. We hypothesize that colexification follows a Goldilocks principle that balances the two pressures: meanings are more likely to attach to the same word when they are related to an optimal degree—neither too much, nor too little. We find support for this principle in data from over 1200 languages and 1400 meanings. Our results thus suggest that universal forces shape the lexicons of natural languages. More broadly, they contribute to the growing body of evidence suggesting that languages evolve to strike a balance between competing functional and cognitive pressures.
publishDate 2022
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2022
2023
2023
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10230/56229
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2022.105179
url http://hdl.handle.net/10230/56229
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2022.105179
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv Inglés
language_invalid_str_mv Inglés
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv Cognition. 2022;226:105179.
https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S0010027722001676-mmc1.docx
https://osf.io/hjvm5
info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/EC/H2020/715154
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Elsevier
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Elsevier
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya
instname:Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya)
instname_str Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya)
reponame_str Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya
collection Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1869407654226427904
score 15,81155

Similar Items