Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41098947›Full record

ArticleBiology & philosophy2025

A bounded hierarchy framework for the evolution of syntax.

Giulia Palazzolo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biology & philosophy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Utterance evolution: the road to generative, combinatorial communicators.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2026
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Giulia PalazzoloDepartment of Philosophy, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2252-2905

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Is syntax an evolutionary novelty in the human lineage? This question, along with the question of how human syntax evolved, is highly debated in the field of language evolution. In this paper, I reconstruct two prominent frameworks for studying the evolution of human syntax, which I call "unbounded hierarchy" (Bolhuis et al. 2018 in PLoS Biol 16(6):e2005157, 2018. 10.1371/journal.pbio.2005157) and "compositional semantics" (Townsend et al. 2018 in PLoS Biol 16(8):e2006425, 2018. 10.1371/journal.pbio.2006425). I argue that both frameworks face problems when it comes to explaining the evolution of human syntax. Considering these problems, as well as empirical evidence of hierarchy in nonhuman animals, I provide an alternative framework for studying the evolution of human syntax, which I call "bounded hierarchy". The bounded hierarchy framework that I propose traces the evolutionary origins of human syntax to simpler forms of bounded hierarchy that may be present in extant nonhuman animals.

Indexed as

Animal sequencesCompositional semanticsHierarchyLanguage evolutionThe evolution of human syntaxThe merge hypothesis

Identifiers

PMID41098947
PMCPMC12518414

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.