The evolution of anticipatory cognition as a precursor to symbolic communication

This article proposes an ecologically based answer to why humans are the only animals who have developed a symbolic communication system. The first part of the argument claims that the Oldowan culture generated selective forces that lead to the evolution of anticipatory cognition, that is, the ability to mentally represent future needs and events. We argue that anticipatory cognition opened up for new forms of cooperation about future goals that were beneficial for hominid societies. Symbolic communication then emerged as the most efficient way of solving problems concerning cooperation about future non-existent goals. 1. What are the significant forces behind the evolution of language? Explaining how language evolved involves answering two quite distinct scientific questions (Bickerton 2003, Tomasello 2003). The first is why humans have developed a system of symbolic representation as a basis for much of their communication. The second is why this system has acquired the structural characteristics of the syntax of extant human languages. In this paper, we focus on the first question. Homo sapiens is the only species with a symbolic language. If one believes that language has come into existence according to the principles of evolutionary theory, there should be some selective advantage that has fostered the development of language among humans. Recently, a popular approach has been that language arose as a result of increased social interaction, for example as a consequence of increasing group size (Dunbar 1996) or as some form of ritualization (Deacon, 1997; Knight, 1998). However, despite all the merits of these proposals, they have problems explaining why language has not evolved among other apes or animals, at least to some degree (Bickerton, 2002, p. 209; Gärdenfors, 2004, p. 237). As a matter of fact, the social interaction among many species is very strong. If social interaction is the crucial reason for the evolution of language, it should be expected that at least some other primate species would have developed some communication forms that go beyond animal call systems. Bickerton (2002, p. 210) concludes: “When a complex and unique development occurs in only one species, the most logical conclusion is that the selective pressure driving that development must have been unique to that species. Thus the strength of social intelligence in other primates argues against, not for, social intelligence as the force behind the emergence of language.” The upshot is that some other evolutionary forces behind the evolution of language must be identified – forces that have only applied to the hominid line. One factor that has been surprisingly neglected in the discussions of the evolution of language is the difference in the ecology of the early hominids and the other apes (Bickerton 2002). Following Osvath and