Minecraft study sheds new light on how language may have evolved

A new study led by Cardiff University has used a modified version of Minecraft to test theories about the evolution of symbolic communication.

The research focuses on examining what kinds of social situations might have encouraged humans to move beyond pointing and gesture, and begin developing more abstract forms of communication.

Published in the Journal of Language Evolution, the study was led by Dr Seán Roberts and Dr Kateryna Krykoniuk from Cardiff University, with Professor Fiona Jordan from the University of Bristol.

Science Animated, a communication agency specialising in making complex research accessible through animation, produced a video summarising the findings.

Rather than trying to recreate the exact conditions in which language evolved, the team created experimental “arenas” in Minecraft. Participants worked in pairs to complete practical tasks, but weren’t allowed to speak. They could use their avatars to point or gesture, and could knock on the table to create signals.

In one task, pairs worked together to build a structure using coloured blocks, with each participant given different information and materials. Most solved the task through pointing and trial and error, with only three out of 33 pairs developing shared signals for the blocks. This was unexpected, and suggested that building a structure together is not a good motivator to invent a language.

To find an arena that did motivate language evolution, the researchers broadened their search beyond academia to talk to video game makers, science fiction authors and with the participants of the experiments themselves.

“Everyone has a different perspective on the problem, so listening to people can help find creative solutions that we would never have thought of”, said Roberts. “Several of our participants came up with very insightful ideas that helped us.”

The final task was inspired by theories about fire maintenance in early human societies where pointing was less useful: one participant knew which materials were needed to keep a fire going, while the other had to collect them from a source some distance away.

In this setting, shared signals were more likely to emerge, with four out of 11 pairs establishing symbolic signals and nine attempting to do so. When the mine was moved closer, attempts to establish signals dropped sharply.

The findings suggest that symbolic communication is more likely to emerge when three conditions come together: people have different information, they need to divide labour, and they need to refer to things that are not immediately present.

The authors argue that language is unlikely to have evolved due to one factor alone, and that fire maintenance may have created some of the pressures needed for early symbolic communication. The hunt is now on to find other arenas and tasks that might help further explain how humans developed such a complicated communication system.

The research was supported by the Arts and Humanities Research Council.