[1] Andersen H. Abductive and deductive change. Language 1973;40:765--93.

[2] Aunger R, editor. Darwinizing culture: The status of memetics as a science. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press; 2000.

[3] Baker CL. Introduction to generative-transformational syntax. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1978.

[4] Batali J. The negotiation and acquisition of recursive grammars as a result of competition among exemplars. In: Briscoe E, editor. Linguistic evolution through language acquisition: Formal and computational models. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press; 2002. p. 111--72.

[5] Berko J. The child's learning of English morphology. Word 1958;14:150--77.

[6] Bloom P. How children learn the meanings of words. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2000.

[7] Boyd R, Richerson PJ. Culture and the evolutionary process. Chicago, IL: Univ. of Chicago Press; 1985.

[8] Brighton H. Experiments in iterated instance-based learning. Tech. Rep., Language Evolution and Computation Research Unit; 2000.

[9] Brighton H. Compositional syntax from cultural transmission. Artificial Life 2002;8(1):25--54.

[10] Brighton H. Simplicity as a driving force in linguistic evolution. Ph.D. Thesis, The University of Edinburgh; March 2003.

[11] Brighton H. Linguistic evolution and induction by minimum description length. In preparation.

[12] Brighton H, Kirby S. The survival of the smallest: Stability conditions for the cultural evolution of compositional language. In: Kelemen J, Sosík P, editors. Advances in artificial life: Proceedings of the 6th European conference on artificial life. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 2001. p. 592--601.

[13] Brighton H, Kirby S. Understanding linguistic evolution by visualizing the emergence of topographic mappings. Artificial Life. In press.

[14] Brighton H, Kirby S, Smith K. Cultural selection for learnability: Three principles underlying the view that language adapts to be learnable. In: Tallerman M, editor. Language origins: Perspectives on evolution. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press; 2005.

[15] Briscoe E, editor. Linguistic evolution through language acquisition: Formal and computational models. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press; 2002.

[16] Cavalli-Sforza LL, Feldman MW. Cultural transmission and evolution: A quantitative approach. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press; 1981.

[17] Chater N. The search for simplicity: A fundamental cognitive principle? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A 1999;52:273--302.

[18] Chater N, Vitányi PMB. Simplicity: A unifying principle in cognitive science? Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2003;7(1):19--22.

[19] Chater N, Vitányi PMB. A simplicity principle for language acquisition: Re-evaluating what can be learned from positive evidence; 2004 ; Manuscript under review.

[20] Cheney D, Seyfarth R. How monkeys see the world: Inside the mind of another species. Chicago, IL: Univ. of Chicago Press; 1990.

[21] Chomsky N. Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1965.

[22] Chomsky N. Recent contributions to the theory of innate ideas. Synthese 1967;17:2--11.

[23] Chomsky N. In: Belletti A, Rizzi L, editors. On nature and language. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press; 2002.

[24] Christiansen M. Infinite languages, finite minds: Connectionism, learning and linguistic structure. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Edinburgh; 1994.

[25] Christiansen M, Kirby S. Language evolution. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press; 2003.

[26] Christiansen MH, Kirby S. Language evolution: Consensus and controversies. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2003;7(7):300--7.

[27] Clark R, Roberts I. A computational model of language learnability and language change. Linguistic Inquiry 1993;24(2):299--345.

[28] Comrie B. Language universals and linguistic typology. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell; 1989.

[29] Cowie F. What's within? Nativism reconsidered. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press; 1999.

[30] Crain S. Language acquisition in the absence of experience. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 1991;14.

[31] Croft W. Typology and universals. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press; 1990.

[32] Culicover PW. Syntactic nuts: Hard cases, syntactic theory, and language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press; 1999.

[33] Dawkins R. The selfish gene. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press; 1989.

[34] Deacon T. The symbolic species. London: Penguin; 1997.

[35] Doherty MJ. Children's difficulty in learning homonyms. Journal of Child Language 2004;31(1):203--14.

[36] Durham WH. Coevolution: Genes, culture and human diversity. Stanford, CA: Stanford Univ. Press; 1991.

[37] Elman JE, Bates EA, Johnson MH, Karmiloff-Smith A, Parisi D, Plunkett K, editors. Rethinking innateness: A connectionist perspective on development. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1996.

[38] Elman JL. Generalization from sparse input. In: Proceedings of the 38th annual meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago Linguistic Society; 2003.

[39] Feyerabend P. Against method. London: Verso; 1978. H. Brighton et al. / Physics of Life Reviews 2 (2005) 177--226 225

[40] Glendinning P. Stability, instability, and chaos: An introduction to the theory of nonlinear differential equations. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press; 1994.

[41] Grünwald P. Model selection based on minimum description length. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 2000;44:133-52.

[42] Hare M, Elman JL. Learning and morphological change. Cognition 1995;56(1):61--98.

[43] Hopcroft JE, Ullman JD. Introduction to automata theory, languages, and computation. Reading, MA: Addison--Wesley; 1979.

[44] Hurford JR. Biological evolution of the Saussurean sign as a component of the language acquisition device. Lingua 1989;77(2):187--222.

[45] Hurford JR. Nativist and functional explanations in language acquisition. In: Roca IM, editor. Logical issues in language acquisition. Dordrecht: Foris; 1990. p. 85--136.

[46] Jackendoff R. Foundations of language: Brain, meaning, grammar, evolution. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press; 2002.

[47] Kagan J. The second year. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press; 1981.

[48] Kimball JP. The formal theory of grammar. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1973.

[49] Kirby S. Function, selection and innateness: The emergence of language universals. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press; 1999.

[50] Kirby S. Syntax without natural selection: how compositionality emerges from vocabulary in a population of learners. In: Knight C, Studdert-Kennedy M, Hurford J, editors. The evolutionary emergence of language: Social function and the origins of linguistic form. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press; 2000. p. 303--23.

[51] Kirby S. Spontaneous evolution of linguistic structure: an iterated learning model of the emergence of regularity and irregularity. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 2001;5(2):102--10.

[52] Kirby S. Learning, bottlenecks and the evolution of recursive syntax. In: Briscoe E, editor. Linguistic evolution through language acquisition: Formal and computational models. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press; 2002. p. 173--203.

[53] Krifka M. Compositionality. In: Wilson RA, Keil F, editors. The MIT encyclopaedia of the cognitive sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2001.

[54] LePage RB, Tabouret-Keller A. Acts of identity. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press; 1985.

[55] Li M, Vitányi P. An introduction to Kolmogorov complexity and its applications. New York: Springer-Verlag; 1997.

[56] Lidz J, Waxman S. Reaffirming the poverty of the stimulus argument: A reply to the replies. Cognition 2004;93:157--65.

[57] Lidz J, Waxman S, Freedman J. What infants know about syntax but couldn't have learned: Evidence for syntactic structure at 18-months. Cognition 2003;89:65--73.

[58] Lightfoot D. The development of language: Acquisition, change, and evolution. Oxford: Blackwell; 1999.

[59] Ma’ nczak W. Laws of analogy. In: Fisiak J, editor. Historical morphology. The Hague: Mouton; 1980. p. 283--8.

[60] Markman EM. Categorization and naming in children: Problems of induction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1989.

[61] Markman EM. Constraints on word learning: Speculations about their nature, origins, and domain specificity. In: Gunnar M, Maratsos M, editors. Modularity and constraints in language and cognition: The Minnesota symposium on child psychology, vol. 25. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1992. p. 59--101.

[62] Markman EM, Wachtel GF. Children's use of mutual exclusivity to constrain the meaning of words. Cognitive Psychology 1988;20:121--57.

[63] Maynard Smith J, Szathmáry E. The major transitions in evolution. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press; 1995.

[64] Maynard Smith J, Szathmáry E. The origins of life: From the birth of life to the origins of language. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press; 1999.

[65] Mazzocco MM. Children's interpretations of homonyms: A developmental study. Journal of Child Language 1997;24(2):441--67.

[66] Mesoudi A, Whiten A, Laland KN. Is human cultural evolution Darwinian? Evidence reviewed from the perspective of the origin of species. Evolution 2004;58(1):1--11.

[67] Newmeyer FJ. Uniformitarian assumptions and language evolution research. In: Wray A, editor. The transition to language. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press; 2002.

[68] Niyogi P, Berwick RC. Evolutionary consequences of language learning. Linguistics and Philosophy 1997;20:697--719.

[69] Nowak MA, Komarova NL. Towards an evolutionary theory of language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2001;5(7):288--95.

[70] O'Grady W, Dobrovolsky M, Katamba F. Contemporary linguistics: An introduction. 3rd ed. London: Longman; 1996.

[71] Oliphant M. The learning barrier: Moving from innate to learned systems of communication. Adaptive Behavior 1999;7(3/4):371--84.

[72] Osherton D, Stob M, Weinstein S. Systems that learn. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1986. 226 H. Brighton et al. / Physics of Life Reviews 2 (2005) 177--226

[73] Pinker S, Bloom P. Natural language and natural selection. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 1990;13(4):707--84.

[74] Pitt MA, Myung IJ, Zhang S. Toward a method of selecting among computational models of cognition. Psychological Review 2002;109(3):472--91.

[75] Pullum GK. Learnability, hyperlearning, and the poverty of the stimulus. In: Johnson J, Juge ML, Moxley JL, editors. Proceeding of the 22nd annual meeting: General session and parasession on the role of learnability in grammatical theory. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistic Society; 1996. p. 498--513.

[76] Pullum GK, Scholz BC. Empirical assessment of stimulus poverty arguments. The Linguistic Review 2002;19(1--2):9--50.

[77] Rissanen J. Modeling by shortest data description. Automatica 1978;14:465--71.

[78] Rissanen J. Stochastic complexity in learning. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 1997;55:89--95.

[79] Rosenblatt F. The perceptron: A probabilistic model for information storage and organization in the brain. Psychological Review 1958;65:368--408.

[80] Slobin DI. Cognitive prerequisites for the development of grammar. In: Freguson CA, Slobin DI, editors. Studies of child language development. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston; 1973.

[81] Slobin DI. Language change in childhood and history. In: Macnamara J, editor. Language learning and thought. London: Academic Press; 1977. p. 185--221.

[82] Slobin DI. Crosslinguistic evidence for the language-making capacity. In: Slobin DI, editor. The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition, vol. 2. Hillsdale: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates; 1985. p. 1157--249.

[83] Smith ADM. Intelligent meaning creation in a clumpy world helps communication. Artificial Life 2003;9(2):175--90.

[84] Smith K. The cultural evolution of communication in a population of neural networks. Connection Science 2002;14(1):65--84.

[85] Smith K. Compositionality from culture: The role of environment structure and learning bias. Tech. Rep., Language Evolution and Computation Research Unit, University of Edinburgh; 2003.

[86] Smith K. The evolution of vocabulary. Journal of Theoretical Biology 2004;228(1):127--42.

[87] Smith K, Brighton H, Kirby S. Complex systems in language evolution: The cultural emergence of compositional structure. Advances in Complex Systems 2003;6(4):537--58.

[88] Smith K, Hurford JR. Language evolution in populations: Extending the iterated learning model. In: Banzhaf W, Christaller T, Dittrich P, Kim JT, Ziegler J, editors. Advances in artificial life (Proceedings of the 7th European conference on artificial life). Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 2003. p. 507--16.

[89] Smith K, Kirby S, Brighton H. Iterated learning: A framework for the emergence of language. Artificial Life 2003;9(4):371--86.

[90] Steels L. Constructing and sharing perceptual distinctions. In: van Someren M, Widmer G, editors. Proceedings of the European conference on machine learning. ECML '97. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 1997. p. 4--13.

[91] Teal TK, Taylor CE. Effects of compression on language evolution. Artificial Life 2000;6(2):129--43.

[92] Tomasello M. The cultural origins of human cognition. Harvard: Harvard Univ. Press; 1999.

[93] Trask RL. Historical linguistics. London: Arnold; 1996.

[94] Trudgill P. Sex, covert prestige, and linguistic change in the urban British English of Norwich. Language in Society 1972;1:179--96.

[95] Uriagereka J. Rhyme and reason: An introduction to minimalist syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1998.

[96] von Frisch K. Decoding the language of the bee. Science 1974;185:663--8.

[97] Wagner L. Defending nativism in language acquisition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2001;6(7):283--4.

[98] Wexler K. On the argument from the poverty of the stimulus. In: Kasher A, editor. The Chomskyan turn. Oxford: Blackwell; 1991.

[99] Wolff JG. Language acquisition, data compression, and generalization. Language and Communication 1982;2(1):57--89.

[100] Zadrozny W. From compositional to systematic semantics. Linguistics and Philosophy 1994;17:329--42.