In a re-evaluation of Hockett's foundational features that have long dominated linguistic theory—concepts like 'arbitrariness', 'duality of patterning', and 'displacement'—an international team of linguists and cognitive scientists shows that modern science demands a radical shift in how we understand language and how it evolved. The conclusion? Language is not a spoken code. It's a dynamic, multimodal, socially embedded system that evolves through interaction, culture, and meaning-making.
Updating Hockett
The past few decades have transformed our understanding of communication. We now know that language is not limited to speech: the sign languages used by deaf communities are fully fledged linguistic systems, and tactile sign systems—like Protactile, used by a community of DeafBlind signers in the northwest USA—proves language can be transmitted through touch.
Scholars have discovered that animal communication is far more sophisticated than once believed: dolphins use signature whistles, birds construct complex songs with syntax-like structure, and apes engage in intentional, context-sensitive communication with gestures. And now with the rise of generative AI, the very idea that language belongs only to biological minds is now under debate.
"This isn't about discarding Hockett," says Dr. Michael Pleyer, lead author and researcher at Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń. "It's about updating him. His framework was revolutionary in 1960 - but science has moved on. Today, we see that features once thought uniquely human—like productivity (the ability to create an infinite number of sentences), displacement (the ability to talk about things not in the here and now), and even recursive structure (the ability to embed sentences within sentences)—are also found to some extent in animal communication. The real story isn't about what separates us from other species. It's about how language, in all its complexity, connects us."
Published by the interdisciplinary team Pleyer, Perlman, Lupyan, de Reus, and Raviv (2025), the paper presents a new paradigm for language science: one that centres on multimodality, social interaction, and cultural evolution—not a static checklist. It calls for a reimagining of language not as a fixed set of "design" features, but rather as a living, adaptive system that is shaped by how we use it, with whom, and in what context.
Beyond the List: A New Vision of Language
The paper identifies three transformative themes in modern science that now guide the shift away from a static 'feature list' towards a more flexible view:
1. Multimodality and semiotic diversity
Rather than being limited to speech, languages are signed just as well as spoken. The use of gestures and facial expressions are an integral part of speech, not just "supplementary" add-ons. And more than language being a symbolic "arbitrary" code, we now know that iconicity—where sound or form resembles meaning (e.g., imitative gestures, onomatopoeias like 'buzz', 'crash', a slow drawl for 'slooooow', and emoji in written communication)—is also essential to human communication. This multimodal and highly flexible nature is core to human language, allowing us to make just about any behaviour into a communicative act.
2. Language as social and functional
Communication is not just about sending and receiving messages with a fixed code. It's about people creating shared meaning in context. A simple phrase like 'Isn't that Tom's bike?' can mean 'Let's meet here' or 'Let's avoid this place' - depending on our history with Tom and with each other. Language also signals our identity, sometimes whether we like it or not (imagine, for example, always being identified as coming from a certain region or as being a non-native speaker just because of our accent). Language can thus promote closeness but also distance from each other. Language also has the power to shape our thought (such as when learning a new colour term improves people's colour discrimination).
3. Language as an adaptive, evolving system
Many of language's most prominent features such as its productivity and compositional structure don't just "exist", but they arise in the process of social interaction and cultural transmission as the result of the cumulative interactions of many individuals over different timescales – from minutes to generations. Moreover, languages adapt to their social environment, with different community structures giving rise to the amazing cross-linguistic diversity we see today.
Societal relevance
These findings come at a pivotal moment. Sign languages are now recognized as full-fledged languages—equal in complexity to spoken ones. Animal communication is seen as far more sophisticated than once believed: birds, dolphins, primates, and even insects use structured signals with context, intention, and innovation. Generative AI blurs the line between human and machine language, raising urgent questions: What is language, and who—or what—can use it?
Co-author Dr. Marcus Perlman from the University of Birmingham explains, "The last few decades have been an exciting time for linguistics, especially for those of us interested in the origins of human language. Language scientists today know about lots of stuff that was mostly obscure to scientists back then – for example, huge advances in our understanding of sign languages and now tactile signing systems, and recently, the advent of large language models like ChatGPT. It makes sense that linguistic theory would require a major update."
Science, inclusion, and public understanding
The paper has significant social and educational value, as it:
- Challenges outdated textbook narratives that equate language with speech.
- Affirms the legitimacy of sign languages and non-speech modalities—advancing equity and inclusion.
- Offers educators a modern framework for teaching language evolution, communication, and cognition.
"Language is not a static thing," adds senior author Dr. Limor Raviv from the Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. "It's a dynamic, embodied, and deeply social act, which is flexible in form, function, and evolution. When we accept that, we see not just what makes us human—but how we are in fact connected to the wider story of animal communication."
About the study
This research synthesises decades of findings from linguistics, cognitive science, animal behavior, and neuroscience. It builds on recent work, including a 2022 study showing Hockett's features remain dominant in introductory textbooks—despite growing evidence that they no longer capture the full picture.
The full paper, titled "The 'design features' of language revisited." is published in Trends in Cognitive Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2025.10.004
