Formal Properties of Language as Constraints on Neural Dynamics

arXiv:2609.14384 · cs.CL · Submitted 2026-09-13 · Read on arXiv

cs.CL

Submitted: 2026-09-13

Updated: 2026-09-13

Code: https://github.com/ElliotMurphy91/NeuralAdmissibilityProgram

License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

The gist: What must a neural system be capable of to implement language? Current research annotates stimuli with linguistic variables and tests which electrodes, voxels, or language-model layers predict neural

Terminology

Abstract

What must a neural system be capable of to implement language? Current research annotates stimuli with linguistic variables and tests which electrodes, voxels, or language-model layers predict neural activity. Yet predictive success leaves mechanisms under-constrained. Here, we show that algebraic properties of language specify invariants that mechanisms must preserve: non-associative hierarchical grouping, commutativity, recursive closure, access to substructures, and structured workspace transitions. We term this the Neural Admissibility Program (NAP). Syntactic structure building is analyzed algebraically, with candidate mechanisms offered for each requirement: content-addressable workspace memory, graph-structured transient dynamics scheduling structure-building operations (e.g. stable heteroclinic channels), and a phase-coupled sealing operation recording grouping. Simulations show that a corrected Marcolli-Berwick entropy-optimized binding gate preserves grouping only within a narrow commitment band. As an alternative, we propose a novel neural binding operation we term 'Meld': two constituent populations converge through shared synapses, integrate sublinearly, and saturate. Meld is, to our knowledge, the closest neurally plausible composition law to syntactic Merge. It preserves every NAP invariant, uses known cortical operations, and recovers hierarchical structure at every tested depth and temperature. It predicts that effective population dimensionality separates alternative bracketings and that the composite depends on constituent disagreement. Importantly, the laws decoding bracketing most accurately are a priori inadmissible, showing that decoding accuracy alone cannot adjudicate between mechanisms. By specifying how neural dynamics can remain faithful to linguistic structure, the NAP changes the criterion by which neural implementations of cognition are evaluated.

Sources

Related papers