Origin of Language (Origins)

by dhw, Sunday, December 22, 2013, 12:37 (3987 days ago)

MATT (under "Different in degree or kind"): We obviously don't know how language originated, but if we note that captive gorillas, (koko, in particular) were able to develop a vocabulary of about 2000 words, we have some kind of an idea that the ability to learn language isn't unique. What makes us unique is quite simply (to me) an issue of instinct. Other ape communities don't rely on other members quite as intricately as we do--we're more social, not less. 
It isn't a stretch to say that we have an instinct for language, and that I think it was this instinct, this desire to more effectively communicate that allowed us to develop constant word-symbols over time, passed on via music and culture.-This boils down to what you mean by language. All organisms communicate, and they use whatever means are at their disposal, including chemicals, touch, sound, smell, movement etc. These presumably develop until all needs have been met, and then they stagnate. A gorilla will only learn human vocabulary if put under some kind of obligation to do so. Conversely, feral children only "speak" the language of the animals that have reared them. The difference with humans is that thanks to our superior intelligence and additional layers of consciousness, there is no end to the "need". I imagine that the earliest humans would have had a very basic vocabulary not dissimilar to that of other animals, but our heightened awareness demanded that we put names to things we perceive, and as time went by, it demanded that we even put names to things we don't perceive. That's how language evolves, and it does so through intelligence, with every new word a deliberate invention. I doubt if cavemen had a word for "existentialism" or "genetics" or "internal combustion"! Even my wife's native language (Urhobo) would use English for such concepts. I agree that our social interdependence is a vital factor, but all social animals (including insects) are interdependent, and so for me the main difference is the range of subjects we feel we "need" to communicate, and that arises directly from our heightened awareness of the world and ourselves.-As regards the anatomical differences, before the invention of writing, we used mainly sound, but as David says, our vocal instruments have had to be greatly refined in order to provide the range of sounds necessary for our huge variety of communications. If I were pushed into choosing one explanation over all others, I'd say it was our heightened consciousness that created the need for an ever expanding vocabulary, and the need for new sounds created pressure on the cell community to reshape itself into the organs we have today. I certainly prefer that to random mutations, but no doubt David will opt for God planning and preprogramming it a few billion years ago, or stepping in to do a dabble.