Origin of Language (Origins)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Tuesday, January 07, 2014, 14:15 (3971 days ago) @ dhw

Dhw: 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.
> 
> MATT: As selection worked to have us walking more upright we (because apes ARE pretty smart) started figuring out that we could hunt large game as well as gather. Hunting large game *requires* a team effort. So right away we see social behavior taking center stage. I'm of the opinion that until we were able to create stable nomadic societies, we didn't have the luxury of time that necessitates using our minds for reflection, which in my view, was the driver of more complex language and understanding. 
> 
> Perhaps this is a chicken and egg situation. "Figuring out" something new already requires heightened awareness, so our time and energy saving innovations arose from our heightened awareness, and these in turn allowed us to use our awareness for further developments. All these ideas would have required enhanced methods of communication, and I suspect as you do that this would have resulted in adjustments to our physiology (the response of "the intelligent cell" perhaps). I like the idea of increased leisure allowing a wider scope of reflection, which would also broaden language and culture generally. I'm not so sure about trade. The fact is that languages have developed separately (there are neighbouring tribes that speak a totally different language ... another form of evolutionary convergence?), and tribal warfare is at least as common as tribal trade! But we may now be talking about events long after human language had begun its evolution.
> -I think its a feedback loop: Native peoples are much more attuned to their natural surroundings, in short, it pays to be observant in the bush. And again, natural gifts (Paul can hear better than I can) help drive the selective process... it isn't hard to see that the best hunter would have the best prospects for an H. Erectus wife. What observations could possibly have lead to cultural innovation? And we're naturally curious as well. So our hunters go out -
> MATT: I don't think the emergence of language in humans is a strong case for a creator. 
> 
> Nor do I. For me, human language is a natural extension of communication as practised by all our fellow animals. Their subject matter, however, is (we assume) generally limited to matters of survival, whereas our degree of awareness and self-awareness has immeasurably expanded the range, with each new mode of survival, habitation, environmental conquest, reflection, leisure activity, providing a further spur to the development. As we know from the rapid changes taking place even now, this is a never-ending evolution.-I don't fully buy that. I've seen prarie dogs engage in play, and don't get me started on cats! A business of ferrets also engage in highly intelligent, non-survival behavior based on curiosity. Whenever I read the work of behavioral biologists, I'm always brought back to earth about my perceived superiority. -I just marked a book that intends to explain four pillars of evolution: Genetic, Epigenetic, Behavioral, and Symbolic Variation. I hope to bring its insights here.

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"