shottie
14-08-2007, 08:37 PM
Stephen R. L. Clark
Abstract
There is both theoretical and experimental reason to suppose that no-one could ever have learned to speak without an environment of language-users. How then did the first language-users learn? Animal communication systems provide no help, since human languages aren't constituted as a natural system of signs, and are essentially recursive and syntactic. Such languages aren't demanded by evolution, since most creatures, even intelligent creatures, manage very well without them. I propose that representations, and even public representations like sculptures, precede full languages, which were devised by the first human children as secret tongues to create fantasy realms inaccessible to their proto-human parents. Language, in brief, is not required for truth-telling or for the convenience of hunters. It is a peculiar modification of public representation, which permits us to construct new public worlds.
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract;jsessionid=C08AE511EE8CC7AC8D0934C 7156F56C0.tomcat1?fromPage=online&aid=53859
Personnaly i feel that language (the gift/curse of speech) was introduced into the human conciousness (genetic manipulation) to force thought, make smarter..
The english language doesn't seem/sound like 'Natural' like evolution caused it to occur. I often think people in old enland spoke better english than we do today, we just have more words.
How long would it take for human brains to develop the tools to make language possible?
How long would it take to learn a language?
How long would it take for a language to evolve?
Abstract
There is both theoretical and experimental reason to suppose that no-one could ever have learned to speak without an environment of language-users. How then did the first language-users learn? Animal communication systems provide no help, since human languages aren't constituted as a natural system of signs, and are essentially recursive and syntactic. Such languages aren't demanded by evolution, since most creatures, even intelligent creatures, manage very well without them. I propose that representations, and even public representations like sculptures, precede full languages, which were devised by the first human children as secret tongues to create fantasy realms inaccessible to their proto-human parents. Language, in brief, is not required for truth-telling or for the convenience of hunters. It is a peculiar modification of public representation, which permits us to construct new public worlds.
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract;jsessionid=C08AE511EE8CC7AC8D0934C 7156F56C0.tomcat1?fromPage=online&aid=53859
Personnaly i feel that language (the gift/curse of speech) was introduced into the human conciousness (genetic manipulation) to force thought, make smarter..
The english language doesn't seem/sound like 'Natural' like evolution caused it to occur. I often think people in old enland spoke better english than we do today, we just have more words.
How long would it take for human brains to develop the tools to make language possible?
How long would it take to learn a language?
How long would it take for a language to evolve?