How did language originate?

[HydrogenBond]

I am of the belief that language developed due to necessity. Let me develop this premise with an example. If we had a group of people sitting around a table and we placed a simple known object in front of them, like an orange, and ask them to identify it, someone would quickly say, orange.

Next, we will place an unknown object on the table, that nobody has seen before. The group would now generate more words than just one, in an attempt to pin it down. With the known object, one word is enough to settle it. But with the unknown more words need to be generated.

In a simple, repetitive and predictable environment, where things are known, there is less need to generate many words. To increase the generation of words, we simply need to add unknowns. This could be done by migrating into new places. It could be due to forming civilization where manmade and/or gathered articles from many places, and customs, are concentrated in one place, placing more unknowns for everyone to see, etc.

The other possible cause, which may be more fundamental, is the evolution of human consciousness on top of animal consciousness. The animal consciousness is able to survive quite nicely without needing many sounds. Body language is often enough. The extra layer of consciousness within humans allows humans to see more detail, generating more words by adding more unknowns.

For example, the layman might see a tree in the woods. Someone who is knowledgeable in the biology of plants, is trained to sees much more detail. This is an analogy between animal and animal-human consciousness. A new tree is not just a new tree. The person who can see the details, will need to generate even more words, before they settle on a name since it may need to be more contextual.

Another effect, which could have helped human consciousness evolve, is connected to early religion. Religion creates a world of perception, associated with spirits and ghosts, which can make known objects, unpredictable. For example, the tree is only a tree to the objective mind. But once you add the religion effect and/or the tree spirit to the equation, the tree is now capable of doing many more things, in an unpredictable way. One is forced to look more carefully at the details, to see if the little ant will cause the leaf to twitch and wake up the spirit, etc.

Because the imagination is both personal and collective, not everyone will be seeing the same special effect or the same special effect at the same time. This would have the effect of making it harder for the group to close the labeling of the unknown, keeping word generation open longer.

I am digressing, but the bible tells of a stage language formation (Tower of Babel) where everyone begins to babble, unable to understand each other. This may have been caused by the tower to heaven causing each to see the special effect in their own unique way. Maybe everyone was generating new words for the experience and nobody was listening. The entropy in all the words, causes the group to scatter into different clicks.

As an example of the imagination and the need for generating words, the sober sailor sees the manatee. The sailor with the active imagination sees a mermaid. This sailor sees what he thinks he sees, and will need to generate words to convince the other, who can not see it. A third sailor's imagination, who is listening, becomes active and he starts to see the mermaid due to the words, but he sees a redhead and not a blond because that is the color of his wife's hair. Now there is another argument where a lot of words are generated, with the words only shut off or settled with sabers. Without the imagination active, the word manatee would have been the end, and then back to work.

If you look at modern times, political speeches are part objective substance and part rhetoric. Both groupings of words are used to help close the unknown questions and problems that appear in the minds and imaginations of the electorate. Rhetoric is far more effective since it reaches one at the emotional level. This may be more primitive. Whatever can sooth or animate the emotions are the word clusters that are most effective. This emotion connection may have been the primal cause and effect of word generation. The unknowns created unsettled emotions, such that whatever sounds can settle them, is easier to remember. That is why any student can learn more if they enjoy what they are learning. The words are more soothing and exciting while also labeling the unknowns brought into awareness.

[sman]

Although there are some misconceptions about language here, they don’t concern me nearly as much as the misconceptions about evolutionary biology.

Originally Posted by HydrogenBond

I am of the belief that language developed due to necessity.

I believe this is the product of teleological thinking, which is often and easily, but nontheless falaciously, applied to biology. Teleology was Lamark’s guide to evolution, and he was smarter than us, so we should be very cautious of it. The process of evolution does not design systems according to any kind of necessity. It can only work with the variation in the way things are working in the here and now - cannot plan for the future.

Originally Posted by HydrogenBond

The other possible cause, which may be more fundamental, is the evolution of human consciousness on top of animal consciousness. The animal consciousness is able to survive quite nicely without needing many sounds. Body language is often enough. The extra layer of consciousness within humans allows humans to see more detail, generating more words by adding more unknowns.

This is an excerpt from the 19th century. Human consciousness as some kind of high-tech, bolt-on accessory to animal consciousness. Human consciousness evolved in the same way that human liver evolved: any variation in the system that conferred a benefit in the given environment is selected for. As a result the liver, and the consciousness, evolved to maximize gene frequency for this variation.

The annunciations of linguistics are temporal, open to critisizm and open to new ideas. My advice is to make sure our ideas check out with Natural Selection, the strongest theory in science.

[SidewalkCynic]

Originally Posted by sman

I believe this is the product of teleological thinking, which is often and easily, but nontheless falaciously, applied to biology. Teleology was Lamark’s guide to evolution, and he was smarter than us, so we should be very cautious of it. The process of evolution does not design systems according to any kind of necessity. It can only work with the variation in the way things are working in the here and now - cannot plan for the future.

The annunciations of linguistics are temporal, open to critisizm and open to new ideas. My advice is to make sure our ideas check out with Natural Selection, the strongest theory in science.

But, we are able to plan for the future, so let's make sure our ideas check out with Natural Selection and ideas that are futile, or detrimental, are segregated until a verified conclusion can be determined.

And, I say we do things my way, because my way is the strongest way. And, for starters in association with this topic give me the proper liguistic characteristics for the concept, science?

From there we will begin work on, "it," "idea," and "religion."