Linguistics Encyclopedia.pdf

Origin of language
The question of the origin of language is approached with caution by many modern
linguists, because they feel that it is not possible to provide any reliable evidence on the
matter. Indeed, the Société Linguistique de Paris has as one of its foundation rules the
exclusion from its meetings of any papers on the origin of language. However, the
question of the origin of language is obviously of interest from an evolutionary point of
view, and some fossil evidence exists from which the constitution of the vocal tract of
earlier hominids and other factors which may have a bearing on the question can be
deduced.
Lieberman (1984) argues that human language is built on a biological base that is
present in other primates, and that both humans and animals have innate neural
mechanisms which are matched to their respective sound-producing mechanisms (ibid.,
p. 324). Yet most linguists will readily agree that only humans have language proper, and
that the possession of language puts humans at considerable advantage compared with
other species: human language is virtually unconstrained in its communicative range,
requires little expenditure of energy, hardly interferes with other physical activities, and
allows for highly sophisticated collaboration among its users.
The relationship between thought and language is of considerable interest, and it
seems clear that natural human language differs from all other communication systems,
both those of other animals and those with which even the most sophisticated computers
are able to operate (see ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE): human language is more
diverse, represents reality in more detail, and allows its users to report not only on facts
but to create fictions, poetry, and scientific hypotheses, which are generally assumed to
be out of the range of any non-human individual, whether animal or machine. It is
therefore not surprising that the question of the origin of this apparently unparalleled
phenomenon has exercised and continues to exercise both the popular and the more
academic imaginations.
In the past, in addition to the assumption made within most religions that the deity
gave speech to humankind, speculation has centred around: (1) communicative noisemaking,
which gradually evolved into fully fledged language; (2) imitation of natural
sounds (onomatopoeia), later conventionalized; (3) initially involuntary expressions of
strong emotion, later conventionalized and made to include, for instance, calls for help;
(4) analogizing with child language acquisition; and (5) analogizing with so-called
primitive languages. Direct evidence bearing on the first three of these theses is
unobtainable, but counterspeculation can easily be provided.
The first three theses are usually presented as if a group of individuals using
communicative noises/imitation of natural sounds/expressions of strong emotion made a
conscious decision to develop these systems, and this seems implausible (see
PHILOSOPHY OF LANGUAGE, p. 330): (1) many animals make apparently
communicative noises, but these have not developed into fully fledged human-like
languages (see ANIMALS AND LANGUAGE); (2) onomatopoeia plays a part in all