3 ms·

There's not much too information in the article, to be honest. However, it's an interesting notion to me because I've recently become very interested in etymolo

by netule 10y ago

There's not much too information in the article, to be honest. However, it's an interesting notion to me because I've recently become very interested in etymologies, specifically Proto-Indo-European. Since all people come from the same place and have roughly the same features, it's not hard to imagine that there was once a common shared tongue. After all, in the grand scheme of things, these migrations didn't happen all too long ago. I wonder if this will eventually lead to a new reconstructed language, something to tie together the Afro-Asiatic, Indo-European, etc. Very exciting.

ClayFerguson 10y ago
Checkout my post. I researched the timelines of when mammals appeared, when primates appeared, and when the continents first separated. One conclusion is that language existed WAY before even primates did. On language: There is much to be learned from dolphins. They were just last week reported to have been seen having an actual back and forth complex conversation. Two dolphins were given a technical task to solve, and were discussing how best to do it. Pretty amazing.
- flukus 10y ago
  Considering our nearest ancestors don't have complex language I'd say convergent/parallel evolution is a much more reasonable conclusion.
  - ClayFerguson 10y ago
    Dolphins have complex language using sound, and they are very distant cousins. The fact that chimps don't talk is likely to be 50% because of inadequate throat construction, and 50% lack of intelligence. Past extinct lifeforms could have easily had vocal cords and intelligence. We just don't know. That's the point of my post. The possibility exists that language first evolved billions of years ago.
wahern 10y ago
Some researchers believe articulated language arose after the last out-of-Africa event. If that's the case, it's possible the gene(s) arose outside of Africa and migrated back into Africa from, e.g., Asia. And that primitive articulated language with grammar, etc, as we understand it arose multiple times independently. Most researchers believe the cognitive prerequisites for articulated speech came before and drove the emergence of the physical ability for articulated speech. But Joseph Jordania, for example, argues that speech evolved from choral singing, which arose as a defense mechanism on the savannah where groups of human ancestors would vocalize and gyrate in unison to intimidate predators. The emergence of this particular strategy explains, he argues, why our ancestors, after descending from the trees, didn't evolve more typical defense mechanisms like becoming bigger, growing thicker hides, being able to run faster, etc. The group intimidation display selected for many things, including the ability to dance and sing in a group, because if you weren't in unison with the group, or if you tried to run away, you'd be the first to be eaten. This also explains, he argues, why people can become entranced while dancing in a group. It also, FWIW, neatly skirts the dilemma of so-called group genetic selection--the free-rider problem is taken care of by the hungry lion, and we don't require a complex, unproven fitness model for how cheating was suppressed; classic genetic models would explain how such extremely cooperative behavior could arise and persist among members not immediately related genetically (i.e. not extended family). In that scenario the physical aspects of articulated speech could arise first, and the last piece of the cognitive puzzle could have come last, possibly long after out-of-Africa. But that last piece might have been so advantageous that it could have quickly migrated everywhere, including back into Africa. In Jordania's model African and European populations were the last to receive articulated speech. He predicts, among other things, that polyphonic (i.e. choral, aka group) singing would be more common in European and African societies. And that articulated speech glitches, like stuttering, would be more common in Europe and Africa than in Asia, as Asian populations would have had more time to see these things suppressed in their populations.

by netule 10y ago

ClayFerguson 10y ago

Checkout my post. I researched the timelines of when mammals appeared, when primates appeared, and when the continents first separated. One conclusion is that language existed WAY before even primates did. On language: There is much to be learned from dolphins. They were just last week reported to have been seen having an actual back and forth complex conversation. Two dolphins were given a technical task to solve, and were discussing how best to do it. Pretty amazing.

flukus 10y ago
Considering our nearest ancestors don't have complex language I'd say convergent/parallel evolution is a much more reasonable conclusion.
- ClayFerguson 10y ago
  Dolphins have complex language using sound, and they are very distant cousins. The fact that chimps don't talk is likely to be 50% because of inadequate throat construction, and 50% lack of intelligence. Past extinct lifeforms could have easily had vocal cords and intelligence. We just don't know. That's the point of my post. The possibility exists that language first evolved billions of years ago.

wahern 10y ago

Some researchers believe articulated language arose after the last out-of-Africa event. If that's the case, it's possible the gene(s) arose outside of Africa and migrated back into Africa from, e.g., Asia. And that primitive articulated language with grammar, etc, as we understand it arose multiple times independently. Most researchers believe the cognitive prerequisites for articulated speech came before and drove the emergence of the physical ability for articulated speech. But Joseph Jordania, for example, argues that speech evolved from choral singing, which arose as a defense mechanism on the savannah where groups of human ancestors would vocalize and gyrate in unison to intimidate predators. The emergence of this particular strategy explains, he argues, why our ancestors, after descending from the trees, didn't evolve more typical defense mechanisms like becoming bigger, growing thicker hides, being able to run faster, etc. The group intimidation display selected for many things, including the ability to dance and sing in a group, because if you weren't in unison with the group, or if you tried to run away, you'd be the first to be eaten. This also explains, he argues, why people can become entranced while dancing in a group. It also, FWIW, neatly skirts the dilemma of so-called group genetic selection--the free-rider problem is taken care of by the hungry lion, and we don't require a complex, unproven fitness model for how cheating was suppressed; classic genetic models would explain how such extremely cooperative behavior could arise and persist among members not immediately related genetically (i.e. not extended family). In that scenario the physical aspects of articulated speech could arise first, and the last piece of the cognitive puzzle could have come last, possibly long after out-of-Africa. But that last piece might have been so advantageous that it could have quickly migrated everywhere, including back into Africa. In Jordania's model African and European populations were the last to receive articulated speech. He predicts, among other things, that polyphonic (i.e. choral, aka group) singing would be more common in European and African societies. And that articulated speech glitches, like stuttering, would be more common in Europe and Africa than in Asia, as Asian populations would have had more time to see these things suppressed in their populations.