I Text, Therefore I.M.
Homo lingua, we talk all the time now. Twitter and texting (sexting!) rule the hubbub. The ultimate tool, language has been used to check genetic data indicating that behaviorally modern humans migrated out of Africa, across the Red Sea, roughly 50,000 years ago. Our first language was click, like Khoisian, or the !Kung and San. The San, in particular, show the widest genetic diversity, and this is considered the best indicator of founding population. Similarly, the widest genetics for apples is found in Kazakhstan, so it is the home of the apple tree.
Eden was probably crowded and contentious, with groups
fighting over waterholes, or women. (Amazon Yanomamo laughed at researchers
that asked if they fought over food.) But the exodus led across the Arabian
Peninsula, into India, and was likely also contentious, given the previous
expansion of Homo Erectus and Habilis. This could be where we get legends of
trolls and ogres, which could also be Neanderthal, which met the second group
of migrants that turned west across Turkey, into Europe. ("Before the Dawn" by Nicholas Wade, is a good source on this.)
It's fascinating to think about the reasons language started. Theories have included grooming becoming gossip and hunters making plans. I doubt the latter, since the plan would be usually the same, and while hunting, no one is talking. I think we can take some clues from what we do now.
Studies show that men have larger speaking vocabularies, and women larger comprehension. This is predicted if speech is what geneticists call a fitness indicator, a peacock's tail. It takes spare brainpower to speak entertainingly, and it takes good comprehension to discern the better speaker. Note that elaborate chitchat is not seen in sports bar with male-only populations ("Da Bulls.")
Other evidence is that everyone can speak (pretty much) so this is a deeply valuable attribute, thus evolved long ago, long before we left Africa, and also that we have a single grammar, inherited from the San. But another peacock's tail that is universally admired, and shared by all to some extent, is musical skill, especially singing. Nearly everyone can recognize simple tunes, even if they can't carry one. Ever considered why there are groupies for scrawny rock singers?
And a good speech just won the office of President (lots of good speeches, of course, and good policy, but...). So how do we get to this from no speech?
A guaranteed cool skill for kids is to make cool sounds, whistling, blowing into cupped hands, fake farts, etc. Blade of grass between thumbs (makes a good predator call, too). Imitating animals is common in farm communities ("Soooo-eee!!") Would have been useful in hunting, in warning of danger, in communicating during battle with other groups. Would have been effective at confusing rival groups, if one group had a big talent. One guy might have been enough.
And we have heard lots recently about "mirror" neurons. These aid mimicry as well as empathy, and might be the result of selection for imitating.
So I think speech and song arose roughly simultaneously. Both song and story have the attribute of rejecting nonsensical substitutions, improving data permanence. Both are universal. And both can be used for the opposite purpose.
During the Korean War, Chinese battles were launched with musical signals, playing of a flute or trumpet. Kodak chemists would time exposures with popular songs. Work songs, sea chanties, aided mechanical activity. And words can move us in our bodies, as art, not just instructions. One writer said that writing was saying with words what could not be said with words. Mark Twain said the right word had an effect that was both prompt and electric.
And words can give us immortality. Humans will remember things our loved ones said, that our leaders said, that our artists said, that our kids said. Some of those will passed along, and so on. Homer, the Bible, the Greek plays, Dante, Cervantes, are immortal now.
For those who bemoan the impermanence of digital data, think about the impermanence of a told story. With a good audience, it's not a worry.
A priest, a minister, a rabbi, a monkey, and a horse walk into a bar, and the bartender says, "What is this, some kind of joke?"
















Awesome.
I am speechless.
May 5, 2009 9:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
So M I!
May 5, 2009 9:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Heh,
May 5, 2009 9:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Somebody should write a book called: THE CHANT
No kidding. Tom you already know I am a Jaynes nut.
But Aristotle actually wrote for his history of the human race, that it all began with song.
May 5, 2009 10:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
A recent favorite of mine was Barbara Ehrenreich's "Dancing in the Streets". She thought that group dancing might have been useful for confusing prey. I think, though, that it was for fighting, for dazzing and scaring the enemy. Ever heard of the Maori team dance before Rugby matches? Then think of marching Redcoats.
May 5, 2009 10:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Saw an reenactment on cable of Maori dance.
See. You drive me nuts. Now I am thinking of the wolf hunting drive. The wolf hunting drive became the sheep dogs protective caring for the sheep herd. They just stopped biting the sheep. ha
Domestication. Socialization. I love this stuff Tom.
May 5, 2009 10:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wolves that hung around human camps for scraps still reverted to hunting drive when the herd showed up. Those that cut elk loose might have been run off by people, after performing that useful service, but fed later. They might have been better fed than the packs that tried, and sometimes failed, to do it on their own.
May 6, 2009 12:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think language started as signs (verbal or not) indicating or transmitting will, aka commands, whether as dominance or reciprocity. There is a lot of "as if" language as well (do flowers communicate via language with pollinators, etc?), but I'm thinking primarily of directive gestures or vocalizations useful in effecting order in a small social setting.
The ability to reflect upon the meaning of a gesture (so it's not merely reflexive) may have developed after basic vocabularies.
May 5, 2009 10:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
we needed an increase in short-term memory to be able to evaluate imitated animal sounds, I think. One genetic change that is intriguing allows shorter jaw muscles, which may have reduced the constraint of brain size. But more likely, any slight variation in that ability would be rewarded once mimicry was possible.
Once we have an retention of a second or two, we can unpack a sequence of sights or sounds, thus strings of signs. I still think sounds came from imitating animals. We already used sounds, as apes, other mammals use sounds. Few (none?)use active signs, only passive ones like deer's raised white tails for flight, or leaping antelope.
May 5, 2009 10:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, interesting point re string length/time versus vocabulary. Clearly extended time is involved in the communication of more complicated messages, messages involving greater articulation and finer distinctions. "This" is simple. "This, not that" is slightly articulated. "This and that but not those" is much more so. And so on. "This, tomorrow" involves a different kind of temporality.
The temporality of the message acquisition is different from the temporality of the idea as well as different from that of the execution of the will of the message (do it later). I suspect they can all evolve/develop somewhat separately.
May 6, 2009 12:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
"This, not that" can be a simple "yes ...no." I’m willing to bet that “yes” and “no;” “good” and “bad” were our first words. I guess that’s why everybody is a critic.
It seems like most animals have a bark for "no" or that just signifies a threat (read as “no”). Animals seem to instinctively develop their sounds and signals, so I imagine we started that way and took it further because of the tools Tom mentions. More social animals like chimps and whales have a pretty complex language (whales call long distance), but then some, like wolves, do not. Then again, our greatest mimes, parrots, are said to learn to speak at pre-k level understanding and to communicate simple concepts, but do they use this ability in the wild? Why haven't they evolved a complex language? Of course, smaller brain size has a limiting effect on evolution just as physical ability to manipulate the environment does.
I think it’s true that music and language go hand in hand (kids try to sing little phrases without real words) but music may have developed as language evolved or perhaps the synchronicity enabled the evolution. But there must be something else that enabled humans to excel at communication and use language as a tool of thought.
Some theories have it that pursuit of knowledge became our driving force as we formed societies (since knowledge is technology is power) and so evolution of language to further technology would be natural. That makes sense to me, but there had to be a tipping point somewhere. (I'll stop; once again, I've talked too much).
May 6, 2009 5:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
That is still a matter of higher articulation. I think "yes ... no" probably derives from direct expression, a look of terror or a look of hunger. Getting to the point of a verbal expression of the "message" requires something like nuance.
May 7, 2009 4:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Very important blog, Tom, as now men (at least on TPM) can relax about the size of ....well, you know. Because, you're right. It's the not only the size, but the deft use of vocabulary that thrill us here. Puts wordsmithing in a whole new light, eh?
A fine blog, Tom; so please carry on and say a kind word or two (or three or four) about the Jutes.
May 6, 2009 4:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
As a likely Saxon, I can say the Jutes tasted just fine as they were absorbed.
May 6, 2009 8:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
An interesting film, docu-drama, if you will, was Werner Hertzog's 'The enigma of Kaspar Hauser', which describes the life of a human kept chained in a basement with no language interactions for the first 17 years of his life. When he does make contact with the rest of his species, and develops his language skills, he "develops unorthodox approaches to religion and logic, but music is what pleases him most". Interesting in and of itself, it begs the question not only of the etiology of language, but how language affects cognitive and thought processes by it's own 'structure'.
In the spirit of limiting the spread of disease: it is generally acknowledged that singing the 'ABC Song" while washing one's hands is a good measure of the amount of time required for an anti-bacterial soap to have a positive effect in killing germs.
May 6, 2009 12:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
AB WHAT???
May 6, 2009 12:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not that abc song... this abc song. But I sing it a tad more allegro graziozo.
May 6, 2009 3:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
So you're arguing that Cro Magnons increased their evolutionary fitness by holding parties, with lots of balloons, and by singing along to the ABC song, in really sappy voices.
Seems reasonable.
May 6, 2009 4:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Where's Tom? Somebody needs to intervene here before this thread takes the 'MigQuin' death spiral into pathological irreverence. Someone save us from ourselves.
May 6, 2009 4:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Look Miguel, you must have some patience with this Q guy. In another blog he admitted that he had been chained in a basement for his first 17 years and made into a sandwich.
CUT THE POOR GUY SOME SLACK FOR CHRISSAKES!! (Blesses himself)
May 6, 2009 5:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
They say that Stage 2 Swine Flu affects the brain. Apparently its preceded by the sudden appearance of sunglasses.
Don't get too close, Dick.
May 6, 2009 7:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Another interesting and thought provoking post.
Personal anecdote: I remember using the theme from Jeopardy to time my 30 second swabs when testing for chlamydia during a pelvic exam. I sang it silently in my mind, of course.
May 6, 2009 12:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wonder if this correlates at all with extroversion versus introversion?
May 6, 2009 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink