How language was devoloped

[Joseph_Stalin]

*Note: I don't know if any of those Harvard genius guys have made any reasonable attempts at this, and if so I haven't read them yet.

Come on, now, I want to hear your theories on this. It may not seem like much, but turning simple, monosyllabic grunts into words is a big deal.

My theory is that people began to make associations with different types of grunting and howling and such. For example: Me and Caveman Jack here are always collecting wood. It's an everyday thing that happens often. But it gets tiring pointing to a piece of wood everytime you want to do that activity. So me and jack make a special grunt for it, "blargh" (i dunno...). So now, everytime me and jack want to collect wood, we say "blargh". Soon it's becoming a hit with the rest of our tribe. But not everyone collects wood. Another guy, joe, likes the idea and calls fishing "gahk". The same thing happens. Then as time progresses we start refining our speech, because obviously we realized that we sound like a bunch of retards. Our children are taught the words too, which further decomposes the words (and then recomposes I suppose). "Blargh" soon becomes "blark" and then "bark".

I suppose "gahk" becomes "gack" and then "gock" or maybe "dock" which is part of fishing.

The basic idea follows into ideas, such a "get" and "take".

Abstract things like "Germany" and "Russia" or names of countries might have come from words meaning "fertile" or "rocky" or "icey".

Written word has a lot to do with it to, but not many people wrote frequently; maybe the smartest in the group or the leader.

Well thank you for your time. Try and post your ideas. :)

[AirRick101]

Well, to put aside the possibility that basic language was supernaturally inspired by a deity...

I can agree with yours as a possibility...I can't think of any other theory that's not like yours...

Another thing to think about that I'm curious about. Why is it that our brains even have massive ability to convert words into meaning?

[Howie]

There are a lot of religious thoughts which people would argue. Of course Adam & Eve. Who could most likey already communicate. And then the Tower of Babble. The tower where the people where going to build a tower to reach the heavens. God had then made everyone speak in a foriegn tongue so thay could not finish the tower. I'm sorry but what a hoex. Every Biblical event that I have heard or read seems very unlikley at best. And could have a scientific reason for what happened in there small world where they had roamed.
I think as the continents seperated that this would account for differant languages. As far as how the actuall language got started to begin with I think that your Idea is a very reasonable Idea. IF you think about it, How else (without a devine spirit) would communication begin?

[Life]

[quote]There are a lot of religious thoughts which people would argue. Of course Adam & Eve. Who could most likey already communicate. [quote]

telepathy?

[Alric]

I think it probably started with some kind of body language, which pointing at a piece of wood could of been a part of. I am not sure if they really got "tired" of it though but I guess it doesn't matter. I think what your saying sounds pretty reasonable though.

One thing I wonder though, is couldn't they have just started talking normal right away? Like maybe the first word they came up with was "wood". I not not really sure what sounds come naturally to humans but I dont think it has to be grunts.

[evangel]

Many times I don't think we can begin to grasp what a powerful and wonderful thing we have to be able to communicate -especially with today's means (media, technology,etc.). The potential is awesome.

...the Tower of Babble. The tower where the people where going to build a tower to reach the heavens. God had then made everyone speak in a foriegn tongue so thay could not finish the tower. I'm sorry but what a hoex. [/b]

I've heard one interpretation of the account of Babel (also called the Zigguraut I think) to be that the people who built the tower did not build it so that they could literally "reach the heavens" but that this actually means that these people were so advanced in their ability to communicate and in knowledge of the spiritual realms/dimensions that the construct of the tower served as a temple or point where Babylonian "priests" were making attempts to "invade" or "make war" with heaven. In other words, through their advanced ideas, the ability to communicate those ideas, through collaboration, combined effort, etc. they were able to somehow communicate with spiritual entities or gain access to spiritual planes... Thus God caused mass confusion so that they were unable to realize this goal -kind of along the lines of Satan's attempt to overthrow God (Both efforts were futile and pathetic).

I don't think that they actually believed they could physically reach the heavens, but that they were attempting to bypass God's given means of communion to take divine power and knowledge for themselves (like the ancient Egyptians - times 10)

[Howie]

Originally posted by evangel
I don't think that they actually believed they could physically reach the heavens, but that they were attempting to bypass God's given means of communion to take divine power and knowledge for themselves (like the ancient Egyptians - times 10)

Good point evangel. My friend and I got into that discussion and he pointed that out as well!
Why do you rhink God would work in such ways that would seem so much harder than they have to be. If he is almighty? - To gain faith?

[evangel]

To create believers (children) who will be completely dependent on him and who will worship him out of a natural outpouring of love towards him (We love Him because he first loves us) rather than simply bowing down because "we have to." I don't think it is "difficult," really. I think we make it difficult by our lack of faith... To me it's more like a strict father who disciplines his children because he wants to teach them to gain self-discipline and wisdom in the perfect and noble way rather than them finding some kind of short-cut that would only lend to our being spoiled, prideful, and ungrateful towards him.

[Joseph_Stalin]

Thanks for some of your comments but, not trying to be a jerk here, I was asking about theories on language creation, not about theories on god (although Howetzer made a good remark about divine intervention and communication) There are already half a dozen of those out there already.

And what AirRick said about relating words with meaning. I'm pretty sure it's a natural process of our brain to categorize things into texture and shape, as well as meaning.

[Evanescent]

Ya but i really don't care how it started as long as i can use it

[Joseph_Stalin]

Which reminds me how often langauge is taken for granted. :roll:

[Evanescent]

yea we don't give he cavemen and such enough credit or possibly we just forget about adam and eve

[evangel]

Originally posted by Joseph_Stalin
Thanks for some of your comments but, not trying to be a jerk here, I was asking about theories on language creation, not about theories on god

Actually, I was responding to Howetzer's question...

My theory on language creation is pretty simple really. God created it. I do believe that the ability to speak or communicate has something to do with the creation of matter since each time something is introduced into existence it is preceded by God's voice or God's "breath"

[Evanescent]

Yea that is my belief

[Demerzel]

Originally posted by Joseph_Stalin
Abstract things like \"Germany\" and \"Russia\" or names of countries
You insert vague hints. How did that type of thing come about?

Originally posted by Howetzer
Of course Adam & Eve. Who could most likey already communicate.
*points at apple* *points at mouth* *bites*

[Evanescent]

How would Kain and Able know how to Farm and Kill and such. I think we can safely say that it was created by god.Not to say anything about other religons but that is my belief.Plus I don't think it is wise to talk about religion here so we should stop.

[Joseph_Stalin]

My 'Alien' Theory...just tossing things around...
_______________________________________

Then there are those people who believe we were created by aliens or something; just genetic experimentation on a global scale.

If so, it could be that we were just to stupid to invent anything, and the 'divine intervention' is just that--aliens.

But that is not soo far-fetched if it took places thousands of years ago.

We could even be the "last hope" of these species. Imagine if we are those aliens (meaning their very dna structure and everything) except, you know, they were destroying each other in a major galatic war. And those guys were scientists or something. So they wanting to make sure they survived, but they didn't want us to suffer the same fate...

But perhaps they are failing...

_______________________________________

End of rambling.

Think about it though. Many have speculated that god is aliens (I think I said that right...), with all the 'pyramids developed by many cultures simultaneously, but with different materials and such. And that gods were just figures adapted from the animals and creatures around them to represent the strange things they saw--flashing lights, electromagnetic hovering, etc., etc.

Or that each 'nation' of aliens took a different culture to influence, so that their language was passed down to them.

Think.

[LewisM]

I think you've gotta filter in the fact that way, way, way, way, way back we were apes (if that kind of things floats your boat). I dont really know much about modern apes, but I know that they communicate with each other (with screeches or body language). I guess, as 'humans' developed, our brains developed, our language developed.

[Evanescent]

Some religous views rule out that theory.Unless your religon is scientist/apeman.

[simisu]

language is a pretty amazing thing...
music is a language as well!
and mathematics...

what makes one language diffrent from another is not really the actual words! its the grammer... the rules of it all!
what took the most time to develope was probably the grammer rather then the actual sounds or words that meant something specific...

[wer]

I just read the best seller book, The Bible Code II, and they deal with this. Issak Newtons jornal, was found by some guy in Isreal (they listed his name, but I'm to lazy to look it up :D ). He expected to find all kinds of stuff aqbout gravity, but instead he found the Bible Code. The Bible Code is a 3,500 year old code, that tells "prophecys". It's written in hebrew. But in the Bible Code it had "Code Key" next to "Mans Language". They are looking for the code key, supposibly in the dead sea, wich they think contains the first laguage used by man.

[bradybaker]

Ever notice how everyone talks to babies and infants in the same way?

- High pitch
- Extended vowel sounds
- Sometimes just utter nonsense

The theory currently held by many linguistics experts suggests that this is how language began. Primitive human mothers were forced to put their infants down beside them while attending to other tasks. This "baby talk" was simply a way to comfort the infant from a distance as opposed to comforting the child with physical action. Just give that a few million years and here we are.

I got this information from the July issue of Discover magazine....or Scientific American...it was one of them. I encourage everyone to check it out.

[Taosaur]

The "baby-talk" theory makes some sense, as does Joseph_Stalin's original post. Language probably developed from different sources, very slowly, proving useful to survival and being reinforced socially and genetically in each generation.

Regarding evolution and Genesis: I was never Christian, so I only got around to reading the Bible in college, for a literature class. All this time I'd heard people telling me that they disagreed with evolution based on this book, so I read the book and find that, as metaphysical allegory, it describes the big bang and evolution in remarkable detail, considering that Genesis was compiled 3-5 thousand years ago.

No, it doesn't mention Austrolepithecus or selfish genes, but what do you think it means that humanity's ancestors lived naked amongst the animals "in a garden" until they ate of "the Tree of Knowledge?" This disagrees with evolution? Even if you want to picture God whispering the text of the King James Bible word-for-word into Moses's ear, He couldn't have gone into much more detail without including one hell of a prologue, including the sum total of all scientific findings to date, plus everything we haven't learned yet. The Bible doesn't include a science book. It wasn't necessary--we're figuring that stuff out on our own. What it does include, like the stories of all religions, is a way of relating to the world around us on a day-to-day basis as human beings. God gives you these beautiful metaphors, leaves bones and pottery and whatnot scattered all over the earth, and still you tell Him He's lying.

I know, I'm arguing religion, it's pointless.

"Religious fundamentalism is fundamentally irreligious."
--Joseph Campbell

[Maystar]

i think too much emphasis is put on words these days....
i mean, check the dictionary out and all those elaborate words..... we can't even learn to keep out temper in a traffic jam.....

the start of language?
who knows???

you think that language is a miracle, just look at everything else around us.

doesn't it start to look quite abstract after a while?

[evangel]

it describes the big bang and evolution in remarkable detail, considering that Genesis was compiled 3-5 thousand years ago. *[/b]

It could also describe the alien theory, depending on how you interpret it. Anything can be READ INTO the Bible. Problem is that hermeneutics (rules of logical textual interpretation) and logic point to allegory being allegory and history being history (as in historical or \"literal\" factual accounts). If you study it as literature, of course it is only going to be that (literature) and nothing more to you.

... but what do you think it means that humanity's ancestors lived naked amongst the animals \"in a garden\" until they ate of \"the Tree of Knowledge?\"[/b]

Obviously, the author differentiated between man and \"the animals\" or else he would not have written such a distinction.

God gives you these beautiful metaphors, leaves bones and pottery and whatnot scattered all over the earth, and still you tell Him He's lying.[/b]

Ummm ... okay. :roll:

He "left" much more than metaphors (if you take time to study scripture - which is what I believe you're referring to when you say "metaphors") And it was man who left the pottery and "whatnot."

[Joseph_Stalin]

Originally posted by Maystar
doesn't it start to look quite abstract after a while?

Well, I start thinking, "Damn, who decided that we would call this a printer?" I can try to start calling it something else, but then, suddenly, Society Man comes and punches me in the face with an over-dramatic *POW* I am forced to call it a printer because everyone else does.


It's like when you repeat a word 50 times and it starts to sound funny. The word loses it meaning for a few seconds, doesn't it? Well take this into a point of a few thousand years and you get the picture. Translations aren't even the tip of the iceberg.

Repeat the word meaning about 50 times to yourself, and you'll understand. The word "meaning" loses its meaning. ;)