Chimps'r' not us: latest brain/language development theory (Introduction)

by dhw, Tuesday, August 06, 2019, 13:45 (1731 days ago) @ David Turell

QUOTE: In other words, by 600,000 years ago, the number of distinct verbalizations used for communication must have been on par with the number of words in modern languages.

According to this, the apparatus was already being used by pre-sapiens for communication 600,000 years ago, so what was all that nonsense about H. sapiens not using it for 100,000 years? Language of whatever kind is ALWAYS necessary and always in use!

QUOTE: "On the other hand, artifacts signifying modern imagination, such as composite figurative arts, elaborate burials, bone needles with an eye, and construction of dwellings arose not earlier than 70,000 years ago. The half million-year-gap between the acquisition of the modern speech apparatus and modern imagination has baffled scientists for decades. (DAVID’s bold)

DAVID: Once again new research supports my view of mechanism first and use second. Modern H. sapiens appeared 315,000 year ago with a large brain, a modern speech apparatus but only a primitive language. Please note the nuance in my bold above. The large brain and the speech apparatus allowed simplistic speech, but with time and practice over 245,000 years we finally achieved the modern language and speech we now experience.

I don’t know why you’ve bolded it. Nobody knows why there was a cultural leap some 70,000 years ago (or whenever), but there is no argument over the obvious fact that the apparatus was in place approx. 300,000 years ago (or maybe even 600,000), the apparatus was always in use, and language has evolved from the comparatively simple to the extremely complex. Where we disagree is over your claim that the apparatus was dabbled by God in advance of any need for it, whereas I propose that whenever it changed, it did so in response to pre-sapiens'need for more complex forms of communication, just as the pre-whale’s legs changed to flippers when required to perform new actions. On this we shall have to differ.