Gerry asked
> I find your idea fascinating. Why do you think Language might
> have begun as a polygenic occurance? I wish to explore this idea
first.
I tend to agree with the ideas expressed at
http://www.zompist.com/lang
org.htm
In his analysis of the possible pathways that led to the evolution of
language Mark Rosefelder suggests that language was not obtained via a
once and for all sudden genetic "jump" up from the Apes to Homo
sapiens. Instead there must have been a great deal of development via
intermediary stages, for instance in the separation of subject from
object, in the evolution of verb structures, in the ability to
interrogate, or give precision about directions etc. Some of these
steps would have given the possessors clear linguistic advantage,
others would not have much effect at all, until combined with some
other feature. It seems highly unlikely that all of the
"breakthroughs" would have been confined to just one (H.sapiens)
lineage. As H.erectus seemed to have a similar tendency towards
encephalisation whether in Africa, Europe, Java or China, it is quite
probable that innovations occurred in many areas, and were spread as
groups contacted and communicated. Thus rather than a simple
phylogenic tree such as I proposed for the origins of modern languages
(based on Cavalli Sforza), we have a tapestry or intertwining vine-like
pattern by which languages developed. (In fact this intertwining vine
like pattern is probably a more accurate representation of language
development (eg from PIE) than the simple trees we normally draw).
> I also agree with what you say about certain events being transposed
> into a generic event that lends itself to legend and exaggeration.
> After all, all languages originated at the Tower of Babel, all folks
> originated from a common Eve, and all of us Christians are derived
from
> Adam and Eve. Anyhow, that's what "historical sources say". And
> anyhow, what's your take on these issues?
My take on these are that they are attempts to explain and give
meaning. Adam comes from the Hebrew pun on the words mening both
"human" and "ground". This pun seems to have been widespread
throughout the ancient middle east, where constructions of humanity
from clay (by Khnum the Egyptian potter god, or by Enki - mixing clay
with blood of the slain god Kingsi) were widely found. Eve, as "hawah"
was the "mother of all living" and was originally a Goddess. The
Sumerian Goddess, Ninhursag (Lady of the Mountain) was also called
"mother of all living", and in one of her guises was known as "Ninti"
Lady of the Rib. The Sumerian pun seems to have been the origin of the
myth of Eve being constructed from Adam's rib. The attempt to
construct an explanation that this was for Eve to be the companion and
helper of Adam shows that the Hebrew editor did not understand the
earlier Sumerian story, nor the Sumerian pun on "Lady Rib" or "All
Mother".
> I also like your implication that Language may not have arisen from a
> common source. Do you have any facts to present?
Recent work suggests that there were two waves of erectus out of Africa
- the first (by 1.5 million years or thereabouts) moved east through
the connection between the African and Oriental Biome regions. As this
movement was horizontal it would not have led to great changes being
required in lifestyles. The Asian "Chopper" technologies seem to have
evolved straight from an Oldowan stone tradition. A second movement
out of Africa of Acheulian stone tool users about 800,000 years ago
carried Acheulian tools into Europe and Asia as far as India. This
movement would have been much more "vertical" crossing numerous
climatic regions as it left Africa and entered Europe. As Heidelberg
humanity, they seem ultimately to have evolved into Neanderthals, which
seem physiologically very adapted to a cold environment. Finally we
have the "out of Africa" scenario again for Homo sapiens, with one wave
for South and East Asia and Australia (leaving Africa maybe 75,000
years ago and again heading east) and a second much later one (leaving
Africa 40,000 years ago and again heading north).
I see the later group as that which spoke Glen's Dene-Caucasian
languages (which I refer to as SCAN). This would seem to be a single
sourced language family that did split as it moved into the high
Eurasian region. But whether Homo had a fully developed language as it
moved East is much less clear. I would suspect that the sea voyage to
Australasia out of the Sahul region would require full linguistic
skills, but whether this was finally developed in situ in Asia, or
whether it was fully developed in Africa first - I think we still don't
have enough evidence for a jusgement call - despite Greenberg and
Ruhlen.
Just my personal cut on the matter.
Hope this helps
John