----- Original Message -----
From: Glen Gordon
To: nostratic@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 8:39 PM
Subject: Re: [nostratic] Re: language origin

>If one rejects a Darwinian paradigm and instead views both biological and
>psychological studies (both mind and body) in a similar fashion, then Ernst
>Haeckel's embryo development can
>accompany "brain science" as illustrated by McClean as well as by
>Wilder Penfield.

All you're doing, Gerry, is cloaking your rebuttals in a series
of sesquipedalian strands that make the subject seem far more
library-dependant than it really is. The matter is simple and
self-evident and doesn't require special postmodern terms like
"embryo development" or "brain science".
GRW:  Aw come on Glennie.  Sesquipedalian strands -- where did you dig that one up?  I think we have the perfect example of the pot calling the kettle black!   Look up Haeckel, McClean and Wilder Penfield in your favorite brower (I use Google) and see what happens?  Then if you become curious, you might see what Triune Brain reveals. 

A slow evolution of language is the ONLY explanation. In contrast,
a sudden, spontaneous origin to human language is as likely as
spontaneous combustion. It takes _two_ people to speak but the
genesis of language requires some previous communication to
begin with, bringing us to an immediate paradox. So anything other
than an evolution of language is entirely counterlogical (but sells
many books to be later quoted by eager book beavers like yourself).
GRW:  Yes, a slow evolution is a good explanation.  But when does it begin for human language?  Language constantly changes as new vocabulary is added while grammatical structure changes from useage.  Why not begin the "origin" of human language with a small group (theoretical of course).  The question that still remains foremost is when did the first group begin speaking?

Perhaps you should peel the onions... I'll just make some instant
soup instead. The former cooking activity is fun, even romantic;
the latter practical.
GRW:  If it's practical you're after, why not open a can?