How did languages originate?
>>Since we are all one human species, every language in the world is related either directly or indirectly to some other language.
>>I don't think so. Common origin of humans doesn't mean common origin of language.
>>Not necessarily. Many linguists believe that children are capable of generating entirely novel languages on their own.
>>It's been proven that children are able to develop their own languages that aren't related to their own. Twins develop 'secret languages' all the time.
What do you think?
I hope to one day carry out such an experiment with some children.
I will keep them isolated without the influence of a language.
It will be similar to te Truman show. I will but their exploits on television and watch how they develop language. Then , at the age of 20 I will release them into the world as part of a comedy show.
I will win the Nobel Prize.
They probably wouldn't, they would communicate through signs and rough sounds (like cavemen) after all it took us a hell lot of time to develop a real language, and with the time it evolved into all the modern ones that we have today.
That depends on what you consider a "real language."
Sumerian was spoken at least as early as the 4th milenneum BC, perhaps earlier. Surely it was descended from something which in turn was descended from something, etc. with rather complex (albeit probably regular) grammar.
Check out "The Unfolding of Language" by Guy Deutscher. It's really fascinating, and a fun read (as far as linguistics books go).
Tower of Babel + millenia of evolution.
MadScientist, who will take care of them? One time I heard about an experiment where the adult caretakers of some children dressed up in gorilla suits, or maybe that was just a story.
We will drop food into the cage from above.
The presumed fact that isolated children are capable of developping their own language is not relevant at all to the current subject. How on earth can one suppose that such a fragile troop of ancient humans could have survived and transferred their invented language to their offsprings? For me it is obvious that all human languages have a common ancestor, just as all members of Homo sapiens sapiens have common ancestors who lived a couple of hundreds of thousand years ago. This means only that modern linguistics has no means to investigate the origin of languages, in harsh contrast to molecular biology which has been able to provide ample evidence of our biological history.
If you can say "Give me that banana, or I'll kill you," you don't have to take your hand off your weapon to point...
If you believe the Biblical story, then languages were a kind of punishment. Many students in high school have agreed about the punishment part even if they are atheists...lol.
lol good point K.T. I can blame God for my B in third year French... :-)
You may want to blame our ambitious ziggurat-building ancestors instead. I think the languages are a good thing. Imagine how quickly we would have destroyed the earth if we continued on our path. Not being able to communicate probably slowed us down a bit. Some think that this is how Chinese writing originated. They drew pictures because they were unable to communicate verbally. Interesting theory.
Stupid theory! Hahaha! Did Kent Hovind make that one up?
I didn't even know who Kent Hovind was when I read your message. No, I've heard about this idea for years. It makes sense in a way. If you have a common culture, but not a common language, pictures work to convey the necessary information.