On Tue, 10 Oct 95 13:38:08 MDT you wrote:
[...]
>A couple of miscellanea from other posts by Jim Bell:
JB>It also depends on the ability use language and symbols. Evidence
>for this does not exist beyond 40,000 years ago or so. As the
>experts explain, there is no such thing as a primitive language. It
>is an all-or-nothing event. That event occurred recently in history.
JF>There is no such thing as a primitive language *now, among Homo
>sapiens*. None of your quotes gives any reason to believe that
>earlier humans such as Homo erectus could not have had a more
>primitive form of language. The fact that we start finding complex
>cultural artifacts from 40,000 years ago does not prove that language
>arose at the same time.
My daughter's university Biology textbook says:
"Homo erectus was prevalent throughout Eurasia and Africa during the
Pleistocene Epoch (1-3 MYA), also called the Ice Age, because of the
recurrent cold weather that produced the glaciers of this epoch. Homo
erectus had an average brain size of 1,000 cc, but the shape of the
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
skull indicates that the areas of the brain necessary for memory,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
intellect, and language were not well developed." (Mader S.,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
"Biology", 3rd Ed., Wm. C. Brown: Indiana, 1990, p435)
and
"Cro-Magnon (Homo sapiens sapiens) people lived about 40,000
years ago. Their brain capacity was similar to ours (about 1,360 cc).
They were such accomplished hunters that some researchers believe they
are responsible for the extinction, during the Upper Pleistocene
Epoch, of many, large mammalian animals, such as the giant sloth,
mammoth, saber- toothed tiger, and giant ox. Because language would
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
have facilitated their ability to hunt such large animals, it's quite
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
possible that meaningful speech began at this time...Cro-Magnon people
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
had an advanced form of stone technology that included the making of
compound tools; the stone was fitted to a wooden handle. They were
the first to throw spears, enabling them to kill animals from a
distance. And they were the first to make blades, knifelike objects
that do not appear to have been chipped from a stone....they sculpted
many small figurines. They also painted beautiful drawings of animals
on cave walls in Spain and France. Perhaps, they, too, had a
religion, and these artistic endeavors were an important part of their
form of worship. If Cro-Magnon people did cause the extinction of
many types of animals, it may account for the transition from a
hunting economy to an agricultural economy about 12,000 to 15,000
years ago." (Mader, p437)
There is evidence of rapid transitions here. Homo erectus existed 1-3
million years ago (or .3 - 1.8 MYA Hominid FAQ), had an average brain
size of 1,000 cc, but presumably could not speak meaningfully because
"the areas of the brain necessary for memory, intellect, and language
were not well developed." (Mader, p435). Neanderthal Man existed
100,000 years ago (Mader, p435-436) or possibly 200,0000 years ago (G.
Morton, J. Foley), had a large enough brain size and may have had the
necessary Broca's brain equipment. They made tools, had art, and
seemed to have had a religion of sorts. Cro-Magnon Man (Homo sapiens
sapiens) lived only about 40,000 years ago. They had a similar brain
capacity to modern man. They were the first to have "meaningful
speech". Their stone tool technology was "advanced". Their art was
"beautiful". They transited from a hunting economy to an agricultural
economy only "about 12,000 to 15,000 years ago." (Mader, p437)
Homo erectus and Neanderthal man might not have overlapped, or if they
did, it was very brief, necessitating a rapid speciation and
extinction, if they were related by descent. H. sapiens neanderthalis
and H. sapiens sapiens, may have only overlapped for 5 thousand years,
again a rapid speciation and extinction, again only if they were
related. As to tools and art there was apparently another rapid
transition. Cro-Magnon Man's tools and art were from the outset
superior to Nanderthal Man's. Finally, only H. sapiens sapiens began
farming, in a geological split-microsecond ago.
Indeed, if the "Out of Africa" view is correct, then Neandertals are
an isolated side branch on the human family tree and modern humans
would not be the genetic descendants of the Neandertals. This is
supported both by the "mitochondrial Eve" molecular biological theory
which sees modern humans stemming from a small H. erectus population
only 200,000 years ago and replacing Neandertals and Homo erectus.
Palaeontological support for this replacement theory is in the oldest
anatomically modern human fossils found at Qafzeh in Israel dated at
90,000 y.a. (H. Valladas, et all, Nature 331, 18 February 1988,
614-16). Lubenow points out: "This date not only would imply the very
early appearance of modern humans in the Near East, but it also would
imply a 60,000 year period when Neandertals and modern humans lived
together without any genetic exchange or hybridization....Stephen Jay
Gould (...Natural History June 1988)...and Chris Stringer (...Nature
331, 18 February 1988, 565) even suggest that the Neandertals be
removed from our species (sapiens) and once again given their earlier
designation Homo neanderthalensis." (Lubenow, p68).
Of course, if this is correct, then H. sapiens sprang directly from H.
erectus, with no known intermediates. It would indeed be an
"explosion", on a par with the Big Bang and Cambrian explosion.
JB>But this view seems at odds with the following:
>"This capacity for language seems to be, in the evolutionary scale, a
>relatively recent, sudden, and explosive development. A few years
>ago, it was thought to have begun to happen with Homo erectus perhaps
>a million years ago. Now, as Julian Jaynes at Princeton, among
>others, believes, it appears to have occurred in Neanderthal man as
>recently as the fourth glaciation, which lasted from about 75,000 to
>35,000 years ago." [Percy, "Is a Theory of Man Possible?"]
JF>You treat this as if it was fact, when it is just one opinion, and
>probably very much a minority opinion. I think most scientists would
>attribute language to Homo erectus. After all they hunted and had stone
>tools and fire, I find it very hard to believe that they did not have
>some language.
Perhaps it is not such a "minority opinion" as you think? My
daughter's anthropology textbook says:
"Could the Zhoukoudian erectus/ speak? Their hunting and
technological skills would suggest they possessed some kind of
symbolic communication. If the skull was, in fact, used as a symbol
as we have speculated, then symbolic communication is even more
suggestive. However, this is a subject on which there is little
agreement Some anthropologists argue that the tools used by H. erectus
assumes speech capability; others study the evolution of the skull and
how the brain (e.g., Broca's area) was affected, and conclude speech
began quite early in hominid evolution (Falk, 1987). Still others
believe that speech did not originate until the Upper Paleolithic, or
at least cannot be proved until then (Davidson and Noble, 1989). At
this point, we agree with Falk when she says, "Unfortunately, what it
is going to take to settle the debate about when language originated
in hominids is a time machine. Until one becomes available, we can
only speculate about this fascinating and important question" (1989,
p. 141)" (Nelson H. & Jurmain R., "Introduction To Physical
Anthropology", West Publishing Company: St. Paul, Fifth Edition,
1991, p483)
JF>In addition, we have the fossil evidence of Broca's region, nearly
>2 million years ago. No, we can't *prove* it was associated with
>language, but it's a reasonable inference. In short, we have no
>evidence that language arose 40,000 years ago, and some evidence
against it.
H. erectus may have had "some language" it may haved only
"rudimentary" as you yourself say of H. habilis in your Homid FAQ:
"Homo habilis...The bulge of Broca's area, essential for speech, is
visible in habilis brain casts, indicates it was probably capable of
rudimentary speech." (Jim Foley, "Fossil Hominids", Jan. 10, 1995).
Such "rudimentary speech" may have been "one sound/ one meaning":
"To understand why humans are so intelligent, we need to understand
how our ancestors remodeled the apes' symbolic repertoire and enhanced
it by inventing syntax. Wild chimpanzees use about three dozen
different vocalizations to convey about three dozen different
meanings. They may repeat a sound to intensify its meaning, but they
do not string together three sounds to add a new word to their
vocabulary. We humans also use about three dozen vocalizations,
called phonemes. Yet only their combinations have content: we string
together meaningless sounds to make meaningful words. No one has yet
explained how our ancestors got over the hump of replacing "one sound/
one meaning" with a sequential combinatorial system of meaningless
phonemes, but it is probably one of the most important advances that
took place during ape-to-human evolution. Furthermore, human language
uses strings of strings, such as the word phrases that make up this
sentence." (Calvin W.H., "The Emergence of Intelligence", Scientific
American, October 1994, p80).
Also, having just a Broca's area is not enough:
"In contrast to animals, man possesses several language centres in the
dominant brain hemisphere...The foot of the third frontal convolution
of the brain cortex, called Broca's area, is involved with motor
elaboration of all movements for expressive language. Its destruction
through disease or injury causes expressive aphasia, the inability to
speak or write. The posterior third of the upper temporal convolution
represents Wernicke's area of receptive speech comprehension. Damage
to this area produces receptive aphasia, the inability to understand
what is spoken or written as if the patient had never known that
language." ("Encyclopaedia Britannica", 15th edition, 1984, Benton,
Chicago, 17:485).
What this means is that only when *the full system* was in place could
the ability to speak, write and understand, begin. This is a problem
for the Blind Watchmaker, because a Broca's area would be useless
without a Wernicke's area, not to mention the physical voice
machinery (eg. larynx, etc).
I agree with Jim Bell that the origin of H. sapiens in general, and
human language in particular, was explosive. The figure of three-fold
human brain expansion, in terms of brain size, has been quoted, but
Calvin claims it was a *fourfold* expansion, in terms of the cerebral
cortex area:
"The two-millimeter-thick cerebral cortex is the part of the brain
most involved with making novel associations. Ours is extensively
wrinkled, but were it flattened, it would occupy four sheets of typing
paper. A chimpanzee's cortex would fit on one sheet, a monkey's on a
postcard, a rat's on a stamp." (Calvin W.H., "The Emergence of
Intelligence", Scientific American, October 1994, p79).
and
"Although Africa was cooling and drying as upright posture was
becoming established four million years ago, brain size did not change
much. The fourfold expansion of the hominid brain did not start until
the ice ages began, 2.5 million years ago." (Calvin, p80).
Gould says:
"The human brain is now about three times larger than that of
Australopithecus. This increase has often been called the most rapid
and most important event in the history of evolution." (Gould S.J.,
"Ever Since Darwin", Penguin, 1977, p183)
and
"Evolutionary increase in human brain size...The slope is the highest
ever calculated for an evolutionary sequence...The graph indicates
that our brain has increased much more rapidly than any prediction
based on compensations for body size would allow." (Gould, p184)
According to Stanley:
"It appears that our own species, in particular, is the product of a
remarkable event of quantum speciation." (Stanley S.M., "The New
Evolutionary Timetable, 1991, p139)
Regards.
Stephen
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| Stephen Jones | ,--_|\ | sjones@iinet.net.au |
| 3 Hawker Ave | / Oz \ | sjones@odyssey.apana.org.au |
| Warwick 6024 |->*_,--\_/ | http://www.iinet.net.au/~sjones/ |
| Perth, Australia | v | phone +61 9 448 7439 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------