Language is a complex concept about which many philosophers are still curious about how it formed and evolved. The study of primates plays a large role in the evolution of modern-day language. A common curiosity regarding language evolution is whether or not the fundamentals of language are innate in humans, and if so to what extent could they innate. The interesting, but also frustrating part about studying where language came from is that there is no concrete evidence that can explain exactly when it arose. There are many different theories on when and how it evolved. Current theories are typically based on anatomy of the brain, anatomy of the mouth and throat, social evolution, and comparisons between nonverbal humans and other primates. This research will discuss a few theories that have been discussed for language evolution.

Humans are the only animals that use language in both a relevant and communicative way. There is no proven time period in which language was indicated to have evolved or fully developed, however research done with primates can give us a general idea of when human language formed. Language had to have developed between the time genus Homo split away from other Homo habilis primates about 2.5 million years ago and the modern-day behavior by the first human, Homo sapiens around 50,000 years ago (Harley, 2010). To find a more specific time frame research and findings regarding ancestors during this time will now be discussed.

Evidence showing when humans developed the tools to articulate speech as we do today can give a more specific period of time. 2 million years ago, fossils from great apes showed to have a developed Broca’s area, which plays an essential role in speech production. However, it is possible that this area of the brain was used for something other than speech production (Cantalupa & Hopkins, 2001).

Neanderthals were close relatives to humans. They were originally believed to be unable to produce speech sounds based on the structure of their brains, but more current research suggests otherwise. A Neanderthal’s hyoid bone was discovered. This is the bone that supports the base of tongue, which suggests that Neanderthals were capable of some sort of speech (Arsenberg et al., 2007). More research on Neanderthals found a similar gene to the FOXP2 gene. This gene is believed to be important for speech production (Krause et al., 2007). Also, Harley (2010) states “Neanderthals used tools, buried their dead, controlled fire, lived in shelters, and possibly might even have practiced rituals and religion and made music”. For Neanderthals to have these abilities and practices, it is likely that they also had some form of verbal communication.

The above research makes claims that specific ancestors or were pre-linguistic were capable of producing sophisticated speech sounds. However, other theories suggest that there is a difference between a language-ready brain and a language-using brain. This theory explains that although other primates developed biologically to be capable of producing speech, it took many years for a cultural evolvement for this complex communication system to be possible. Brains changed from language ready to language using (Arbib, 2017). Nonhuman primates had limited, but voluntary vocal learning abilities. Yet, facial expressions were an innate part of the communication system. When vocals began to change based on survival it would make sense that language evolved from the social and survival techniques used by these ancestors. This would allow for new brain uses and mechanisms to be used in these species (Arbib, 2017). This theory supports the next theory that will be discussed next.

It is believed that language did not just appear at once, but rather, that prior- cognitive abilities helped evolve and develop modern day language. For example, baboons have a sophisticated social knowledge and many properties are shared with modern human language. When communicating, baboons use different screams to symbol different meanings, such as threats and fear (Seyfarth et al., 2005). One property that relates to baboons social knowledge and language is representation. Their knowledge is representational because when a baboon hears another baboon vocalize, specific information is acquired about an interaction. Also, there are discrete values in their social cognition that form a hierarchy structure. Identity, sex, matrilineal kin group, and dominance rank are all values that play a role for baboons socially. These traits form a social hierarchy that is ranked within and across families. When a baboon screams, only higher placed baboons produce threat screams and baboons or are ranked lower produce screams of fear. These screams have specific tones that distinguish the meanings (Seyfarth et al., 2005). Lastly, their social abilities are rule-governed because they can recognize that particular vocalizations follow certain rules of direction and that it should comply with the hierarchy (Seyfarth et al., 2005). This information suggests that the internal properties and functions of language could have stemmed from ancestors that did not have language abilities. Results from this research support the “social origins” hypothesis. This hypothesis argues language representation evolved from our ancestors due to their social relations.

Infant humans and nonhuman primates communicate very similarly. Both use gestures to communicate. In addition, even human adults use gestures while communicating and using spoken language. Since gesturing is common between all three of these groups, it suggests that some aspects of language could be innate and that gestures lead to modern day language. A gestural origin of language theory is widely believed to be a valid theory for the evolution of language. Chimpanzees of all ages used intentional communication gestures over a variety of contexts (Liebal & Call et al., 2011).

Also, it has been proven that humans that were isolated, and were never exposed to a certain language, have the abilities to form their own language using home signs. Senghas and Coppola (2001) researched a group of deaf Nicaraguan individuals who were not exposed to a formal modern day structured language. In their study, the participants watched a short video of a cartoon and then were recorded signing the story to another deaf individual. The signing rates were then computed. Results from this study showed that child learners were developing Nicaraguan Sign Language (Senghas & Coppola, 2001). Further information from this study showed that Nicaraguan Sign Language developed into a more complex language through interactions with other individuals using it. Young children learned from their elders, and results showed the younger people were exposed to the language, the more they could grasp and understand (Senghas & Coppola, 2001). This supports the idea that language can be somewhat innate and effected greatly by environmental factors.

In conclusion, there are many biological and environmental factors that have led to the development of complex modern language that we know and understand today. This topic is still an interest to many researchers and still remains to be a bit of mystery, but it is clear that there are multiple different factors that led to language as a formal and useful communication system. Understanding the relevant theories previously discussed can give us a better idea of how language is possible and what are the important components that relate to it.

References:

Arbib, M. A. (2017). Toward the language-ready brain: Biological evolution and primate comparisons. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 24(1), 142-150. doi:10.3758/s13423-016-1098-2

Arsenberg, B., Tillier, A.M., Vandermeersch, B., Duday, H., Schepartz, L.A., & Rak, Y.. (1989) A middle palaeolithic human hyoid bone. Nature.

Cantalupo, C., & Hopkins, W.D. (2001). Asymmetric Broca’s area in great apes. Nature, 415, 505.

Harley, T. A. (2010). “Talking the talk: language, psychology and science”.

Krause, J., Lalueza-Fox, C., Orlando, L., Enard, W., Green, R.E., Bubaro, H.A., et al. (2007), The derived FOXP2 variant of modern humans was shared withNeandertals. Current Biology, 17.

Liebal, K., & Call, J. (2011). The origins of non-human primates manual gestures. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences,367(1585), 118-128. doi:10.1098/rstb.2011.0044

Senghas, A., & Coppola, M. (2001). Children Creating Language: How Nicaraguan Sign Language Acquired a Spatial Grammar. Psychological Science, 12(4), 323-   328. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00359

Seyfarth, R., Cheney, D., & Bergman, T. (2005). Primate Social Cognition And The Cognitive Precursors Of Language. TRENDS in Cognitive Science, 9(6).