Proto-Human language

Last updated
Proto-Human
Proto-Sapiens, Proto-World
(widely rejected)
Reconstruction ofAll extant languages
Era Paleolithic

The Proto-Human language (also Proto-Sapiens, Proto-World) is the hypothetical direct genetic predecessor of all the world's spoken languages. [1]

Contents

The concept is speculative and not amenable to analysis in historical linguistics. It presupposes a monogenetic origin of language, i.e. the derivation of all natural languages from a single origin, presumably at some time in the Middle Paleolithic period. As the predecessor of all extant languages spoken by modern humans ( Homo sapiens ), Proto-Human language as hypothesised would not necessarily be ancestral to any hypothetical Neanderthal language.

Terminology

There is no generally accepted term for this concept. Most treatments of the subject do not include a name for the language under consideration (e.g. Bengtson and Ruhlen [2] ). The terms Proto-World and Proto-Human [3] are in occasional use. Merritt Ruhlen used the term Proto-Sapiens.

History of the idea

The first serious scientific attempt to establish the reality of monogenesis was that of Alfredo Trombetti, in his book L'unità d'origine del linguaggio, published in 1905. [4] : 263  [5] Trombetti estimated that the common ancestor of existing languages had been spoken between 100,000 and 200,000 years ago. [6] : 315 

Monogenesis was dismissed by many linguists in the late 19th and early 20th centuries when the doctrine of the polygenesis of the human races and their languages was widely popularised. [7] : 190 

The best-known supporter of monogenesis in America in the mid-20th century was Morris Swadesh. [4] : 215  He pioneered two important methods for investigating deep relationships between languages, lexicostatistics and glottochronology.

In the second half of the 20th century, Joseph Greenberg produced a series of large-scale classifications of the world's languages. These were and are controversial but widely discussed. Although Greenberg did not produce an explicit argument for monogenesis, all of his classification work was geared toward this end. As he stated: [8] : 337  "The ultimate goal is a comprehensive classification of what is very likely a single language family."

Notable American advocates of linguistic monogenesis include Merritt Ruhlen, John Bengtson, and Harold Fleming.

Date and location

The first concrete attempt to estimate the date of the hypothetical ancestor language was that of Alfredo Trombetti, [6] : 315  who concluded it was spoken between 100,000 and 200,000 years ago, or close to the first emergence of Homo sapiens .

It is uncertain or disputed whether the earliest members of Homo sapiens had fully developed language. Some scholars link the emergence of language proper (out of a proto-linguistic stage that may have lasted considerably longer) to the development of behavioral modernity toward the end of the Middle Paleolithic or at the beginning of the Upper Paleolithic, roughly 50,000 years ago. Thus, in the opinion of Richard Klein, the ability to produce complex speech only developed some 50,000 years ago (with the appearance of modern humans or Cro-Magnons). Johanna Nichols (1998) [9] argued that vocal languages must have begun diversifying in our species at least 100,000 years ago.

In 2011, an article in the journal Science proposed an African origin of modern human languages. [10] It was suggested that human language predates the out-of-Africa migrations of 50,000 to 70,000 years ago and that language might have been the essential cultural and cognitive innovation that facilitated human colonization of the globe. [11]

In Perreault and Mathew (2012), [12] an estimate of the time of the first emergence of human language was based on phonemic diversity. This is based on the assumption that phonemic diversity evolves much more slowly than grammar or vocabulary, slowly increasing over time (but reduced among small founding populations). The largest phoneme inventories are found among African languages, while the smallest inventories are found in South America and Oceania, some of the last regions of the globe to be colonized. The authors used data from the colonization of Southeast Asia to estimate the rate of increase in phonemic diversity. Applying this rate to African languages, Perreault and Mathew (2012) arrived at an estimated age of 150,000 to 350,000 years, compatible with the emergence and early dispersal of H. sapiens. The validity of this approach has been criticized as flawed. [13]

Claimed characteristics

Speculation on the "characteristics" of Proto-World is limited to linguistic typology, i.e. the identification of universal features shared by all human languages, such as grammar (in the sense of "fixed or preferred sequences of linguistic elements"), and recursion, but beyond this, nothing can be known of it. [14]

Christopher Ehret has hypothesized that Proto-Human had a very complex consonant system, including clicks. [15]

A few linguists, such as Merritt Ruhlen, have suggested the application of mass comparison and internal reconstruction (cf. Babaev 2008). Several linguists have attempted to reconstruct the language, while many others[ who? ] reject this as fringe science. [16]

Vocabulary

Ruhlen tentatively traces several words back to the ancestral language, based on the occurrence of similar sound-and-meaning forms in languages across the globe. Bengtson and Ruhlen identify 27 "global etymologies". [2] The following table lists a selection of these forms: [17]

Language
phylum		Who?What?WaterHairSmell / Nose
Nilo-Saharan nadenkisumčona
Afroasiatic k(w)maak’wasommsuna
Dravidian yāvyānīrupūṭačuṇṭu
Eurasiatic kwimiakwāpunčesnā
Dené–Caucasian kwimaʔoχwatshāmsuŋ
Indo-Pacific  minaokhoutusɨnna
Amerind kunemanaakwāsummečuna
Source:. [17] : 103  The symbol V stands for "a vowel whose precise character is unknown" (ib. 105).

Based on these correspondences, Ruhlen [17] : 105  lists these roots for the ancestor language:

Selected items from Bengtson's and Ruhlen's (1994) list of 27 "global etymologies": [2]

No.RootGloss
4čun(g)a‘nose; to smell’
10ku(n)‘who?’
26tsuma‘hair’
27ʔaq’wa‘water’

Syntax

There are competing theories about the basic word order of the hypothesized Proto-Human. These usually assume subject-initial ordering because it is the most common globally. Derek Bickerton proposes SVO (subject-verb-object) because this word order (like its mirror OVS) helps differentiate between the subject and object in the absence of evolved case markers by separating them with the verb. [18]

By contrast, Talmy Givón hypothesizes that Proto-Human had SOV (subject-object-verb), based on the observation that many old languages (e.g., Sanskrit, Latin) had dominant SOV, but the proportion of SVO has increased over time. On such a basis, it is suggested that human languages are shifting globally from the original SOV to the modern SVO. Givón bases his theory on the empirical claim that word-order change mostly results in SVO and never in SOV. [19]

Exploring Givón's idea in their 2011 paper, Murray Gell-Mann and Merritt Ruhlen stated that shifts to SOV are also attested. However, when these are excluded, the data indeed support Givón's claim. The authors justified the exclusion by pointing out that the shift to SOV is unexceptionally a matter of borrowing the order from a neighbouring language. Moreover, they argued that, since many languages have already changed to SVO, a new trend towards VSO and VOS ordering has arisen. [20]

Harald Hammarström reanalysed the data. In contrast to such claims, he found that a shift to SOV is in every case the most common type, suggesting that there is, rather, an unchanged universal tendency towards SOV regardless of the way that languages change and that the relative increase of SVO is a historical effect of European colonialism. [21] In conclusion, it is the best guess that the first language had SOV—because it is generally the most common—but it could have had any set order or no dominant order.

Criticism

Many linguists reject the methods used to determine these forms. Several areas of criticism are raised with the methods Ruhlen and Gell-Mann employ. The essential basis of these criticisms is that the words being compared do not show common ancestry; the reasons for this vary. One is onomatopoeia: for example, the suggested root for 'smell' listed above, *čuna, may simply be a result of many languages employing an onomatopoeic word that sounds like sniffing, snuffling, or smelling. Another is the taboo quality of certain words. Lyle Campbell points out that many established proto-languages do not contain an equivalent word for *putV 'vulva' because of how often such taboo words are replaced in the lexicon, and notes that it "strains credibility to imagine" that a proto-World form of such a word would survive in many languages.

Using the criteria that Bengtson and Ruhlen employ to find cognates to their proposed roots, Lyle Campbell finds seven possible matches to their root for woman *kuna in Spanish, including cónyuge 'wife, spouse', chica 'girl', and cana 'old woman (adjective)'. He then goes on to show how what Bengtson and Ruhlen would identify as reflexes of *kuna cannot possibly be related to a proto-World word for woman. Cónyuge, for example, comes from the Latin root meaning 'to join', so its origin had nothing to do with the word 'woman'; chica is related to a Latin word meaning 'insignificant thing'; cana comes from the Latin word for 'white', and again shows a history unrelated to the word 'woman'. [22] Campbell asserts is that these types of problems are endemic to the methods used by Ruhlen and others.

Some linguists question the very possibility of tracing language elements so far back into the past. Campbell notes that given the time elapsed since the origin of human language, every word from that time would have been replaced or changed beyond recognition in all languages today. Campbell harshly criticizes efforts to reconstruct a Proto-human language, saying "the search for global etymologies is at best a hopeless waste of time, at worst an embarrassment to linguistics as a discipline, unfortunately confusing and misleading to those who might look to linguistics for understanding in this area." [23]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Joseph Greenberg</span> American linguist (1915–2001)

Joseph Harold Greenberg was an American linguist, known mainly for his work concerning linguistic typology and the genetic classification of languages.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Nostratic languages</span> Proposed superfamily of Eurasian and African languages

Nostratic is a hypothetical language macrofamily including many of the language families of northern Eurasia. Though a historically important proposal, in a contemporary context it is typically considered a fringe theory. Although the exact composition varies based on proponent, it typically comprises Kartvelian, Indo-European and Uralic languages; some languages from the similarly controversial Altaic family; the Afroasiatic languages; as well as the Dravidian languages.

Linguistic typology is a field of linguistics that studies and classifies languages according to their structural features to allow their comparison. Its aim is to describe and explain the structural diversity and the common properties of the world's languages. Its subdisciplines include, but are not limited to phonological typology, which deals with sound features; syntactic typology, which deals with word order and form; lexical typology, which deals with language vocabulary; and theoretical typology, which aims to explain the universal tendencies.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Na-Dene languages</span> Indigenous North American language family

Na-Dene is a family of Native American languages that includes at least the Athabaskan languages, Eyak, and Tlingit languages. Haida was formerly included, but is now considered doubtful. By far the most widely spoken Na-Dene language today is Navajo.

In historical linguistics, the homeland or Urheimat of a proto-language is the region in which it was spoken before splitting into different daughter languages. A proto-language is the reconstructed or historically-attested parent language of a group of languages that are genetically related.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Yeniseian languages</span> Language family of central Siberia

The Yeniseian languages are a family of languages that are spoken by the Yeniseian people in the Yenisei River region of central Siberia. As part of the proposed Dené–Yeniseian language family, the Yeniseian languages have been argued to be part of "the first demonstration of a genealogical link between Old World and New World language families that meets the standards of traditional comparative-historical linguistics". The only surviving language of the group today is Ket.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Amerind languages</span> Hypothetical language macrofamily of the Americas

Amerind is a hypothetical higher-level language family proposed by Joseph Greenberg in 1960 and elaborated by his student Merritt Ruhlen. Greenberg proposed that all of the indigenous languages of the Americas belong to one of three language families, the previously established Eskimo–Aleut and Na–Dene, and with everything else—otherwise classified by specialists as belonging to dozens of independent families—as Amerind. Due to a large number of methodological flaws in the 1987 book Language in the Americas, the relationships he proposed between these languages have been rejected by the majority of historical linguists as spurious.

Mass comparison is a method developed by Joseph Greenberg to determine the level of genetic relatedness between languages. It is now usually called multilateral comparison. Mass comparison has been referred to as a "methodological deception" and is rejected by most linguists, and its continued use is primarily restricted to fringe linguistics.

A linguistic universal is a pattern that occurs systematically across natural languages, potentially true for all of them. For example, All languages have nouns and verbs, or If a language is spoken, it has consonants and vowels. Research in this area of linguistics is closely tied to the study of linguistic typology, and intends to reveal generalizations across languages, likely tied to cognition, perception, or other abilities of the mind. The field originates from discussions influenced by Noam Chomsky's proposal of a Universal Grammar, but was largely pioneered by the linguist Joseph Greenberg, who derived a set of forty-five basic universals, mostly dealing with syntax, from a study of some thirty languages.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Merritt Ruhlen</span> American linguist (1944–2021)

Merritt Ruhlen was an American linguist who worked on the classification of languages and what this reveals about the origin and evolution of modern humans. Amongst other linguists, Ruhlen's work was recognized as standing outside the mainstream of comparative-historical linguistics. He was the principal advocate and defender of Joseph Greenberg's approach to language classification.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Dené–Caucasian languages</span> Proposed language family

Dené–Caucasian is a proposed language family that includes widely-separated language groups spoken in the Northern Hemisphere: Sino-Tibetan languages, Yeniseian languages, Burushaski and North Caucasian languages in Asia; Na-Dené languages in North America; and the Vasconic languages from Europe.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Eurasiatic languages</span> Proposed language macrofamily

Eurasiatic is a proposed language macrofamily that would include many language families historically spoken in northern, western, and southern Eurasia.

Two types of language change can be characterized as linguistic drift: a unidirectional short-term and cyclic long-term drift.

John D. Bengtson is an American historical and anthropological linguist. He is past president and currently vice-president of the Association for the Study of Language in Prehistory, and has served as editor of the journal Mother Tongue. Since 2001 he has been a member/researcher of Evolution of Human Languages, an international project on the linguistic prehistory of humanity coordinated by the Santa Fe Institute. His areas of specialization include Scandinavian languages and linguistics, Indo-European linguistics, Dené–Caucasian (Sino-Caucasian) languages, and paleolinguistics.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Borean languages</span> Proposed language family

Borean is a hypothetical linguistic macrofamily that encompasses almost all language families worldwide except those native to the Americas, Africa, Oceania, and the Andaman Islands. Its supporters propose that the various languages spoken in Eurasia and adjacent regions have a genealogical relationship, and ultimately descend from languages spoken during the Upper Paleolithic in the millennia following the Last Glacial Maximum. The name Borean is based on the Greek βορέας, and means "northern". This reflects the fact that the group is held to include most language families native to the northern hemisphere. Two distinct models of Borean exist: that of Harold C. Fleming and that of Sergei Starostin.

Paleolinguistics is a term used by some linguists for the study of the distant human past by linguistic means. For most historical linguists there is no separate field of paleolinguistics. Those who use the term are generally advocates of hypotheses not generally accepted by mainstream historical linguists, a group colloquially referred to as "long-rangers".

Harold Crane Fleming was an anthropologist and historical linguist specializing in the cultures and languages of the Horn of Africa. As an adherent of the Four Field School of American anthropology, he stresses the integration of physical anthropology, linguistics, archaeology, and cultural anthropology in solving anthropological problems.

The history of linguistics in the United States began to discover a greater understanding of humans and language. By trying to find a greater ‘parent language’ through similarities in different languages, a number of connections were discovered. Many contributors and new ideas helped shape the study of linguistics in the United States into what we know it as today. In the 1920s, linguistics focused on grammatical analysis and grammatical structure, especially of languages indigenous to North America, such as Chippewa, Apache, and more. In addition to scholars who have paved the way for linguistics in the United States, the Linguistic Society of America is a group that has contributed to the research of linguistics in America. The United States has long been known for its diverse collection of linguistic features and dialects that are spread across the country. In recent years, the study of linguistics in the United States has broadened to include nonstandard varieties of English speaking, such as Chicano English and African American English, as well as the question if language perpetuates inequalities.

Dené–Yeniseian is a proposed language family consisting of the Yeniseian languages of central Siberia and the Na-Dené languages of northwestern North America.

The Evolution of Human Languages (EHL) project is a historical-comparative linguistics research project hosted by the Santa Fe Institute. It aims to provide a detailed genealogical classification of the world's languages.

References

Notes

  1. ↑ Mcwhorter, John (4 September 2020). "How are the Various Proto-World Families Linked?". The Proto-World language, also known as the Proto-Human or Proto-Sapiens, is believed to be the single source of origin of all the world's languages.
  2. 1 2 3 Meritt Ruhlen; John Bengtson (1994). "Global etymologies". On the Origin of Languages: Studies in Linguistic Taxonomy (PDF). pp. 277–336. Retrieved 27 June 2020.
  3. ↑ Used by the Harold Fleming (2003) and John Bengtson (2007).
  4. 1 2 Ruhlen, Meritt (1994). The Origin of Language: Tracing the Evolution of the Mother Tongue. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
  5. ↑ Trombetti, Alfredo (1905). L'unità d'origine del linguaggio (in Italian). Bologna: Luigi Beltrami.
  6. 1 2 Trombetti, Alfredo (1922–1923). Elementi di glottologia (in Italian). Bologna: Zanichelli.
  7. ↑ de Saussure, Ferdinand (1986) [1916]. Cours de linguistique générale[Course in General Linguistics] (in French). Translated by Harris, Roy. Chicago: Open Court.
  8. ↑ Greenberg, Joseph H. (1987). Language in the Americas. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
  9. ↑ Johanna Nichols, 1998. The origin and dispersal of languages: Linguistic evidence. In Nina Jablonski and Leslie C. Aiello, eds., The Origin and Diversification of Language, pp. 127-70. (Memoirs of the California Academy of Sciences, 24.) San Francisco: California Academy of Sciences.
  10. ↑ Quentin D. Atkinson (15 Apr 2011). "Phonemic Diversity Supports a Serial Founder Effect Model of Language Expansion from Africa". Science. 332 (6027): 346–349. Bibcode:2011Sci...332..346A. doi:10.1126/science.1199295. PMID   21493858. S2CID   42021647.
  11. ↑ Michael Balter (14 April 2011). "Language May Have Helped Early Humans Spread Out of Africa". Science. Retrieved 13 August 2021.
  12. ↑ Perreault, C.; Mathew, S. (2012). "Dating the origin of language using phonemic diversity". PLOS ONE. 7 (4): e35289. Bibcode:2012PLoSO...735289P. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0035289 . PMC   3338724 . PMID   22558135.
  13. ↑ Hunley, Keith; Bowern, Claire; Healy, Meghan (2 January 2012). "Rejection of a serial founder effects model of genetic and linguistic coevolution". Proceedings of the Royal Society B. 279 (1736): 2281–2288. doi:10.1098/rspb.2011.2296. PMC   3321699 . PMID   22298843.
    Bowern, Claire (November 2011). "Out of Africa? The logic of phoneme inventories and founder effects". Linguistic Typology. 15 (2): 207–216. doi:10.1515/lity.2011.015. hdl: 1885/28291 . ISSN   1613-415X. S2CID   120276963.
  14. ↑ Campbell & Poser (2008:391)
  15. ↑ CARTA: The Origin of Us -- Christopher Ehret: Relationships of Ancient African Languages. August 1, 2013. Archived from the original on 2021-12-11.
  16. ↑ Velasquez-Manoff, Moises (19 July 2007). "Linguists seek a time when we spoke as one". Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved 18 May 2018.
  17. 1 2 3 Ruhlen, Meritt (1994). The Origin of Language: Tracing the Evolution of the Mother Tongue. New York: John Wiley and Sons. ISBN   9780471159636 . Retrieved 27 June 2020.
  18. ↑ Bickerton, Derek (1981). Roots of Language. Ann Arbor: Karoma. ISBN   9783946234104.
  19. ↑ Givón, Talmy (1979). On Understanding Grammar. Cambridge, MA: Academic Press. ISBN   978-0-12-285451-4.
  20. ↑ Gell-Mann, Murray; Ruhlen, Merritt (2011). "The origin and evolution of word order". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 108 (42): 17290–17295. Bibcode:2011PNAS..10817290G. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1113716108 . PMC   3198322 . PMID   21987807.
  21. ↑ Hammarström, Harald (2015). "The Basic Word Order Typology: An Exhaustive Study" (PDF). www.eva.mpg.de. Max Planck Institute. Archived from the original on 2022-08-11. Retrieved 2023-05-02.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (link)
  22. ↑ Campbell & Poser (2008:370–372)
  23. ↑ Campbell & Poser (2008:393)

    Sources

    • Bengtson, John D. 2007. "On fossil dinosaurs and fossil words".
    • Campbell, Lyle, and William J. Poser. 2008. Language Classification: History and Method. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    • Edgar, Blake (March–April 2008). "Letter from South Africa". Archaeology. 61 (2). Retrieved 5 November 2018.
    • Gell-Mann, Murray and Merritt Ruhlen. 2003. "The origin and evolution of syntax" [ dead link ]. (Also: HTML version [ dead link ].)
    • Givón, Talmy. 1979. On Understanding Grammar. New York: Academic Press.
    • Greenberg, Joseph. 1963. "Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements". In Universals of Language, edited by Joseph Greenberg, Cambridge: MIT Press, pp. 58–90. (In second edition of Universals of Language, 1966: pp. 73–113.)
    • Greenberg, Joseph H. 1966. The Languages of Africa, revised edition. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. (Published simultaneously at The Hague by Mouton & Co.)
    • Greenberg, Joseph H. 1971. "The Indo-Pacific hypothesis". Reprinted in Joseph H. Greenberg, Genetic Linguistics: Essays on Theory and Method, edited by William Croft, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.
    • Greenberg, Joseph H. 2000–2002. Indo-European and Its Closest Relatives: The Eurasiatic Language Family. Volume 1: Grammar. Volume 2: Lexicon. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
    • Klein, Richard G. and Blake Edgar. 2002. The Dawn of Human Culture. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
    • McDougall, Ian; Brown, Francis H.; Fleagle, John G. (2005). "Stratigraphic placement and age of modern humans from Kibish, Ethiopia" (PDF). Nature. 433 (7027): 733–736. Bibcode:2005Natur.433..733M. doi:10.1038/nature03258. PMID   15716951. S2CID   1454595.
    • Nandi, Owi Ivar. 2012. Human Language Evolution, as Coframed by Behavioral and Psychological Universalisms, Bloomington: iUniverse Publishers.
    • Wells, Spencer. 2007. Deep Ancestry: Inside the Genographic Project. Washington, D.C.: National Geographic.
    • White, Tim D.; Asfaw, B.; DeGusta, D.; Gilbert, H.; Richards, G.D.; Suwa, G.; Howell, F.C. (2003). "Pleistocene Homo sapiens from Middle Awash, Ethiopia". Nature. 423 (6941): 742–747. Bibcode:2003Natur.423..742W. doi:10.1038/nature01669. PMID   12802332. S2CID   4432091.
    This page is based on this Wikipedia article
    Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
    Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.