Evolution, and 'functional' + 'social'

[Michel DeGraff]

Sylvester Osu wrote:

> I think that though we still have a lot to learn about Language and
> languages, linguistics has acquired enough knowledge concerning the
> rapport between language and culture, and language and society as to
> know that it makes no sense talking of more developed or less
> developed languages. Such phrases offer no good illustration of any
> question treated in linguistics at all.

Actually the question whether some languages are less developed than
others is unfortunately still very much at the forefront of
contemporary creolistics.  Please see a commentary I wrote on this
question in Linguistic Typology 5.2/3, 2001.  This entire issue of the
journal was about the claim that "the world's simplest grammars are
Creole grammars".  My article is available on my web page at:
http://web.mit.edu/linguistics/www/degraff/darwin/anti-simplest.html

                                 -michel.
___________________________________________________________________________
MIT Linguistics & Philosophy, 77 Massachusetts Ave, Cambridge MA 02139-4307
degraff at MIT.EDU        http://web.mit.edu/linguistics/www/degraff.home.html
___________________________________________________________________________