LL-L "Language history" 2011.04.15 (09) [EN]

[Lowlands-L List]

=====================================================
L O W L A N D S - L - 15 April 2011 - Volume 09
lowlands.list at gmail.com - http://lowlands-l.net/
Posting: lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org
Archive: http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html
Encoding: Unicode (UTF-08)
Language Codes: lowlands-l.net/codes.php
=====================================================



From: Paul Finlow-Bates <wolf_thunder51 at yahoo.co.uk>

Subject: LL-L "Language history" 2011.04.15 (05) [EN]



From: Isaac M. Davis
<isaacmacdonalddavis at gmail.com<http://uk.mc286.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=isaacmacdonalddavis@gmail.com>>


Subject: LL-L "Language history" 2011.04.15 (03) [EN]



Hello all,



....." If the human race began as several related tribal groups, say in the
Rift Valley, then there would never have been any 'political' situation, as
it were, that would have caused them to speak the same language, rather than
sharing some words (but not all) with the groups more closely related to you
and having next to no vocabulary in common with groups that are on the other
end of the valley, even as all groups were developing more complex language
skills."


The human race couldn't emerge from several related tribal groups if there
was no communication. We would have to be descended from one or other of
them, and speak a descendent of one their languages.  Or, if they are
related, they must have a common ancestor - and a common ancestral language
even if it subsequently diverged.



Paul

Derby

England



----------



From: Hellinckx Luc <luc.hellinckx at gmail.com>

Subject: LL-L "Language history"



Beste Paul,



You wrote:



I can't see why a single proto language should be "fringe science".  Unless
you believe that different languages were created independently, Tower of
Babel fashion, I can't envisage any mechanism of language evolution that *
doesn't* involve a single proto-language.



>From what I understand, it seems likely that Neanderthal had linguistic
capacity. Moroever, since their genome also provides strong evidence for
interbreeding with humans (1 to 4 % of Eurasian genes would come from
Neanderthals), it can't be ruled out that modern language is some sort of
pidgin to a certain extent. Reconstructing the language that modern humans
may have shared with Neanderthals before their first split, roughly 400 000
years ago, is another matter of course. Maybe Neanderthal was only capable
of singing whereas Homo sapiens was a chatterbox?



Even if one day, you manage to make a draft of the proto-language of
primates, then a new question will arise: what language did we speak before
we were primates ? ... what does our language have in common with bird
speech (Twitter, here we come) ? ... and so on.



What language does the Force speak? Rest assured, math it is...he told
me...and I understood ;=)



Kind greetings,



Luc Hellinckx, Halle, Belgium



=========================================================
Send posting submissions to lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org.
Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
Send commands (including "signoff lowlands-l") to
listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org or lowlands.list at gmail.com
http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html.
http://www.facebook.com/?ref=logo#!/group.php?gid=118916521473498
===============================================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lowlands-l/attachments/20110415/af333029/attachment.htm>