Semester 4

Course 01
Prof BOUYA

INTRODUCTION TO LANGUAGE ACQUISITION

1. The origins of language

Many linguists and researchers belonging to different fields examined the question of the
origin of human language. They presented proposals regarding this question and critically
evaluated their relative merit.
We simply don‟t know how language originated (i.e. how it began or came into existence). It
is supposed that some type of spoken language must have developed between 100,000 and
50,000 years ago, well before written language (about 5,000 years ago). Nevertheless, there is
no direct physical evidence (e.g. in the form of artifacts) or remaining traces relating to the
speech of our distant ancestors that might tell how language was back in the early stages.
Perhaps because of this absence of direct physical evidence, speculations about the origins of
human speech have been developed. These speculations or reflections about the origin or
source of human language are of six types:
- the divine source
- the natural sound source
- the social interaction source
- the physical adaptation source
- the tool-making source
- the genetic source

1.1 The divine source

Nearly all divine theories believe that languages originated from a single source and are thus
monogenetic theories of language origin. The basic idea is that the point of origin of human
language is a divine source, i.e. proceeding directly from God or a god. This idea is attested
in most religions.

1-1-1 The divine source: Christianity

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God (John
1:1). And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of
the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam
called every living creature, that was the name thereof (Genesis 2:19)
And the Lord said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they
begin to do; and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do.
Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one
another's speech. So the Lord scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the
earth: and they left off to build the city. Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the

1
Lord did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the Lord scatter
them abroad upon the face of all the earth (Genesis 11:7-9)
If human language did emanate (or come out) from a divine source, we have no way of
reconstructing, restoring or recreating that original language, especially given the events in a
place called Babel in relation to what is called The Tower of Babel.
The Tower of Babel, a tower in a story in the Old Testament of the Bible. The story is
supposed to explain why there are so many different languages in the world. According to the
story, everyone originally spoke the same language, but when the people of Babel tried to
build a tower that would reach to Heaven, God prevented them by making them all speak
different languages. The people could not understand each other and were unable to finish
building the tower.

1-1-2 The divine source: ISLAM

“ Read with the name of your Lord who created (every thing) ”. (Surat Alaalak). “ And He
taught Adam the names – all of them ”. (Surat Al Baqarah).
the language phenomena are discussed in the verses of the Qur'an. As a sacred book that is
believed as the guideline for human life, the Qur'an surely also contains verses on the
language phenomena, both regarding the origin of human language, the diversity of human
languages, and ethics of using language. The Qur'an invites people to study and respect the
diversity of languages and declares it as an important sign of divine power at work in the
organization of the universe. The Qur'an does not only recognize the existence of the
diversity of languages as a manifestation of Allah's will, but also presents it as a challenge for
research and understanding.
1-1-3 The divine source: Hinduism
There grew in the centre of the earth the wonderful „world tree,‟ or „knowledge tree‟. It was
so tall that it reached almost to heaven. It said in its heart, „I shall hold my head in heaven and
spread my branches over all the earth, and gather all men together under my shadow, and
protect them, and prevent them from separating‟. But Brahma, the creator-god, to punish the
pride of the tree, cut off its branches and cast them down on the earth, when they sprang up as
wata trees, and made differences of belief and speech and customs to prevail on the earth, to
disperse men upon its surface.
1-1-4 The divine source: Africa
The Wa-Sania, a Bantu people of East African origin, have a tale that in the beginning, the
peoples of the earth knew only one language, but during a severe famine, a madness struck
the people, causing them to wander in all directions, jabbering strange words, and this is how
different languages came about
Efforts have been made to rediscover or reconstruct this original divine language. A few
experiments have been carried with conflicting results. The basic hypothesis seems to have
been that, if human newly born infants grew up without hearing any language around them,
then they would spontaneously begin using the original God-given language.

2
Herodotus, the Greek historian, tells of what may well have been the first psycholinguistic
experiment. It was done 2,500 years ago by Psammetichus, an Egyptian pharaoh. The
experiment consisted in isolating two newly born babies except for the company of goats and
a mute shepherd for two years. The two infants were not exposed to any human speech with
the hope that, after a certain period, they would start producing the original God-given
language. After two years of isolation, the children were reported to have spontaneously
uttered, not an Egyptian word, but something that was identified as the Phrygian word bekos,
meaning “bread”. The pharaoh concluded that Phrygian, an older language spoken in part of
what is modern Turkey now extinct, must be the original language. That seems very unlikely.
The children may not have picked this “word” from any human source, but as several
commentators have pointed out, they must have heard what the goats were saying. The
children were simply imitating the cry of goats around them.
Another similar experiment was carried out by king James the Fourth of Scotland around the
year 1500. The children were reported to have spontaneously started speaking Hebrew,
confirming the king‟s belief that Hebrew had indeed been the language of the Garden of
Eden.
Are the results of these kinds of experiments confirmed or refuted by other similar cases?
All other cases of children who have been discovered living in isolation, without any contact
with human speech, tend not to confirm the results of these types of divine source
experiments. Very young children living without access to human language (i.e. without
being sufficiently exposed to human speech) in their early years grow up with no language at
all.

Criticism:
• Children discovered living in isolation do not confirm these findings but grow up with no
language at all

• Divine source is impossible to prove/disprove and the ‘first language’ is impossible to

reconstruct!!

• There is no powerful evidence of the development of language

1.2 The natural sound source

A quite different view of the beginnings of language is based on the concept of natural
sounds. The basic idea is that primitive words could have been imitations of the natural
sounds which early humans heard around them. The fact that all modern languages have
some words with some pronunciations that seem to echo (or resemble) naturally occurring
sounds could be used to support this theory. This type of view has been called the “bow-wow
theory” of language origin. Words that sound similar to the noises they describe are examples
of onomatopoeia.

3
Onomatopoeia – the formation or use of words intended to be a vocal imitation of the sound
associated with the thing or action designated (e g buzz, cuckoo, cock-a-doodle-do, splash,
bang, boom, rattle, hiss, screech, bow-wow)
While it is true that a number of words in any language are onomatopoeic, it is hard to see
how most of the soundless things as well as abstract concepts in our world could have been
referred to in a language that simply echoed natural sounds. We might also be sceptical about
a view that seems to assume that a language is only a set of words used as “names” for things.
A language must also include a syntax, rules governing the way words are combined to form
sentences.

Criticism:
• How would soundless things and abstract concepts have been referred to??
• Criticism: Language is more than only a set of names

It has also been suggested that the original sounds of language may have come from natural
cries of emotion such as pain, anger, shock and joy. This is exemplified by interjections such
as Ouch! Ah!, Ooh!, Wow!, Yuck. Again, these natural cries couldn‟t be the original sounds
of language because they are produced differently from the way sounds in language are
produced. Sounds expressing emotion are produced with sudden intakes of breath, which is
the opposite of ordinary talk. We normally produce spoken language on exhaled breath.
Basically, the expressive noises people make in emotional reactions contain sounds that are
not otherwise used in speech production and consequently would seem to be rather unlikely
candidates as source sounds for language.
Air stream mechanism – the source of energy for speech production
The main mechanism that is normally employed in producing sounds in speech is breathing
out or exhaling. This is referred to as an egressive, pulmonic mechanism since air flows
outwards from the lungs. Sounds expressing emotions are produced by taking in air.

Criticism:
• These are produced with sudden intakes of breath, which is not the case for
ordinary speech!! => emotional reactions contain sounds not otherwise used in
speech production
names

1.3 The social interaction source

Another proposal involving natural sounds has been called the “yo-he-ho” theory. The idea
is that the sounds of a person involved in physical effort could be the source of our language,
especially when that physical effort involved several people and the interaction had to be
coordinated. So, a group of early humans might have developed a set of hums, grunts, and

4
 groans that were used when they were lifting and carrying large pieces of trees or large dead
animals (such as lifeless hairy mammoths).

This proposal appears to be interesting and its appeal lies in the fact that it places the
development of human language in a social context. Early people must have lived in groups,
if only because larger groups offered better protection from attack. Groups are necessarily
social organizations and, to maintain those organizations, some form of communication is
required. So, human sounds, however they were produced (even as grunts or groans), must
have some principled use within the life and social interaction of early human groups.

The question is: Does this proposal provide an adequate answer to the question regarding the
origin of human speech?
Although this proposal includes an important idea that may relate to the uses of humanly
produced sounds, it does not answer the question regarding the origins of human speech. The
reason is that apes and other primates live in social groups and use grunts and social calls
(just like early humans), but they do not seem to have developed the capacity for speech.

Criticism:
• Apes and other primates also live in groups and use grunts etc without having
developed the capacity for speech!!

1.4 The physical adaptation source

Human beings possess physical features (related to the body) which other creatures do not
have. These physical features, which are unique to humans, may have been able to support
speech production and, therefore, they are considered as the source of language.
We can start with the observation that, at some early stage, our ancestors made a very
significant transition to an upright (vertical) posture, with bipedal (on two feet) locomotion
(mobility), and a revised role for the front limbs. A similar development is believed to have
taken place with human hands and some believe that manual gestures may have been a
precursor of language.
Some effects of this type of change can be seen in physical differences between the skull of a
gorilla and that of a Neandertal man (an early type of human being who lived in Europe
during the Stone Age) from around 60,000 years ago. The reconstructed vocal tract of a
Neandertal suggests that some consonant-like sound distinctions would have been possible.
In the study of evolutionary development, there are certain physical features, best thought of
as partial adaptations, which appear to be relevant for speech. They are streamlined (made
simpler and more efficient) versions of features found in other primates (mammals including
human beings, the apes, monkeys, etc). Such features indicate that probably early humans
had the capacity for speech.

5
1-4-1 Teeth, lips, mouth, larynx and pharynx
Human teeth are unusual compared with those of other animals. They are even in height.
They are upright, not slanting outwards. Such regularity is surprising – it is certainly not
needed for eating. Yet evenly spaced, equal-sized teeth which touch one another are valuable
for the articulation of a number of sounds, such as S (as in sun), F (as in fun), V (as in van),
SH (as in shut), TH (as in thin).
Human lips have muscles which are considerably more developed and show more intricate
interlacing than those in the lips of other primates.
The mouth is relatively small and can be opened and shut rapidly. This makes it simple to
pronounce sounds such as P (as in put) and B (as in boat), which require a total stoppage of
the airstream with the lips, followed by a sudden release of pressure as the mouth is opened.
The human tongue is thick, muscular and mobile, as opposed to the long, thin tongues of
monkeys. The advantage of a thick tongue is that the size of the mouth cavity can be varied
allowing a range of vowels to be pronounced.
Another important difference between humans and monkeys concerns the larynx, which
contains the „voice box‟ or „vocal cords‟. It is simpler in structure than that of other primates.
But this is an advantage. Air can move freely past and then out through the nose and mouth
without being hindered. The streamlining and simplification of the human larynx may be a
sign of adaptation to speech.
The human larynx differs significantly in position from the larynx of other primates, such as
monkeys. In the course of human physical development, the assumption of an upright posture
moved the head more directly above the spinal column and the larynx dropped to a lower
position. This created a longer cavity (an empty or hollowed-out space) called the pharynx,
above the vocal folds, which acts as a resonator for increased range and clarity of the sounds
produced via the larynx and the vocal tract. But this comes with a price. A monkey can seal
its mouth off from its windpipe and breathe while it is eating. Humans cannot do this, so food
can get stuck in the windpipe, sometimes causing them to choke to death.
In the physical adaptation view, one function (producing speech sounds) must have been
superimposed on existing anatomical features (teeth, lips, mouth, larynx, pharynx) previously
used for other purposes (chewing, sucking).
We can think of the human baby in its first few years as a living example of some of these
physical changes taking place. In other words, the development of the human infant in early
childhood (ontogeny) seems to mirror the development of early man (phylogeny). At birth,
the baby‟s brain is only a quarter of its eventual weight and the larynx is much higher in the
throat, allowing babies, like chimpanzees, to breathe and drink at the same time. In a
relatively short period of time, the larynx descends, the brain develops, the child assumes an
upright posture and starts walking and talking.

1-4-2 Ontogeny and phylogeny

6
 The term ontogeny is biologists‟ term for the origin and development of an individual
organism. The ontogeny of language is therefore its development in children, Ontogeny is the
chronological acquisition, development, and decay of language in the individual, from birth
to death; chiefly used for the study of language acquisition in children. The term phylogeny
refers to the evolution of language in the human species. It is applied to the speech
community as a whole - the subjectmatter of philology and historical linguistics.
Thence ontogenetic vs. phylogenetic

Criticism:
• Certain birds and parrots are able to also produce a wide variety of sounds.

1.5 The tool-making source

The basic idea according to this source is that language has originated in connection with the
tool-making ability.
By about two million years ago, there is evidence that humans had developed preferential
right-handedness and had become capable of making stone tools. Wood tools and composite
tools eventually followed. Tool-making, or the outcome of manipulating objects and
changing them using both hands, is evidence of a brain at work. It is believed that a similar
development happened with language simultaneously. Tool-making (or object manipulation)
and language use are evidence of a brain at work.
The human brain is not only large relative to human body size, it is also lateralized, that is,
it has specialized function in each of the two hemispheres. Those functions that control the
motor movements involved in complex vocalization (speaking) and object manipulation
(making or using tools) are very close to each other in the left hemisphere of the brain. It may
be that there was an evolutionary connection between the language-using and tool-using
abilities of humans and that both were involved in the development of the speaking brain.
This proposal seems to be somewhat superior to the natural sound source. The activity of
humans producing single noises to indicate objects in their environment may indeed have
been a crucial stage in the development of language, but what it lacks is structural
organization. All languages, including sign language, require the organizing and combining
of sounds or signs in specific arrangements. We seem to have developed a part of our brain
that specializes in making these arrangements.
The appeal of this proposal is that the two skills of tool-making and using language seem to
have developed analogously or in parallel.
If we think in terms of the most basic process involved in primitive tool-making, it is not
enough to be able to grasp one rock (make one sound); the human must also be able to bring
another rock (other sounds) into proper contact with the first in order to develop a tool. In
terms of language structure, the human may have first developed a naming ability by
producing a specific and consistent noise (e.g. fOOd) for a specific object. The crucial
additional step was to bring another specific noise (e.g. gOOd) into combination with the first

7
to build a complex message (fOOd gOOd). Several thousand years of development later,
humans have sharpened and made it more keen or effective this message-building capacity to
a point where, on having lunch, they can say This food is good. As far as we know, other
primates are not doing this nor would be capable of manipulating tools.

1.6 The genetic source

The basic idea of the genetic source of language origin is that language didn‟t emanate as the
result of small physical adaptations of the human species over time but as an innate capacity.
Human offspring are born with a special capacity for language. It is innate, no other creature
seems to have it, and it is not tied to a specific type of language. In other words, language
capacity is genetically hard-wired (genetically built-in) in the newly born human. This is
referred to as the Innateness hypothesis. This hypothesis aims to capture the complexity of
the young child‟s language development. Even children who are born deaf (and do not
develop speech) become fluent sign language users, given appropriate circumstances, very
early in life.
As a solution to the puzzle of the origins of language, this innateness hypothesis would seem
to point to something in human genetics, possibly a crucial mutation, as the source. This
would not have been a gradual change, but something that happened rather quickly. We are
not sure when this proposed genetic change might have taken place or how it might relate to
the physical adaptations described earlier.
If this is, indeed, the case the investigation of the origins of language then turns into a search
for the special “language gene” that only humans possess. If we are indeed the only creatures
with this special capacity for language, then it will be completely impossible for any other
creature to produce or understand language.

1-6 SUMMARY

Theories Arguments for Arguments against Development

The divine source Suddenly

(monogenetic)

The natural Existence of Soundless things Gradually

sound source onomatopoeia and abstract
(bow-wow/pooh- concepts
pooh)
Produced with
intake of breath

8
The social Early humans Other primates also Gradually
interaction lived in groups live in groups and
source (yo-he-ho) use grunts

The physical There‟s evidence These changes Gradually

adaptation source for the would not
(teeth, lips, mouth, evolutionary themselves lead to
larynx & pharynx) changes speech production

The tool-making Accounts for Gradually

source (brain) structural
organisation of
language

The genetic Automatic set of Suddenly

source (innateness developments in
theory) young children

1-6 Study questions

1. Why is it difficult to agree with Psammetichus that Phrygian must have been the
original human language?
2. What is the basic idea behind the “bow-wow” theory of language origin?
3. Why are interjections such as Ouch considered to be unlikely sources of human
speech sounds?
4. Where is the pharynx and how did it become an important part of human sound
production?
5. Why do you think that young deaf children who become fluent in sign language
would be cited in support of the innateness hypothesis?
6. With which of the six “sources” would you associate this quotation?

Chewing, licking and sucking are extremely widespread mammalian activities, which,
in terms of casual observation, have obvious similarities with speech.
(MacNeilage, 1998)

Tasks

9
A. What is the connection between the Heimlich maneuver and the development of
human speech?
B. What exactly happened at Babel and why is it used in explanations of language
origins?
C. What are the arguments for and against a teleological explanation of the origins of
human speech?
D. The idea that “ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny” was first proposed by Ernst Haeckel
in 1866 and is still frequently used in discussions of language origins.
Can you find a simpler or less technical way to express this idea?
E. In his analysis of the beginnings of human language, William Foley comes to the
conclusion that “language as we understand it was born about 200,000 years ago”
(1997:73). This is substantially earlier than the dates (between 100,000 and 50,000
years ago) that other scholars have proposed. What kinds of evidence and arguments
are typically presented in order to choose a particular date “when language was
born”?
F. What is the connection between the innateness hypothesis, as described in this
chapter, and the idea of a Universal Grammar?

10