Premium
STAGES OF CULTURAL ELABORATION IN THE PLEISTOCENE: POSSIBLE ARCHAEOLOGICAL INDICATORS OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF LANGUAGE CAPABILITIES
Author(s) -
Isaac Glynn L.
Publication year - 1976
Publication title -
annals of the new york academy of sciences
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.712
H-Index - 248
eISSN - 1749-6632
pISSN - 0077-8923
DOI - 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1976.tb25494.x
Subject(s) - citation , annals , elaboration , anthropology , history , archaeology , art history , classics , art , library science , sociology , computer science , humanities
Asking an archaeologist to discuss language is rather like asking a mole to describe life in the treetops. The earthy materials with which archaeologists deal contain no direct traces of the phenomena that figure so largely in a technical consideration of the nature of language. There are no petrified phonemes and no fossil grammars. The oldest actual relicts of language that archaeologists can put their hands on are no older than the first invention of writing systems some five or six thousand years ago. And yet the intricate physiological basis of language makes it perfectly clear that this human ability has deep roots, roots that may extend as far as, or farther back in time than, the documented beginnings of tool-making some two and a half million years ago. However, to return to the simile: if the forest has been cut down and all that remains are the roots, then the mole may not be such an inappropriate consultant. So it is with the history of language development. Comparative studies can indicate phylogenetic patterns, while detailed understanding of the structure and physiology of modern human linguistic capabilities can suggest possible successive stages of prehuman development; however, beyond a certain point, historical understanding demands dated evidence for successive developmental stages. This record, if it is to be obtained at all, must be sought from paleontologists and archaeologists. It is probable that the search is not quite as hopeless as it may look at first glance, but it is equally certain that there are no very simple answers. In my mind there stand out two possible lines of approach to the problem. The j r s t involves scrutiny of the record of developing protohuman material culture systems and consideration of its potential relevance to the problem in hand. Stone artefacts are the best and most persistant long-term markers, but during the last five percent of the time span, we can also deal with more fancy evidence such as burials, ornaments, art, notations, cult objects, structures, and so forth. The second approach involves taking archaeological evidence which is indicative of the economic behavior and the adaptive patterns of early hominids and then considering the potential effects of varying intensities of information exchange on the functioning of the systems. This second approach should contribute to an understanding of the selection pressures that have moulded the evolution of language abilities. PART 1 of this paper follows the first approach, and PART I I the second.