Protolanguage Might Have Evolved Before Ostensive Communication

Biological Theory 12 (2):72-84 (2017)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

According to one currently influential line of thinking, the evolution of ostensive communication was a prerequisite for the evolution of human language. In this article, I distinguish between a strong and a weak version of this view and offer a sustained argument against the former. More specifically, the strong version of this view would have it that ostensive communication was a prerequisite not just for the evolution of fully modern language but for any language-like system of communication. I argue that this version is too strong: I show how some distinctive and important features of language may well have been assembled prior to the evolution of ostensive communication. Put another way, I argue that a protolanguage before ostensive communication scenario is a real possibility. I conclude by briefly arguing that such an evolutionary scenario coheres better with archaeological evidence from the early Pleistocene as well as evidence from developmental psychology pertaining to the nature of our mind reading abilities.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Recognizing communicative intentions in infancy.Gergely Csibra - 2010 - Mind and Language 25 (2):141-168.
Holophrastic protolanguage.Maggie Tallerman - 2010 - In M. Arbib D. Bickerton (ed.), The Emergence of Protolanguage: Holophrasis Vs Compositionality. John Benjamins. pp. 24--83.
Wittgenstein on ostensive definition.P. M. S. Hacker - 1975 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 18 (3):267 – 287.
Protomusic and protolanguage as alternatives to protosign.W. Tecumseh Fitch - 2005 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (2):132-133.
On ostensive communication.Ivo Osolsobĕ - 1979 - Studia Semiotyczne 9:63-75.
Protolanguage reconstructed.Andrew D. M. Smith - 2008 - Interaction Studies. Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systemsinteraction Studies / Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systemsinteraction Studies 9 (1):100-116.
But how did protolanguage actuallystart?Derek Bickerton - 2008 - Interaction Studies 9 (1):169-176.
On ostensive definitions.Janina Kotarbinska - 1960 - Philosophy of Science 27 (1):1-22.
The feasibility of segmentation of protolanguage.István Zachar - 2011 - Interaction Studies. Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systemsinteraction Studies / Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systemsinteraction Studies 12 (1):1-35.
Holophrasis and the protolanguage spectrum.Michael A. Arbib - 2008 - Interaction Studies. Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systemsinteraction Studies / Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systemsinteraction Studies 9 (1):154-168.
From persuasion to manipulation and seduction. (A very short history of global communication).Aurel Codoban - 2006 - Journal for the Study of Religions and Ideologies 5 (14):151-158.
Manipulare, seductie si ideologie ostensiva/ Manipulation, Seduction and Ostensive Ideology.Aurel Codoban - 2003 - Journal for the Study of Religions and Ideologies 2 (4):122-138.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-03-26

Downloads
30 (#519,519)

6 months
7 (#411,886)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Ronald J. Planer
Australian National University

References found in this work

Meaning.Herbert Paul Grice - 1957 - Philosophical Review 66 (3):377-388.
Relevance.D. Sperber & Deirdre Wilson - 1986 - Communication and Cognition: An Interdisciplinary Quarterly Journal 2.

View all 18 references / Add more references