Republic of the Philippines

ILOCOS SUR POLYTECHNIC STATE COLLEGE

COLLEGE OF TEACHER EDUCATION
Tagudin Campus, Tagudin, Ilocos Sur
Tel. No.: (077)-748-71-77
A vibrant and nurturing Polytechnic
Service College

Students: Jakbean M. Ricarde

Subject: Language, Culture and Society
Topic: Accounts on the Origin of Language
Biblical, Mythological, Historical and Scientific Accounts
Date of Reporting: May 14, 2022
Instructor: Dr. Imelda Binay-an

A. Introduction

It’s a phenomenon, a mystery and its existence has Scientist and

Linguistic experts from around the world are debating about it. What is it you
wonder? It is language. Where did it come from? Did nobody knows when,
where or how language was originated?

B. Body

Before we can understand and dive into the issue of the origins of
language we need to know what language is. Language is the institute
whereby humans communicate and interact with each other by the means
of habitually-used oral auditory arbitrary signs and symbols. Although there
isn’t a specific, reliable or definite source for the origin of language scientists
and experts in the field of linguistics came up with Ideas and have given a few
hints on how they think language was developed or came about. Language
surrounds us in our everyday life even before we are born we can hear
sounds and intonation of our mother tongue. Believe it or not but humans from
all works of life use language when we sleep, we dream in language, even
when we think our thoughts are made up of language. Language sets us apart
from any other living organisms because spoken language is only confined
and restricted to humans and is also distinct from any other system of
communication. So where does language come from?

The Origins of Language

The origin of language was still a mystery. What was the first
language? How did language begin where and when? Until recently, a
sensible linguist would likely respond to such questions. As Bernard Campbell
states flatly in Humankind Emerging (Allyn & Bacon, 2005), "We simply do not
know, and never will, how or when language began."
Words don't leave artifacts behind. Writing began long after language
did-so theories of language origins have generally been based on hunches.
For centuries there had been so much fruitless speculation over the question
of how language began that when the Paris Linguistic Society was founded in
1866, its bylaws included a ban on any discussions of it.
Over the centuries, many theories have been put forward and just
about all of them have been challenged, discounted, and often ridiculed. Each
theory accounts for only a small part of what we know about language.
Concerning the origin of the first language, there are two main hypothesis, or
beliefs. Neither can be proven or disproved given present knowledge.

BIBLICAL

Many societies throughout history believed that language is the gift of

the gods to humans. Some evidences are found in the holy bible, let us
discuss about it.

Belief in Divine Creation

In the bible there are two accounts that give an answer to the enigma
of the origin of language. (Genesis 2:19) 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. The problem with the biblical
account is it doesn’t tell us how Adam got the names of animals and how
he was able to memorise every single name of the animals on earth it’s
merely impossible. It also doesn’t state how he named other things which
weren’t animals e.g. plants.

The second account in the bible which tries to answer the confusion
around the origin of language is in (Genesis 11:1-9) the verses in the bible tell
us that the world spoke a universal language but after God was angered by
the people of the city of Babel who tried to build a tower that could reach the
heavens, God decided to invent more languages which caused confusion
amongst the people building the tower and the people could not understand
each other hence they abandoned building of the tower.

The most familiar is found in Genesis 2:20, which tells us that Adam
gave names to all living creatures. This belief predicates that humans were
created from the start with an innate capacity to use language. It can't be
proven that language is as old as humans, but it is definitely true that
language and human society are inseparable. Wherever humans exist
language exists. Every stone age tribe ever encountered has a language
equal to English, Latin, or Greek in terms of its expressive potential and
grammatical complexity. Technologies may be complex or simple, but
language is always complex. Charles Darwin noted this fact when he stated
that as far as concerns language, "Shakespeare walks with the Macedonian
swineherd, and Plato with the wild savage of Assam." In fact, it sometimes
seems that languages spoken by preindustrial societies are much more
complex grammatically than languages such as English (example: English
has about seven tense forms and three noun genders; Kivunjo, a Bantu
language spoken on the slopes of Mount Kilimanjaro, has 14 tenses and
about 20 noun classes.) There are no primitive languages, nor are any known
to have existed in the past--even among the most remote tribes of stone age
hunter gatherers. Nevertheless, it is impossible to prove that the first
anatomically modern humans possessed creative language. It is also
impossible to disprove the hypothesis that primitive languages might have
existed at some point in the distant past of Homo sapiens development.

Those accounts of the bible doesn’t hold any water when it comes
to explaining how language was developed and also chronologically scientists
can’t predict what time language was spoken. First there is no evidence or
proof to suggest that the Tower of Babel was ever build so we cannot verify
whether the tower was build or rather somebody made up the story or not, so
people who are not religious believe it was all a myth and hoax. Secondly it
doesn’t tell us what languages God invented or how many of the languages
where invented.

MYTHODOLOGICAL/HISTORICAL/SCIENTIFICAL

Apart from the biblical account of the origin of language there are also
theories which try to explain how language was developed and where
originated from. I am going to discuss concerning the development of
language that is a methodological, historical and scientific one. Many
proponents like Max Muller and Otto Jesperson argued about the true origin
of language that comes from the natural sound source, oral-gestures source,
genetic source and physically adapted.

Natural sound source. Language merged from natural sounds.

Oral-gesture source. A set of physical gestures was developed as a means of
communication. Then a set of oral gestures, specifically involving the mouth,
developed to expressing ideas.
Physical Adaptation source. Human beings are genetically with some physical
features that are responsible of producing speech sounds.
Glossogenetics. Human language developed as a result of this evolutionary
change.

Also, scientists believe that origin of language is hereditary and that

humans have a ‘’language gene’’ passed on from our prehistoric ancestors
called the FOXP2 gene. The gene was discovered in Britain in the late
twentieth century. The gene affects our ability to understand and produce
language, it causes speech defects. This particular gene doesn’t enable us to
talk but there is a chance it allows speech to develop.

Natural evolution hypothesis

At some point in their evolutionary development humans acquired a

more sophisticated brain which made language invention and learning
possible. In other words, at some point in time humans evolved a language
acquisition device, whatever this may be in real physical terms. The simple
vocalizations and gestures inherited from our primate ancestors then quickly
gave way to a creative system of language--perhaps within a single
generation or two. /Mention the hypothesis about rewiring the visual cortex of
the brain into a language area. According to the natural evolution hypothesis,
as soon as humans developed the biological, or neurological, capacity for
creative language, the cultural development of some specific system of forms
with meanings would have been an inevitable next step.

This hypothesis cannot be proven either. Archeological evidence

unearthed thus far, seems to indicate that modern humans, Homo sapiens,
emerged within the last 150,000 years. By 30,000, BC all other species of
humanoids seem to have been supplanted by Homo sapiens. Could the
success of our species vis-a-vis other hominids be explained by its
possession of superior communicative skills? Speaking people could teach,
plan, organize, and convey more sophisticated information. This would have
given them unparalleled advantage over hominid groups without creative
language. Of course, no one knows whether other species of humanoids--
Homo erectus and Homo Neanderthals -- used creative language. Perhaps
they also did. In any case, Homo sapiens, "the wise human," should perhaps
really be called Homo loquens, "the speaking human" because language and
humans are everywhere found together, whereas wisdom among humans is
much more selectively distributed.

Invention hypothesis. Moving on to our second question, if humans

acquired the capacity for language either by divine gift or by evolution, then
exactly how might humans have devised the first language? There are several
hypotheses as to how language might have been consciously invented by
humans based on a more primitive system of hominid communication. Each
hypothesis is predicated on the idea that the invention of language and its
gradual refinement served as a continuous impetus to additional human
mental development. None of the invention hypotheses I will mention is
convincing and most sane linguists agree that the origin of language is still a
mystery. But the inventive, sarcastic names given these hypotheses by their
critics prove that even linguists can at times be creative.

First, there are five imitation hypothesis that hold that language began
through some sort of human mimicry of naturally occurring sounds or
movements:

1) The "ding-dong" hypothesis. This theory, favored by Plato and

Pythagoras, maintains that speech arose in response to the essential qualities
of objects in the environment. The original sounds people made were
supposedly in harmony with the world around them. Language began when
humans started naming objects, actions and phenomena after a recognizable
sound associated with it in real life. This hypothesis holds that the first human
words were a type of verbal icon, a sign whose form is an exact image of its
meaning: crash became the word for thunder, boom for explosion. Some
words in language obviously did derive from imitation of natural sounds
associated with some object: Chinook Indian word for heart--tun tun, Basque
word for knife: ai-ai (literally ouch-ouch). Each of these iconic words would
derive from an index, a sign whose form is naturally associated with its
meaning in real space and time.

The problem with this hypothesis is that onomatopoeia (imitation of sound,

auditory iconicity) is a very limited part of the vocabulary of any language;
imitative sounds differ from language to language: Russian: ba bakh=bang,
bukh= thud. Even if onomatopoeia provided the first dozen or so words, then
where did names for the thousands of naturally noiseless concepts such as
rock, sun, sky or love come from? Apart from some rare instances of sound
symbolism, there is no persuasive evidence, in any language, of an innate
connection between sound and meaning.

2) The "pooh-pooh" hypothesis. This theory holds that speech began with
interjections-spontaneous cries of pain (“ouch!”), surprise (“Oh!”) and other
emotions. holds that the first words came from involuntary exclamations of
dislike, hunger, pain, or pleasure, eventually leading to the expression of more
developed ideas and emotions. In this case the first word would have been an
involuntary ha-ha-ha, wa-wa-wa. These began to be used to name the actions
which caused these sounds.

The problem with this hypothesis is that, once again, emotional exclamations
are a very small part of any language. They are also highly language specific.
No language contains very many interjections, and, crystal points out, “ the
clicks, intake of breath, and other noises which are used in this way bear little
relationship to the vowels and consonants found in phonology. For instance,
to express sudden pain or discomfort: Eng. ouch; Russ. oi.; Cherokee eee.
Thus, exclamations are more like other words in that they reflect the
phonology of each separate language. Unlike sneezes, tears, hiccoughs or
laughter, which are innate human responses to stimuli, the form of
exclamations depends on language rather than precedes language. Also,
exclamations, like most other words are symbols, showing at least a partially
arbitrary relationship between sound and meaning.

3) The "bow-wow" hypothesis. (the most famous and therefore the most
ridiculed hypothesis) holds that vocabulary developed from imitations of
animal noises, such as: Moo, bark, hiss, meow, quack-quack. In other words,
the first human words were a type of index, a sign whose form is naturally
connected with its meaning in time and space. According to this theory,
language began when our ancestors started imitating the natural sounds
around them.

But, once again, onomatopoeia is a limited part of the vocabulary of any

language. The linguistic renditions of animal sounds differ considerably from
language to language, although each species of animal everywhere makes
essentially the same sound. For instance, a dog’s bark is heard as au au in
Brazil, ham ham in Albania, and wang, wang in China. Thus, the human
interpretation of animal sounds is dependent upon the individual language,
and it seems unlikely than entire vocabularies derived from them.
4) A somewhat different hypothesis is the "ta-ta" hypothesis. Charles Darwin
hypothesized (though he himself was sceptical about his own hypothesis) that
speech may have developed as a sort of mouth pantomime: the organs of
speech were used to imitate the gestures of the hand. In other words,
language developed from gestures that began to be imitated by the organs of
speech--the first words were lip icons of hand gestures.

It is very possible that human language, which today is mostly verbal, had its
origin in some system of gestures; other primates rely on gesture as an
integral part of communication, so it is plausible that human communication
began in the same way. Human gestures, however, just like onomatopoeic
words, differ from culture to culture. Cf. English crossing the finger for good
luck vs. Russian "fig" gesture; nodding for yes vs. for no in Turkish and
Bulgarian; knocking on wood vs. spitting over the left shoulder three times.

5) The la-la hypothesis. This theory provides that if any single factor was
responsible to initiate human language, it would be romantic-side of human
life. The ideas that speech emerged from the sounds of inspired playfulness,
love, poetic sensibility, and song.

This theory still fails to account for the origin of language because of the gap
between the emotional and the rational aspects of speech expression.

Necessity Hypothesis

Language began as a response to some acute necessity in the community.

How involuntary sounds made out of need in certain contexts might have
come to be manipulated as words for an object even out of context.

A second set of hypotheses on language origin holds that language began as

a response to some acute necessity in the community. Here are several
necessity hypotheses of the invention of language:

1) Warning hypothesis. Language may have evolved from warning signals

such as those used by animals. Perhaps language started with a warning to
others, such as Look out, Run, or Help to alert members of the tribe when
some lumbering beast was approaching. Other first words could have been
hunting instructions or instructions connected with other work. In other words,
the first words were indexes used during everyday activities and situations.

2) The "yo-he-ho" hypothesis. Language developed on the basis of human

cooperative efforts. According to this theory, language evolved from the
grunts, groans, and snorts evoked physical labor.

The earliest language was chanting to simulate collective effort, whether

moving great stones to block off cave entrances from roving carnivores or
repeating warlike phrases to inflame the fighting spirit.
It is fairly certain that the first poetry and song came from this aspect of
beginning speech. Songs of this type are still with us: Volga boatmen, military
marching chants, seven dwarfs working song.

Plato also believed that language developed out of sheer practical necessity.
And Modern English has the saying: Necessity is the mother of invention.
Speech and right hand coordination are both controlled in the left hemisphere
of the brain. Could this be a possible clue that manual dexterity and the need
to communicate developed in unison?

3) A more colorful idea is the lying hypothesis. E. H. Sturtevant argued that,

since all real intentions emotions get involuntarily expressed by gesture, look
or sound, voluntary communication must have been invented for the purpose
of lying or deceiving. He proposed that the need to deceive and lie--to use
language in contrast to reality for selfish ends-- was the social prompting that
got language started.

There are no scientific tests to evaluate between these competing

hypotheses. All of them seem equally far fetched. This is why in the late 19th
century the Royal Linguistic Society in London actually banned discussion
and debate on the origin of language out of fear that none of the arguments
had any scientific basis at all and that time would be needlessly wasted on
this fruitless enquiry. Attempts to explain the origin of language are usually
taken no more seriously today either. Recently, comedian Lily Tomlin came
up with her own language invention hypothesis: she claimed that men
invented language so that they could complain.

Each of the imitation hypotheses might explain how certain isolated words of
language developed. Very few words in human language are verbal icons.
Most are symbols, displaying an arbitrary relationship of sound and meaning.
(Example: the word tree in several languages: Spanish árbol; French arbre;
Slovak strom; Georgian he; Ket oks; Estonian puu; German Baum; Russian
derevo; Latvian koks; Hawaiian lä'au).

And each of the necessity hypotheses might explain how involuntary sounds
made out of need in certain contexts might have come to be manipulated as
words for an object even out of context. However, the extended use of natural
indexes still leaves unexplained the development of grammar--the patterns in
language which have definite structural functions but no specific meaning.
The creative, generative aspect of human language that we call grammar is
language's most unique feature. Where did grammar come from? There is
nothing like grammar (patterns with definite functions yet no set meaning) in
animal systems of communication.

In isolated instances it can be shown that a grammatical pattern developed

from chance lexical combinations:

a) suffix -hood from OE word haeda= state. childhood, boyhood, puppyhood.

b) Continuous action: form of verb to be + main verb comes from a locative
phrase I am working > I am at working-- cf. the song I'm a working on the
railroad.

But these are isolated instances. How language developed a complex

grammar remains a complete mystery. This means that how language
developed is equally a mystery. We simply don't know how language may
have actually evolved from simple animal systems of sounds and gestures.

C. Conclusion

It is evidently true that no one knows exactly when or how human

beings came up with spoken language. There are many theories, views and
opinions that are presented about the origin of language however those are
still questionable. Theories about the origin of language differ in regard to their
basic assumptions about what language is. All presented theories do not
precisely demonstrate what is the origin language, but that is clear-cut in the
past people were only able to do some gestures an produce few sounds.

D. References

Nordquist, R. (2019, July 12). Five theories on the Origin of Language.

Retrieved from https://www.thoughtco.com/where-does-language-come-from-
1691015

Okrent, A. (2019, October 6). 6 Early theories about the Origin of Language.
Retrieved from http://mentalfloss.com/article/48631/6-early-theories-about-
origin-language

Taylor, C. The Origin of language. Retrieved from https://creation.com/origin-

of-language

Vajda, E. Retrieved from

http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/vajda/ling201/testimaterials/origin_of_la
nguage.htm

E. Activities

True or False.
1. The origin of language was still a mystery.
2. No society throughout history believed that language is the gift of the
gods to humans.
3. In the bible there are two accounts that give an answer to the enigma
of the origin of language.
4. Apart from the biblical account of the origin of language there are also
theories which try to explain how language was developed and where
originated from.
 5. Also, scientists believe that origin of language is not hereditary and
that humans have a ‘’language gene’’ passed on from our prehistoric
ancestors called the FOXP2 gene.
6. The "ding-dong" hypothesis was favored by Plato and Pythagoras,
maintains that speech arose in response to the essential qualities of
objects in the environment.
7. Warning hypothesis view that language may have evolved from
warning signals such as those used by animals.
8. Natural sound source view that language merged from not natural
sounds.
9. Natural evolution hypothesis hold on that at some point in our
evolutionary development humans acquired a more sophisticated brain
which made language invention and learning possible.
10. The la-la hypothesis provides that if any single factor was responsible
to initiate human language, it would be romantic-side of human life.

Identification
1. Language merged from natural sounds.
2. This theory, favored by Plato and Pythagoras, maintains that speech
arose in response to the essential qualities of objects in the
environment.
3. Language may have evolved from warning signals such as those used
by animals. Perhaps language started with a warning to others, such
as Look out, Run, or Help to alert members of the tribe when some
lumbering beast was approaching.
4. A set of physical gestures was developed as a means of
communication. Then a set of oral gestures, specifically involving the
mouth, developed to expressing ideas.
5. The most famous and therefore the most ridiculed hypothesis.
6. Human language developed as a result of this evolutionary change.
7. Human beings are genetically with some physical features that are
responsible of producing speech sounds.
8. Language developed on the basis of human cooperative efforts.
9. This theory holds that speech began with interjections-spontaneous
cries of pain (“ouch!”), surprise (“Oh!”) and other emotions.
10. Each hypothesis is predicated on the idea that the invention of
language and its gradual refinement served as a continuous impetus to
additional human mental development.

Reflection

What I have learned about the origin of language?

F. Feedback

Key Answers:

True or False
1. True
2. False
3. True
4. True
5. False
6. True
7. True
8. False
9. True
10. True

Identification
1. Natural sound source
2. The "ding-dong" hypothesis
3. Warning hypothesis
4. Oral-gesture source
5. The "bow-wow" hypothesis
6. Glossogenetics
7. Physical Adaptation source
8. The "yo-he-ho" hypothesis.
9. The "pooh-pooh" hypothesis
10. Invention hypothesis.

The Origins of Language

The origin of language
was still a mystery. What
was the first language?
How did
language begin—where and
when? Until recently, a
sensible linguist would likely
respond to
such questions. As Bernard
Campbell states flatly in
Humankind Emerging
(Allyn & Bacon,
2005), "We simply do not
know, and never will, how or
when language began."
Words don’t leave artifacts
behind. Writing began long
after language did—so theories
of language origins have
generally been based on
hunches. For centuries there
had been so
much fruitless speculation
over the question of how
language began that when
the Paris
Linguistic Society was
founded in 1866, its bylaws
included a ban on any
discussions of it.
Over the centuries, many
theories have been put forward
—and just about all of them
have been challenged,
discounted, and often
ridiculed. Each theory
accounts for only a small
part of what we know about
language. Concerning the
origin of the first language,
there are
two main hypotheses, or
beliefs. Neither can be proven
or disproved given present
knowledge.
1) Belief in Divine Creation
 Genesis 2:20 “so Adam
gave names to all cattle, to the
birds of the air, and to
every breast of the field. But
for Adam there was not found
a helper comparable
to him”
 Many societies throughout
history believed that language
is the gift of the gods
to humans
 Adam, the first person,
possessed the language which
he used to name different
creatures
 It can't be proven that
language is as old as humans,
but it is definitely true that
language and human society
are inseparable. Wherever
humans exist language
exists.
 The first occurrence of
language where humans are
recorded as already created
is in Genesis 1:28: “Then God
blessed them, and God said …
”. God expresses
His love in blessing them even
before giving them the laws for
their life on the
perfect Earth He has created
for them.
 Assumption “if human
infants were allowed to
grow up without hearing
any
language around them, th