Physically, speech requires a larynx capable of producing sound through vocal chords with the cooperation of lungs to provide expiration. (Since I have no vocal chords except in my larynx, it’s physically impossible for me to talk through my ass.)
Animals, other than mammalians, have some form of vocalization–for example, the hiss of a reptile or the song of a bird. The differentiations came about, I believe, through the evolutionary development of the human brain, bits and pieces of which came from evolutionary precursors, including the reptilian. There is now thought to be 3 divisions of pre-homo sapian–Homo Erectus, Neanderthal, and Denisovan. By this time in human evolutionary history, speech as a means of communication had already been developed.
I believe modern man is the result of the co-mingling of the genetic make-up of the three ‘tribes’ of hominids–pre-modern humans.
But some of you may think my anus has vocal chords.
We would have to wait for someone or some to get curious and ambitious enough to prove or disprove through genetics. But, til then I can see it. What I would like to see is a generational study on parrots that have been taught to talk for things they want… Can they teach or will they teach their infants or can over generations speech becomes natural through genetic memory?
As far as I know, and we have a small parrot, a Senegal, parrot’s are mimics, only. Even the African Grey, which is quite intelligent, really only mimics what it’s been taught to say given the proper cues. Part of language is the ability to form concepts and sentences. A lot of work has been done with chimpanzees and other apes. Look up Kanzi, a Bonobo chimp, who ‘talks’ along with his sister, Panbanisha.
I’ve also cited an article in New Scientist about finches in another thread (Was Nietzsche a Panpsychic?.)
The research is going on–it just takes a while for the news to get out to the public.
We do know that mammals, marine and terrestrial, have their own languages that are passed on through the generations. We don’t understand them, but it’s possible that they understand us.
So far, however, as far as I can find, while animals can’t speak–vocalize–human languages, perhaps because of the physiological differences, they can understand them. We are part of the animal world, after all.
True a parrot or cockatoo cannot form complex concepts but, their needs and wants are simple at this point and do not live socially with give and take.
That they can be taught to ask for items shows that they can grasp simple needed concepts. If I make this series of sound it will feed me.
Teaching kids to speak is about repetition. We give them concept education as well.
How did those 3 hominid species start off? Trial, error and mostly persistence. We can be adopted ancestors so to speak. Through generations of persistent education we can conceivably change the function of the higher birds especially the omnivore breeds. We can bring them to a point where they teach their progeny how to ask or tell simple things.
I do know that simple birds like the lovebirds I care for, share a language. Some I have learned. I know the sounds they make when they want me to raise the curtains, when one gets out of its cage( horrible little snitches ) plus a few other simple things. I admit it took a year or two for me to learn these things.
See I never thought they could form thoughts/concepts until I decided to mimic them. It was then after repetition that I realized what was going on.
Higher mammals especially omnivores can form more complex concept based sounds but, all vocal noise has purposes.
I do think that with persistence and the help of genetic memory we can actually produce parrots or cockatoos that use forms of human language and their progeny will grasp it and perhaps improve upon it.
Seriously, the development of human speech is still a subject shrouded in mystery and it took centuries of evolutionary changes to make it possible–millions of years. Notice I said ‘speech’ and not ‘language.’ I think humans tend to reject the fact that we’re animals–Chomsky felt that only humans developed a ‘language’ but I think we know better, now. As I’ve said, other animals have developed and passed down their languages, but we don’t understand them. And, while we don’t understand their languages, many of them can understand ours. Imm, it’s a physiological thing; animals, some of them, can form mental concepts, but they aren’t able, physiologically, to form human words.
As for being able to pass things down from generation to generation, animals do. One of the interesting things about the finch article is that breeders, using selective breeding, were able to compress evolutionary time and take the drab munia finch for its song and develop the coloration of the Bengalese finch. In doing so, the Bengalese finch also developed the ability to create new songs–variations on the themes of Paganini, if you will. The new songs and the ability to create them were passed down from generation to generation, along with plumage.
None of this is either human speech or human language. My original contention was that ‘human’ language developed from the ‘human’ ability to produce sound as a ‘human,’ rather than as an ‘animal,’ and that ability was necessary before languages could develop. Languages also incorporate body language unique to the animal, as well as cadence and intonation. How much of that was shared among the Denisovans, the Neanderthals, and Homo Heidelbergensis? I don’t know. But the genome of the modern, single, species of human, Homo sapien, shows a sharing of mitochondrial DNA among the three subspecies.
That’s really all I was talking about. If anyone can show me anything that differs from my interpretation of how human speech started, I’d like to learn from you.
Have you thought that human speech is not different other than it is not now genetic memory? I spend so much time with different species that I can see body language, hear tones etc. Every day. To me the major difference is what is behind the sounds, body language and tones.
Take the simple thought: “You are eating my food”
If you see this enough you hear and see patterns in species. Ours has more complexity because we have more complex thoughts.
We make sounds that communicate just as animals do, we use body language as animals do. Through being hunter gatherer and omnivore descendants we developed more complex abilities and thoughts. Somwhere sometime Ogg met Grogg and one of them convinced the other that a word for tomato was goop. Difference came about due to location and abilities. We can use the USA for a superior example. The words , sounds, patterns all vary even though we speak English. Put a young Southern California girl with an old Maine man, see how well they communicate.
We want to think our level of communication is different but, its only more complex through need and desire.
One more thing
There were studies online some years back about taking species from different parts of the earth and putting them together. Birds, horses etc. They did not understand each other or make the same patterns of sound and body language for the same situations. If they were young they created an understanding, if adults they did or did not eventually learn. I have tried to find these studies but, damned if I can remember what I did or asked to find them, I know they were a stumble upon. Darn the symptoms of age
) plus a few other simple things. I admit it took a year or two for me to learn these things.