Re: The Tally-Ho! Theory of Language Origins
- From: kleinecke@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: 4 Oct 2005 09:19:03 -0700
rogerprince@xxxxxxxx wrote:
> Perhaps writing, in a sense, preceded spoken language.
....
> Evolution often makes new use of systems that have evolved for other
> purposes.
....
> Pure speculation, but traces of this route to language may be left in
> the human genome, `a la the genes that still code for hens' teeth and
> horses' toes.
This has the potential for a great argument about intelligent design.
The advocates for intelligent design might well have advanced speech as
an example of something so complicated and so efficient that it could
not possibly have evolved and therefore must have been handed to us as
a whole by the alleged intelligent designer. It's a better example than
any of the other examples I have seen.
But, so far as I know, they have not done so.
Maybe the reason is that we can PROVE that languages evolve.
But then I suppose we will have no argument because nobody on sci.lang
supports intelligent design.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: The Tally-Ho! Theory of Language Origins
- From: Thomas Haeckelii
- Re: The Tally-Ho! Theory of Language Origins
- Prev by Date: Re: A Question about the Script in the Qur'an
- Next by Date: Re: A Question about the Script in the Qur'an
- Previous by thread: Language in Edinburgh, Scotland 1700-1750?
- Next by thread: Re: The Tally-Ho! Theory of Language Origins
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|