Hooray words!
Babel’s Dawn has a post from last week about Nicholas Ostler’s Empires of the Word, which I read over the summer and absolutely loved.
[...] Ostler’s book (which makes for great reading on its own terms) provides much material for thought in connection with this blog. He introduces what he calls language dynamics,
“how language, in all its evolving variety, organizes not just the human mind but also the large groups of human minds that constitute themselves into societies, which communicate and interact, as well as think and act.” (p. 559)
This is a particularly important idea on a blog that urges a fundamental relationship between joint attention and speech. Our basic model is not Rodin’s thinker manipulating logical symbols in his head, but the interaction of speakers, listeners, and their topics.
[...] Ostler’s critical thesis is that “a language does not grow through the assertion of power, but through the creation of a larger human community” (p. 556). I think I want to add that to the list of this blog’s central ideas, along with the notion that the function of language is to enable joint attention, and that verbal interchanges pilot attention.
I certainly agree that in the study of the origin of language, the social aspect of language simply cannot be ignored. In that vein, I think that Ostler’s book gives some really compelling evidence for the position that language fundamentally isn’t so much about one person commanding another as it is about one person being able to somehow share what’s going on in their head. It’s a way of sharing mental states so that individual intelligent organisms can form an intelligent, social whole. Languages allow groups to not only coordinate their physical activities but also to coordinate the way they look at the world, so that they can share a conceptual vocabulary without all having the same physical brain.







November 5, 2006 at 10:43 pm
(hard at work on my papers, here…) but I really think you’re onto something with “the way they look at the world” notion for language creation. there’s a really big wave of change in the deaf community over implants that are helping people process sound, because people think it fundamentally changes the community, which is built on sign. but I think the important point is the whole phenomenon of the deaf community in the first place, because I think it’s a clear example of people trying to convey to each other they way they view the world. and sign languages aren’t about trying to somehow immitate the spoken language; they’re independent of that. so yeah, right on.
November 6, 2006 at 1:26 am
Yeah…the whole sign language thing is really fascinating to me, since language seems so tied up in speech and audition. I think it’s a really interesting and wide-open question as to whether our faculty for speech evolved as a result of the cognitive capacity to communicate or vice-versa.