|
|
This is only a preview of the paper
Click here to register and get the full text.
Existing members click here to login
|
|
|
In order to be able to discuss this question, we must first be able to define what precisely we mean by language. At first this question seems absurd, since we are all aware of what is meant by the term ‘language’ however slightly different definitions have been given: Stenlund influenced by Ludwig Wittgenstein claimed that languages appear as various forms of linguistic communication between human beings, and he quotes Jaakko Hintikka’s notion ‘of language as a universal medium’; alternatively Carroll defines language as this: language functions through conveying information and thoughts from one individual to another. Language is a socially institutionalised sign system, which is the result of centuries of evolution and change; however, during its long history there exists a set of patterns of behaviour learned and exploited in varying degrees by each member of that speech community.
Jean Aitchison claims that the origins of language are mysterious (there are currently 23 different theories of origin). She quotes two definitions of language: ‘Language is the great conduit, whereby men convey their discoveries, reasoning and knowledge to another’ Locke, 1960; and ‘Language… was invented by man as a means of communicating his thoughts, when mere looks and gestures proved insufficient’ Max Muller, 19thC. For this essay I will assume that the two main functions of language as 1) a system of responses by which individuals communicate with each other (inter-individual communication) and 2) a system of responses that facilitates the thinking and action for the individual (intra-individual communication).
Anthropology has taught us that we are dual creatures, made up of both nature and culture. It is argued that language, or rather the ability to learn and use language, is also the result of these two components. There is a debate about whether languages are the result of evolution (which would result in language families distinct and separate from each other) or diffusion (where there is continual exchange within languages, with each borrowing from another). However it would now seem that language develops through both evolution and diffusion, although there appears to be language families, these are not unchanging, rather words are constantly being ‘borrowed’ from other languages (e. ... it is common for a language to be altered because of war or conquest, or politics). ... the Spanish are not different from the French simply because they do not speech the same language; language differences are often the result of political differences which is the result of culture, rather than racial or heuristic e. ...
It appears that language changes faster than any genetic, natural, evolutionary change would allow, thus a particular language (e. ... English) must be the result of culture rather than biology: however the ability to learn a language appears to be innate (and thus biological) in humans e. ... it is impossible to teach a chimp to talk, since the biology of a chimp’s brain is not made for language learning; however conversely the human brain does appear to be made for learning.
Approximate Word count = 2427
Approximate Pages = 9.7
(250 words per page double spaced)
|
|
|
|
|
|