LANGUAGE: FROM SENSORY MAPPING TO COGNITIVE CONSTRUCT

1. LANGUAGE: FROM SENSORY MAPPING TO COGNITIVE CONSTRUCT Bernard H. Bichakjian BHB@Post.Harvard.edu

2. The canonical view is based on the dichotomist observation that THE CANONICAL VIEW Humans have language Sub humans do not

3. … whence it is concluded … that humans are born with a Universal Grammar coded in their genes

4. THIS A MATERIAL VIEW Is it because abstract thinking is alleged to be subjective? Is it because it better dovetails into syntactic operations expressed in programming language? Maybe both?

5. What we are endowed with i.e., an immaterialpotential • that has enabled us to forge and use a system of verbal communication. is in the words of Saussure a faculté de langage,

6. Humans also have a potential for counting Humans can also count are variants of a core counting model coded in our genes but no one would claim that the known quinquesimal, decimal, vigesimal, sexagesimal, and the modern binary systems Humans have a potential for counting, and that potential is immaterial

7. ... also a potential for dancing Humans can also dance. But no one would claim that humans carry a core dance step in their genes. They can dance the minuet the waltz Humans have a potential for rhythmic motion, and that potential is immaterial. the tango

8. We also have a sense of orientation We find our way and we make maps But we don’t have a rudimentary compass or a model map coded in our genes

9. I realize, of course, that not everyone becomes a mathematician a dancer or a surveyor

10. But ... not everyone acquires language that’s the case of feral children http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ljVd6XS-J0s even among individuals without congenital deficits

11. The lack of linguistic proficiency of feral children • suggests two things: • Language is not an organ-like entity, and language acquisition is not a case of gene expression. • 2. We tap our various potentials to the extent they are needed in our everyday lives. • Language is indispensable for our survival; • so, we are pressed into becoming linguistically proficient ASAP. • Counting is important, but not indispensable; • so, we attain a measure of proficiency. • Dancing is a flourish and surveying a technique; • so, not everyone learns to tango, and map making is left to the experts.

12. Making political hay The attendant relativism of Universal Grammar is politically convenient. If all humans are endowed with the same skeletal grammar, then all languages are gratuitous variants of a unique model. No linguistic feature, present here and absent there, can be claimed to be more or less advanced than its homolog elsewhere. All homologous features are equally advanced , and all linguistic systems are equal. The Italians have a say: “Non è vero, ma è bello.” Turning the words around, one may ask: “It’s beautiful alright, but is it true?”

13. THE VIEWOF A HANDS-ON LINGUIST But, as far as I know, there is no evidence at all that this is the case” (1984:162). “The notion that all languages are somehow exactly equal in complexity and expressiveness is often taught as scientific truth in linguistics courses. Charles Ferguson (1921–1998)

14. AND THE EVIDENCE FROM BIOLOGY There are no signs of a grammar gene has been unambiguous

15. SCIENCE & POLITICAL CORRECTNESS Science may indeed uncover unpleasant truths, but the critical thing is that they are truths. Any effort, whether wicked or well-meaning, to conceal truth or impede its disclosure is destructive.” (James Watson, 2003:372). “… ideology – of any kind – & science are at best inappropriate bedfellows. Jim Watson

16. THE SCIENTIFICALLYCORRECT VIEW Contrary to what has been claimed • Language is NOT a mental organ • Language acquisition is NOT a matter of gene expression • Humans are NOT born with a Universal Grammar coded in their genes • This has been my position for decades

17. MY POSITION FOR DECADES • I have been arguing for decades • that we have a potential for language, not a blue print, • that languages have evolved, as linguistic communities have sought to make their systems of thought and communication • ever-more powerful • and ever-more efficient, • and that they have done so at their own pace and along their own pathways I have received morecriticism than support, but concurring views are emerging.

18. CONCURRING POSITION (1) In a seminal paper, Nick Evans and Steve Levinson have argued that Nick Evans • “The claims of Universal Grammar … are empirically false, unfalsifiable, or misleading in that they refer to tendencies rather than strict universals. • Structural differences should instead be accepted for what they are, • and integrated into a new approach to language and cognition that places diversity centre stage” (Evans and Levinson 2009:429). Steve Levinson

19. CONCURRING POSITION (2) Describing what could be seen as a “follow up” article, Michael Dunn, the lead author, has stated: • “We show that each of these [four] language families evolves according to its own set of rules, not ... to a universal set of rules. • That is inconsistent with the ... “universality theories” of grammar; • it suggests rather that language is part of • not a specialised module distinct from the rest of cognition, • but more part of broad human cognitive skills.”

20. THE INCREASING ROLE OF COGNITION In the remaining part of my paper, I will argue and, to the extent possible, demonstrate • that as incipient speakers cobbled their initial linguistic systems, they improvised grammatical implements on the basis of their perception of the outside world, • but that as languages evolved, the grammatical implements molded on the outside world were gradually replaced with alternatives conceived in the mind exclusively for linguistic purposes. • that this was an important process whereby languages as systems of thought and communication became • ever-more powerful • and ever-more efficient.

21. LANGUAGE EVOLUTION:THE MAIN DIRECTION Visual Cerebral Perceptual Conceptual Grammatical features Grammatical features molded on the outside world developed in the mind for linguistic purposes

22. THE EVOLUTION OF WRITING Pictogram Alphabet

23. THE EVOLUTION OF WRITING Pictogram Alphabet • Picture meaning • tail Acrophonic principle “d” as in “dog” t … • Picture sound • Homonymy • tale • Picture sound • Rebus • tailor • tailgate • Picture meaning • Extension • end

24. THE EVOLUTION OF WRITING Pictogram Alphabet stylized head of an ox   stylized & rotated 90º

25. THE EVOLUTIONOF UNITS OF MEASUREMENT inch metric system foot yard Protagoras: "Man is the measure of all things” ... material and mental!

26. NOUN CLASSES compact human long animal Practically Disappeared solid vegetal liquid mineral

27. ACTIVE VS. STATIVE Nouns Verbs Syntax Agent Ergative case active active Patient Absolutive case stative stative Patient Absolutive case stative

28. FROM ACTIVE VS. STATIVETO MODERN Nouns Masculine Feminine active Ø stative Neuter

29. FROM ACTIVE VS. STATIVETO MODERN Verbs active active/passive stative deponent active adjective stative

30. FROM ACTIVE VS. STATIVETO MODERN Syntax Agent Ergative case Subject nominative case Patient of a stative verb Patient Absolutive case Patient of a active verb Direct object accusative case

31. THE ADVANTAGESOF THE MODERN SETUP Nouns Verbs Adjectives Syntax • No active/stative distinction. • All nouns can occupy all syntactic functions • Can be • predicative • attributive. • No agent/patient distinction. • The action can be expressed from the angle of all participants • No active/stative distinction. • All verbs can have a subject. • Transitive verbs can be put in the passive voice.

32. TOWARDS GREATER FUNCTIONALITY Nouns: No subcategorization. All nouns can be subject. (Originally, neuter nouns were stative and, as such, could not be agents.) Verbs: No subcategorization. All verbs can take a subject. (Originally, only active verbs could have an agent.) Adjectives: They can be attributive or predicative. (Originally, they were stative verbs and, as such, only predicative.) Syntax: All argument alignments are possible: (1) John gave Mary a present. (2) A present was given to Mary by John (3) Mary was given a present by John (Originally, only [1] was possible.)

33. BREAKING THE CHAINSOF THE PRESENT Chained to the present my mind is free to travel Aspect • I can express the actions that are • in progress • completed • resulting state Tense • I can express • the actions • I saw • I am seeing • I shall see

34. GRAMMATICAL MARKERS Stem modulation Function words • Vowel alternation • sing~sang~song • edit~ēdit • Syllable reduplication • canit~cecinit • Conson’t reduplication • kasara~kassara • broke~broke to pieces Function words prepositions, pronouns, degree adverbs, auxiliaries, etc. Suffixes Markers of case, person, degree, tense, mood, etc. rhythmic drum beats

35. ADVANTAGES OF FUNCTION WORDS • Stem modulation provides only a limited number of distinctions. • Suffixes provide more distinctions, • but can trigger morphological irregularities • and therefore language acquisition problems and delays. • Function words can provide • unlimited distinctions • and no language acquisition problems.

36. THE BRAIN IS HOMO’S BEST ASSET

37. THE CEREBRAL SPECIES That we are a cerebral species, that we have achieved our survival and indeed our dominion over many of the elements by using our brain and finding cerebral solutions is common knowledge. What needed to be stressed and demonstrated is that the quest for cerebral alternatives also applies to language. Expectedly enough, languages started with features molded on the out-side world, but the perceptual prototypes gradually morphed into mentally constructed alternatives, especially conceived for linguistic purposes.

38. BECOMING EVER-MORE LOQUENS Harry Jerison has argued that language has provided humans with a cognitive dimension that enables us to elaborate knowledge “not only from sensory mappings that we share with other anthropoids as well as most mammals, but by important inputs to the mapping that comes from our language ‘sense’ as it has evolved in Homo sapiens.” The foregoing has shown that the trend from sensory mapping to cognitive processing has continued, whereby languages have become ever-more powerful instruments for the organization and transfer of knowledge.

39. Thank You BHB@Post.Harvard.edu http://www.bichakjian.com/bernard/