gmsizemore2{at}yahoo.com (Glen M. Sizemore) wrote in
news:ceb6cl$s67$1{at}darwin.ediacara.org: 

> 
> WM: Actually our language capability is deeper than that than that -
> we are
> born with the capacity to develop language based on cues that we can
> expect
> to receive from our social group. 
> 
> GS: Come again? First, how can anything that an animal does not depend
> on "capacities" that "we are born with?"
Especially since "capacities"
> are inferred from their "behavioral manifestations?" Second, are you
> saying that "language" develops because of "our
expectations" and
> doesn't depend on what actually happens in the social world?

I apologize if my habitual brevity of exposition has misled you. I am not 
implying anything about expectations. What I am saying is that 
essentially all human children (even those raised in orphanages or by 
deaf and dumb parents) will ordinarily receive enough exposure to 
language so that they will learn it. But note that they do not receive 
enough exposure to develop language based on a generalized intelligence 
that analyzes inputs and changes its outputs using _only_ the external 
inputs.
 
> WM: We do not "acquire" it in that sense - we will still develop it
> with minimal prompting.
>
> GS: This is, perhaps, the biggest lie perpetrated on the intellectual
> community. There is no evidence that this is the case, though I'm sure
> that you will parade out a few references, and a few facts, and a few
> non-facts. Since I have heard all of it before, I can help you sort
> out fact from non-fact and fact from interpretation. 
 
> But, of course, your phrasing is a bit vague. The term "prompting"
> suggests a sort of plan on the part of the would-be teachers. There
> was no such plan until culture had developed quite a bit. So, in that
> sense, you could be said to be correct. However, if you are arguing
> that "language" develops with minimal interaction (and this is what
> you meant), then what I said stands. Cultures evolve, no doubt, to
> favor arrangements in which "language" is likely to be
"transmitted"
> effectively – cultures that did not produce day-to-day interactions
> that fostered "language" acquisition are not around today.

I largely agree. What I meant by minimal prompting was minimal planned 
teaching.  Humans raised by wolves would not acquire language - the few 
available instances seem to bear this out. But all humans normally 
interact with infants in ways that, as you correctly point out,  have 
been evolved to produce language. My point was that even infants with 
relatively little of such interaction still learn to speak grammatically. 


 In any
> event, the notion that we acquire "language" with minimal social
> interaction is based, to a great extent, on old misrepresentations of
> conditioning theories, especially the notion that novel FORMS of
> behavior constitute novel CLASSES of behavior, and thus could not have
> been acquired by exposure to contingencies of reinforcement. This is a
> widespread ploy in a number of areas, and it is successful in
> squelching the truth because there is a widespread misunderstanding
> about what is acquired when an animal is exposed to contingencies of
> reinforcement.

Spik Engrish, troop! (To quote Firesign Theater) In other words, you just 
went over my head with jargon. But assuming I do understand you,  while I 
do think that language  is a novel class of behavior, absent the use of 
skyhooks it can only arise from previous classes of behavior, so it must 
be available from previous classes of behavior by differential 
reinforcement combined with incremental changes in "capacities". All of 
which I think translates into my agreeing with you :-)
 
> WM: But it was not always that  way. The first languages probably had
> to be painstakingly taught to  neophytes.
> 
> 
> 
> GS: This is quite backwards. It is not until cultures were quite
> developed that we instituted formal training for "language" (and, of
> course, writing is always formally taught). No, language arose
> spontaneously once the vocal musculature and its innervation arose in
> modern hominids. And when it "spread", it was hardly because a plan
> was formulated to specifically induce vocal verbal behavior in others.
> Vocal verbal behavior arose, produced culture, and cultures
> immediately began to evolve under the impetus of the cultural fitness
> produced by "language."

Here is where we do in fact disagree. To me it seems your statement would 
be similar to stating that, for whales, swimming arose spontaneously once 
flippers and flukes arose. Since I don't think you believe that, perhaps 
you could elaborate further. My opinion is that culture already existed 
(it exists in chimps, our closest relative). Upright walking freed the 
hands for tool use and to carry infants, allowing for a longer period of 
development and more complex culture, including the beginnings of trade 
which furthered the requirements for symbol processing. The other result 
of this acculturation was the development of teaching as opposed to 
simple imitation as a method of transmitting culture.  The advantages of 
even minimal language rapidly translated into cultural gains, leading to 
a feedback effect which drove rapid encephalization and conscious control 
of breathing allowing ever more complex verbalization. But without the 
driving force of culture, there would be absolutely no reason to develop 
vocal musculature beyond that which occurs in the other apes, and none of 
them can "speak" even though chimps at least can be taught the rudiments 
of language. The final result was a species (arguably Homo sapiens) where 
the language ability became genetic rather than needing to be taught. 
Teaching still remained a central part of culture, and the result was the 
explosion in accumulated knowledge that has brought us from the cave to 
the moon in a few tens of thousands of years.

Yours,

Bill Morse
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 8/1/04 5:56:35 AM