Monday, May 4, 2015

Four Imitation Hypotheses: Origin of Language

1. DING-DONG: The “ding-dong” hypothesis bases the origins of language on onomatopoeia. This idea states that language began when humans started naming objects after a relevant sound that was already involved in their everyday life. Examples include words such as “boom,” “crash,” and “oink.”

These represent the sounds of certain objects, but it is unclear how to provide onomatopoeia for silent objects such as a rock. It also does not consider abstract ideas like love or justice, as there are no sounds for these words. Also, this hypothesis does not supply words for grammar or abstract items in the English language, so it is not hard to imagine that these types of words are unusual and rare in most languages. Onomatopoeia is such a small part of linguistics and varies greatly from language to language.  Because of these limitations it is considered a limited hypothesis.

2. POOH-POOH: The basis for the “pooh-pooh” hypothesis holds true to the involuntary nature of human speech. Through emotional response, language and speech would have developed in tandem with human interaction and primitive emotional reactions. Such sounds as “wa wa wa” or “ha ha ha,” commonly used to denoted crying or pain and happiness or laughter, respectively, would then develop into a more unique and case-specific series of sounds in association with other emotions and interactions (Vadja).

The problem with this hypothesis, however, is that exclamations, such as the emotional responses that one might associate with these “pooh-pooh” phrases, are in fact dependent on language instead of a basis through which language can be created. For instance, the essence of emotional response for pain is “ouch” in English, “oi” in Russian and “eee” in Cherokee (Vadja). If there was a generalized emotional response that all people made independently of each other, then perhaps there would be some legitimacy to the argument. But those noises that we all do make based on the stimuli of sneezes or hiccups cannot demonstrate a common linguistic nature between peoples.

3. BOW-WOW: The “bow wow” hypothesis is the most popular but perhaps the most far-fetched hypothesis of them all. Basically, it is the idea that human language and vocabulary originated as a form of imitation. It is said that language came from the imitation of animal sounds.

The problem that arises in this hypothesis is that a lot of words that describe animal sounds in different languages are similiar. For instance, in English a pig makes the sound “oink-oink.” In Russian the sound is translated as “hyru-hyru” and in Chinese the sound is translated as “oh-ee-oh-ee.” As one can see, these words represent the sound of a single animal in different languages. The sound and pronunciation of these words are not similar. The overall idea is that one’s language determines how one interprets a sound, and since we have may languages, one cannot prove that human vocabulary comes from them.

4. TA-TA: As commonly seen in primates, hand gestures and body movement are important aspects of interaction and cooperation within societies. Originally hypothesized by Charles Darwin, though not necessarily supported by him, the “ta-ta” hypothesis states that language and the development of sound was generated to support the hand gestures and movements of the individual. So as to better demonstrate the meaning behind the gestures, these sounds progressed into more and more distinct words or combinations of sounds inevitably leading to speech patterns.

Although plausible like many of the other hypothesis, the cultural roots of varying hand gestures suggests that this is most likely not the reason behind language. Where in some places nodding means “yes,” in others nodding means the opposite. Such distinct cultural differences implies that this is not a sound hypothesis.

The Origin of Language

How did this language instinct in humans originate? And how did the first language come into being?

      Concerning the origin of the first language, there are two main hypotheses, or beliefs.  Neither can be proven or disproved given present knowledge.

1) Belief in divine creation.  Many societies throughout history believed that language is the gift of the gods to humans.  The most familiar is found in Genesis 2:20, which tells us that Adam gave names to all living creatures.  This belief predicates that humans were created from the start with an innate capacity to use language.

      It can't be proven that language is as old as humans, but it is definitely true that language and human society are inseparable.  Wherever humans exist language exists.  Every stone age tribe ever encountered has a language equal to English, Latin, or Greek in terms of its expressive potential and grammatical complexity.  Technologies may be complex or simple, but language is always complex. Charles Darwin noted this fact when he stated that as far as concerns language, "Shakespeare walks with the Macedonian swineherd, and Plato with the wild savage of Assam." In fact, it sometimes seems that languages spoken by preindustrial societies are much more complex grammatically than languages such as English (example: English has about seven tense forms and three noun genders; Kivunjo, a Bantu language spoken on the slopes of Mount Kilimanjaro, has 14 tenses and about 20 noun classes.) There are no primitive languages, nor are any known to have existed in the past--even among the most remote tribes of stone age hunter-gatherers.

NATURE OF LANGUAGE

1.       Language is learnt: Learning of language is not an automatic process. Of course, it is a behaviour but it is not type of behaviour like walking and crawling that comes to child in natural way. Language by imitation and practice. Language is not possible without effort.
2.      Language is related to the culture of society: Every language is related to culture of society to which it belongs. The culture of the people naturally influences the language. Every language is the product of society. We cannot separate language from the culture in which that language exists. It has meaning only in relation to that society and culture.
3.      Language is species specific: Language is species specific. Only human beings have got the gift of language. Of course, the other species do communicate but only human beings can make use of language.
4.      Language is species uniformed: Language is species uniformed. All human children are capable of acquiring any language natively if they are provided the right kind of environment.
5.      Language is a system: Each language is a unique system. The system of language consists of sounds, structures and vocabulary. A person who wants to learn a new language will have to learn new sounds, new structures and new vocabulary. The sound system of language differs from language to language depending upon the culture to which a language belongs. Each language has its own system of vocabulary. Thus each language is systematic.
6.      Language is a system of systems: Each language is a system of systems. There are phonological and grammatical systems in all languages. There are several sub systems with in a language. The phonology of a language forms its own system as the various sounds function in a systematic way.
7.      Language is a system of symbols: Each language works through symbols. Different words used in a language are the symbols. They stand for certain things. The language will function well if its symbols are known both to the speaker and the person for whom they are being used.
For example the world cup has three sounds (K, Л, P) It is a symbol of English because a meaning is attached to it. But if we take the same three sounds like, K, Л, P they do form Puc, but that is not a symbol of English language as no meaning is attached to it.
8.      Symbols of language are vocal: Different symbols are used in a single language. These symbols are vocal. A language system does not exist in a vacuum. It is primary used in speech. Only speech provides all essential signals of a language. There are other kinds of symbols which cannot be called vocal symbols. For example, gestures and signal flags are visual symbols and ringing of the bells and beating of a drum are auditory symbols. They do not form any language. In language the sounds are produced through vocal organs. Reading and writing are no doubt important. But speech is the basic form of language. A language without speech is unthinkable.
9.      Language is a skill subject: Learning of a language is a skill subject. It is skill like swimming and cycling. We can not learn swimming or cycling just by studying rules. We can learn it by practice. In the same way, we can learn a language y constant practice of that language. So a lot of repetition for major linguistic skills like listening, speaking, reading and writing is required.
10.    Language is for communication: Language is the best means of communication and self expressions. Human beings express their ideas, thoughts, feelings and emotions through language. In this way language is a means to connect past present and future.
11.     Governed by a particular set of rules: Each language is governed by a particular set or rules. 
          Subject                 Object                   Verb
12.    Symbols of language are Arbitrary: Here by arbitrary symbols we meant that there is no visual relationship between the language item and the object for which it stands. A man is called man traditionally. There is no visual similarity between the symbol ‘man’ and the actual man. We have not named it so on the basis of some logic or scientific principles. In English we say man, in ‘Hindi’ we say ‘manauYya’ and in Punjabi we say ‘___________’. None of them is better than the other. In fact, we call a man ‘man’ because people have agreed to use it in that sense.
13.    Language is unique: Each language is unique because it has its own style of functioning. The sounds, vocabulary and structures of every language have their own specialty.

Friday, May 1, 2015

Compare Foragers and Collectors found in Primitive Societies

Lewis Binford also made a distinction between collectors and foragers, which is also a continuum instead of a dichotomy. Foragers are more mobile, often living in areas where all necessary resources can be found within a small radius of any campsite they go to. When they are done foraging at one site, the entire camp will move a short distance to the next one.

Collectors, on the other hand, are found in places where positioning the camp close to one resource will increase the distance from another resource. Thus, collectors must send teams off to hunt the other resource (usually migratory herds of animals) and send it back. For collectors, adapting to seasonal and spatial variability is crucial, so storage is much more important. Collectors move less, and when they do move, they move greater distances. There's a whole set of vocabulary associated with optimal strategies of gathering food, as well as the different kinds of sites that foragers and collectors leave behind as their archaeological footprint. In general, collectors will live in higher latitudes and foragers closer to the Equator, but the distribution relies more on the distribution of resources and patterns of symbolism in culture than a simple latitudinal cline.

Saturday, April 25, 2015

Power, Authority & Legitimacy Theory - Explained

Power
·         All politics is about power – achieving and maintaining it – Hobbes – basic human urge is to seek ‘power after power’. Programmed – Dawkins’ selfish gene. Conservative viewpoint.
·         The ability to get someone to do something they otherwise wouldn’t do – ‘power to’.
·         Distinguished with authority by power being the ability to do and authority right to do.
·         Distinction from influence – ability to affect outcome even if not having actual final power to decide – influence is a minor form of power by affecting their actions without inciting force/fear – e.g. manipulation.
·         Lukes sees power in three forms: decision-making, agenda setting and thought control.
·         Decision-making – associated with liberal and pluralist perceptions focussing on who actually makes the decisions. Boulding argues decision-making influenced in three ways: the stick (coercion), the deal (mutual benefit through negotiation), and the kiss (sense of loyalty and commitment to individual, thus he has power).
·         Dahl observed decision-making ‘Critique of the ruling elite model’ and found no single elite in charge, pluralist approach, everyone has a say. Different groups have a say on different aspects. Reality was an “example of a democratic system warts and all”.
·         Elitist critiques argue this fails to understand unequal influence of key elites – real decisions made by a fixed elite – real power belongs to banks and military C.Wright Mills.
·         Hobbes – physical or mechanical power whereby power  is used against an individual’s will – individual is subservient to it, otherwise life would be nasty, brutish and short. Advocates strong, monarchical government.