The idiom “necessity is the mother of invention” explains the idea that when a need arises for something, then someone will invent a solution. This phrase is usually thought of as an application only to creative solutions to unusual problems, such as running out of flour when baking. However, it’s also interesting to think of this phrase in an evolutionary context, particularly when it comes to the evolution of language.
There are few who would argue with me when I state that the human race developed language out of an evolutionary need. In purely physical terms, we are nowhere near the top of the food chain; nearly every other species outstrips us in some physical or sensory modality, and some would dominate us in a match of aggression. So, as a race we developed language in order to work together to achieve our goals and become the social species we are today. However, there is at least one group of humans that blurs the line between us and other animals with their unique physical capabilities and unique language. That group is known as the Pirahã.
The Pirahã tribe is a small tribe of people that live in Brazil. They are notable for many reasons, including their advanced hunting capabilities and self-segregation from Brazilian society. However, most interestingly, their language still puzzles prominent linguists today because it fails to meet what were previously thought of as the requirements for language. The Pirahã language uses only three pronouns, does not use subordinate clauses or the past tense, and does not contain vocabulary for color, time, or numbers (Bredow).
With all of these components of language seemingly “missing” from the Pirahã language, it’s easy to blow it off as a lesser language or a primitive communication system. However, while conducting research on the Pirahã, Daniel Everett found that their intelligence was not any lower than their neighbors. More extraordinary still is that the Pirahã language was so simple that they could communicate simply by humming or whistling just as effectively as speaking.
There are two obvious reasons why the Pirahã have developed a language so different from most other languages, both of which ultimately tie back into necessity. First of all, having a simple language that can be communicated through hums, whistles, or other simple noises is vital to a people that hunt much of their food in the dangerous Amazon rainforest. Therefore, it was necessary for them to actively develop a language that allowed full communication in this way. But, as Daniel Everett found when he studied the Pirahã people, “this carpe-diem culture doesn’t allow for abstract thought or complicated connections to the past” (Bredow). Because of this “live in the moment” attitude the Pirahã have, they have no need for the past tense, words for time, or even a system of numbers. This is an example of a culture not having a need, and thus not inventing anything to fill it, an interpretation of the idiom that is not the usual interpretation.
This example of the Pirahã has led me to taking a critical look at communication across all species. I wonder, what conditions are necessary for a species to develop a communication system as advanced as our own? And is it possible for human technology to advance to the point where our comfort levels are great enough to signal a depreciation in our language?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Works Cited
Bredow, Rafaela von. “Brazil’s Pirahã Tribe: Living without Numbers or Time.” Spiegel Online International. 03 May 2006.
What a fascinating post! What confounds me, however, is the apparent divergence between the absence of numbers in their language versus to obvious reality of their need and ability to count things. If a father goes hunting and kills three deer but only needs one for his family, conceptually he has to count to three and determine if he wants to give two to other families in the village. Though the language does not denote "3" he must understand it this way. We learned in this class that all languages and forms of communication are equal in status and value. I wonder if Linguists studying Pirahã should in some way develop a rubric for gauging conceptual forms of communication. Just because numbers don't exist doesn't mean (in my very ignorant opinion) they do not count things conceptually. How can Linguists make room for this in their analysis of the language? Fascinating stuff!
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn a paper by Charles Hockett “The Origin of Speech”, Hockett claims productivity is one of the most important design features of human speech. He says that it differentiates human spoken language from other animal communication systems, such as written language. The last four of his “design features” are the most important for understanding human language according to the author. The duality of patterning which is highly complicated was the last property of language to be developed. If a vocal–auditory system comes to have a large enough distinct meaningful elements, these elements inevitably come to be more and more similar to one another in sound. I think the people of the pirahã tribe are an interesting example of Hockett’s theories.
ReplyDeleteThat is a very interesting and unique example of alternative languages. I think to your first question about the conditions for communication as advanced as our own -- the answer is probably a well developed brain. I know this seems like an obvious answer but we have seen how integral our brain structure is to the actual processing and communication of language. The clearest differentiator between our species and others is the size, complexity and computing power of our brain.
ReplyDeleteTo your second question - which is a very interesting one - I would say that we are already seeing that happen. Sophisticated language is considered to be a relic of academia and aristocratic class systems and consequently it is ostracized and negatively looked upon by our society. As a result our television, news and politicians speak in terms that cater to a 5th grade reading level. So it is very likely that technology brings down the depth and sophistication of spoken language.
Great job bringing a different side of language to the table. It's really interesting to think that something as creative and useful as language was created in the first place. In regards to your first question, its incredible that over the long period that language has developed, it has served the purpose of communication. I have no doubt that the first forms of primitive communication that developed created new conditions and circumstances where increasing better forms of communication were wanted, until we arrived at our current iteration of them. It's also fascinating to look at it from the view of the idiom you use, as it gives insight to language development today. One that really shines for me is the development in words that we use. We use some odd words in today's society, granted the more peculiar ones are used casually and not so much in formal speech, but the use of these words show a need for communicating certain ideas. These ideas can easily be identified using formal language, but ideas that would sometimes take a few words to say now are said using just one word, or even letters.
ReplyDeleteThe example of this that comes to mind is gamer talk. In the world of online gaming, a lot of terms are expressed in acronyms such as "gg" for "good game". That example is pretty straight and saying good game in any context is taken as a ritual of good sportsmanship. Yet words like "gank" and "backdoor" take on entirely different meanings from their common usage to accommodate the needs of gamers trying to communicate efficiently and effectively. In regular english, gank is a verb meaning to steal, while to gamers, it means to be ambushed by a enemy player. Backdoor is a more common word in standard communication, but it is not used as a noun or to designate an entrance to gamers. To backdoor is to attack a target while it is not, or cannot, be protected by its defender(s).
In this way conditions for communication (along with lingo) can develop that are not necessary for any survival or evolutionary reason, but rather just to serve the needs of the community that will utilize it.
The Piraha have been consistently exploited, from traders mainly, throughout their known history because of their lack of numeracy, as a result of their language. Taking the view that they didn't 'need' to develop the skill is a convenient one, as it allows us to avoid awkward questions along the way. The Piraha's isolation has resulted in a very unique language, nonetheless.
ReplyDelete