Home / Science / Did the diet change bring us "F" words? The study deals with the complexity of the origin of languages

Did the diet change bring us "F" words? The study deals with the complexity of the origin of languages

"What came first?" He asked. "The changes in language or the changes in the brain?"

Ray Jackendoff, a linguist at Tufts University who was not involved in the study, said the group notes that the ease with which certain sounds are spoken can vary with diet. "It's interesting, but not earth-conscious." That other cultures have pronounced certain sounds more often than others "does not say much about the deep history of the language."

Other cultural and social factors, such as accepting the sounds of Neighbors may also be significant The authors of the study have contributed to language changes, for example, when hunter-gatherer groups and agrarian groups mingled, so did the sounds .

And others point out that labiodental sounds marginal bites have even been found among hunters and gatherers, such as some Yanomami people in South America, who mostly live as isolated hunter-gatherers, fishermen and horticulturists.

Other linguists also point out that the study is based on unproven assumptions, such as the Effects of these small bite changes on noises, the type of mistakes they could cause, the age of the teeth hunter and the notion of agriculture is a useful proxy for the diet. The role of cognitive factors, including the neuronal control of speech organs, remains untouched.

The authors state that they do not minimize the role of culture, society, or cognition in language development. However, they say that physical differences between people deserve as much attention in researching human speech development as they do in researching animal communication systems.

Some linguists fear that if they are not treated with the utmost care, subsequent investigations of the physical or biological differences in language could strengthen ethnocentric beliefs that have tormented linguistics in the past, especially when research is publicly used as value judgments for various Group languages ​​is interpreted.

"There is a risk here of focusing on positive benefits being gained by individuals in agrarian societies, rather than considering the benefits individuals may have in hunter-gatherer societies," said Adam Albright, linguist at MIT

Source link