how did our language derive from nothing?

We know that other species communicate. We know this because we can observe that information has been transmitted, as in the example of the dancing beesWe may not know how their communication works, but that is likely due to our limitations in understanding the process: only recently has it been discovered that elephants make sounds too low for humans to hear, and they apparently use this for communication over large distances (low frequency sound travels further than high frequency and is less disrupted by things like forests and jungles).Chimpanzees and some other apes in the wild communicate by sign language as well as vocalizations. This has lead to experiments where apes are taught American Sign Language (ASL) and where they have shown a distinct ability to not only learn and communicate in this new language, but add new "words" to the vocabulary. They have also been observed teaching it to new members.We also have examples of Dolphins teaching others to do things, and the Japanese Snow Macaques
Blue Planet Biomes - Japanese Macaque In fact it appears that many species have rudimentary language systems.To get from any one of these to a complex language such as humans use is only a matter of degree development, and not a matter of a whole new concept.To add to what nwr said, there are cases of neglected children in soviet type orphanages where the kids {are\were} virtually ignored by the {overworked\underpaid\uninterested} providers where they have developed their own {language\words\syntax}.Enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

you may be thinking of the soviet orphans?also see Feral child - Wikipedia
for some points on limitations of language learning in humansthe Nicaraguan Sign Language (NSL) is also discussed at
BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Children create new sign language

What this means to me is that the language areas are used by the feral kids, and so are not available for learning a new language, and that part of it may be used for {verbal\non-verbal} communication the child used with his adoptive (feral) parents. Sign language does take up the same parts of the brain as verbal language IIRC.I also don't know if they have compared this to the ability to learn a second language substantially different from your "birth" language at a later age.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

thanks Except that if there is a {feral group} of children they develop their own language (NSL). It seems to me that one contradicts the other, and this leads me to think that the {single feral} children do develop language, just language that is too foreign for us to understand or even conceive because it is "tied up with social interactions" they have with their {feral adoptive} {parents\species}.It is interesting that the wikipedia article listed a number of different species: cows, sheep, dogs, wolves, bears, chickens (though that one is due to abusive neglect), and we humans have not found a level of communication with these species (the way we have with apes for instance). There could be nuances of communication that we are just {deaf\dumb\blind} to seeing in the feral children, being too ready to dismiss them as animalistic grunts and growls and brutish movements. These also have the benefits of some references between the different languages and cultures eh?Thanks, I will. Perhaps it is because the "new culture and language" is even more different for the feral child? Time to google off into the ethernet ...

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

thanksfound
LANGUAGE EVOLUTION: A BRIEF GUIDE FOR LINGUISTS
and
Coconuts (no, not marx brothers. makes me think of spooner)busy reading

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

welcome, new person7, to the fray. If you use the {reply} button at the end of the (there's one on each) message, then your reply is linked to that message and we know who's "your" you're referring to. My recollection is 4 to 7, and closer to 7 from some sources. Selection for improved ability from a base of natural variation, yes. This is discussed on another thread as well (see bones of contention) Any idea what caused this? It seems a little simplified as an explanation to me. Sexual selection for neoteny (youthful looking mates) would have the same result don't you think?The original post also said 2x when the surface area of the human brain is 3x to 4x that of the chimps.Enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

please use the {reply} button included in the message window and not the {general reply} button, as this links your reply to the message that you are replying to, and an e-mail is sent to the person. It also makes your post less cryptic (as in trying to figure out why your are posting it).I presume "It was the turning off of a single gene." is in response to But does not really answer the question? The question is not just that a {mutation\copy-error\etc} occured but why was it selected for?ps -- if you want to see how some of the "trick" formating is done you can choose the {peek} button beside the {reply} button or hit {peek mode} at the top of the message being replied to (assuming you use the {reply} message)Enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}