Language
Language is not inherent; it is taught and passed from generation to generation. It is a purely cultural phenomenon, but has been the main driver of human cultural progress over thousands of years.
The ability to learn and use language is not inherited, it needs no unique brain capability, but it makes the functioning of the brain more efficient, increases knowledge and intelligence, and has an effect on feelings, emotions and consciousness.
The unique ability of humans to use language is enabled by a special set of symbol schemas that are symbols for symbols. This includes symbols representing written words, which are symbols for spoken words, which are in turn symbols for other concepts. Many other cultural fields that involve abstract concepts also make use of meta-symbols, such as mathematics and music (I intend to include pages on these two at some point in the future, and possibly some other cultural subjects later).
- The human brain is no larger than would be expected, compared to body size of other mammals
(see brain size and
brain-body mass ratio)
but the number and type of the connections are probably more crucial with regards to levels of intelligence and the use of language
(see encephalisation quotient and
neuroscience and intelligence).
- All animals with brains must build models of their world in their brains, and this will include
symbol schemas that represent important things including themselves.
- Humans seem to have extra levels of connectivity that allows structures of meta-symbols,
symbols of symbols, to be constructed, so humans can have far more symbol schemas in their brains.
- One of the major uses of meta-symbols, and one of main reasons why humans have far more
symbol schemas than other animals is because of the use of language.
- I have a symbol schema in my brain for every word and phrase that I know; having these
also helps me to express and think about concepts for which there is no specific word.
- Language provides many advantages, including some that help my survival and therefore also the survival of the species.
- More symbol schemas with more connections means more experience and intelligence, even without language.
- Crucially, language allows knowledge and information to be passed between people and between generations.
This is a huge advantage for gathering and spreading information on basic skills such as foraging, hunting, farming,
tool making and usage, animal usage, cooking, medicine and so on.
- The naming of non-abstract objects helps delineate the world.
- Language helps to delimit and refine the extent of a symbol schema and therefore helps define a concept more precisely.
- For people who learn more than one language, this advantage is compounded.
- Any additional representations attached to an existing symbol schema will do the same thing.
- Many abstract concepts would be almost impossible to grasp or think about without the use of language.
- Some relatively easy concepts may be able to be grasped without language; research has shown,
for example, that ducklings and very young babies can understand the concepts of “same” and
“different”1,
2.
- For humans who have been immersed in language since birth, it is almost impossible to imagine
how to think without language, but it must be very difficult to grasp even relatively simple
abstract concepts of (for example) “below”, “before”, “less than”
or “half” without the use of language.
- Children are taught a new abstract concept by the use of concrete examples using words (and perhaps pictures),
and the concept become established through the use of many different examples.
- A new symbol schema that is created to represent a new abstract concept is closely linked to the
symbol schemas that represent the concrete examples (with many synapse connections).
- In the short term, reinstatement via those connections will still be available to attention and memory,
but over time some of the efferent connections may be pruned because of lack of use, so the conscious memory
of the concrete examples is no longer available, but the links are still there.
- This is the same process as learning a new skill, such as throwing a frisbee; in the early stages conscious attention is
required to execute the correct actions, but over time it becomes more automatic and the conscious connections are
no longer available.
- There is evidence that abstract concepts are stored in an associative
network3.
For example, the symbol schema for “danger” might be linked to the symbol schemas for
“lion” and “snake”.
- Language gives the ability to grasp and think about abstract concepts simply by relating them
to other already-understood concrete or abstract
concepts4.
- It could also be argued that the ability to grasp and think about abstract concepts at potentially multiple levels
of abstraction is likely to lead to a better understanding of “the self” - probably the ultimate abstract
concept - which is the crucial component of human consciousness.
- The only hereditary requirements for language are the physiological ability to speak and hear, and the
processing ability to construct and parse (which may be described as unlimited associative learning, or, in my terms, unlimited levels of afferent processing)
- Spoken language obviously uses only physiologically possible sounds.
- Sign-languages and written languages make use of exactly the same processing abilities but
do not have the vocal and aural requirements.
-
^
Ducklings imprint on a relational concept of 'same or different' - Martinho and Kacelnik 2016
doi: 10.1126/science.aaf4247
downloadable here or see GoogleScholar.
The abstract on the first page says:
“The ability to identify and retain logical relations between stimuli and apply them to novel stimuli is known as relational concept learning. This has been demonstrated in a few animal species after extensive reinforcement training, and it reveals the brain’s ability to deal with abstract properties. Here we show relational concept learning in newborn ducklings without reinforced training. Newly hatched domesticated mallards briefly exposed to a pair of objects that were either the same or different in shape or colour later preferred to follow pairs of new objects exhibiting the imprinted relation.”
-
^
The Origins of Same/Different Discrimination in Human Infants - Hespos, Gentner, Anderson and Shivaram 2020
doi: 10.1016/j.cobeha.2020.10.013
downloadable here or see GoogleScholar.
Conclusion on page 11:
“Our studies demonstrate that infants have a relational processing mechanism that can compare across examples to form abstract relations.... What is new about the contributions from the infant work is that same/different discrimination is present in the first year of life suggesting that the ability emerges prior to and independent of language.”
-
^
Abstract and concrete concepts have structurally different representational frameworks - Crutch and Warrington 2005
doi: 10.1093/brain/awh349
downloadable here or see GoogleScholar.
Two-thirds of the way through the Summary:
“...abstract concepts, but not concrete concepts, are represented in an associative neural network.”
-
^
Ibid. Abstract and concrete concepts have structurally different representational frameworks
Conclusion, page 623, third paragraph:
“Abstract concepts, however, may be acquired in the context of language without any direct perceptual input.”
Page last uploaded
Wed Jan 31 07:25:02 2024 MST
