Chapter 2 Psycholinguistics and the Problems of Phylogenesis of Language

Recall that the “phylogenesis of language” is the process of the emergence and development of the human language in general, and not the process of the emergence and development of the language of each given personality.

Seeing that the “moment” of the phylogenetic origin of the language dates hypothetically between 500,000 and 50,000 years “before any era”, leaving us, descendants of apes and - closer to descendants of people of Cro-Magnon type, no material evidence of this or that property The Parisian linguistic society in 1865, i.e., soon a hundred and fifty years ago, in its charter forbade the consideration of any hypotheses about the origin of a language. Somewhat later, in 1873, the president of the London Philological Society, A. Ellis, wrote: "I believe that such questions do not relate to the philological proper." Thus, the problem was removed as "useless", "unproductive." But any prohibitions, as is known, cannot prevent the emergence of interest in the unknown. Therefore, scientists, of course, did not stop their searches, did not refuse to put forward more and more new hypotheses on the basis of various indirect (since there are no direct!) Data.

What is this data? Modern anthropologists point out that the problem of the phylogenesis of language is, of course, linguistic, but also psychological, sociohistorical, and actually anthropological (anthropology is the science of man as a whole). For example, paleoanthropologists who study, in particular, the bones of the skull and skeleton of fossil semihumans and people of Cro-Magnon type, find on the inner side of the cranial cavity of the cavity corresponding to the bulges of the cerebral cortex; if there is a depression corresponding to the “bumps of the speech zone”, “bumps of logical thinking” and, if the age of the skull can be dated, then it is possible to state with a high degree of certainty the presence of at least a primitive language, at least a primitive thinking of an ancient man.

Further, if along with the remains of ancient human skeletons, a “cultural layer” is found (for example, ancient

labor, workpieces for them, remnants of ancient fireplaces, etc.), then the components of this layer are proof of one or another way of life of a primitive creature. Particularly interesting is the evidence of ancient joint labor (hunting, for example), which require joint efforts, and, therefore, certain communication tools. The degree of upright walking is important to determine, in parallel to find out the possibility of release of the hands (for labor actions and gesture signaling), and this is determined by the state of the pelvic bones, the bones of the legs and arms. A study of the jaws of primitive people is at the same time ascertaining the conditions for more or less successful articulation of sounds.

The study of petroglyphs is a means of knowing the mental abilities of man, his ability to reproduce the appearance of animals and their own kind; The image of hunting scenes is evidence of a specific activity that also requires developed communication tools.

In different periods of development of human culture, science, people explained the origin of language in different ways. We will consider only those hypotheses of speech phylogenesis, the content of which correlates with the data of psycholinguistics. Here again we involuntarily enter into polemics with the traditional concepts of linguists.

1. The theory of onomatopoeia comes from the ancient Greek Stoic philosophers. It was followed by the famous German philosopher of the 17-18th centuries. Leibniz. She repeatedly received support in the XIX and even XX centuries. The meaning of the theory is that a person has acquired his own language, imitating the sounds of the surrounding nature (murmur of a stream, the singing of birds, the rumble of thunder, etc.). Proponents of this concept usually give two types of arguments: a) the presence in any language of imitative imitative words like ku-ku, bif-paf, hlop, hry-hry (and derivatives of them are cuckoo, hryushka, clap, etc.), b ) emergence as one of the first in children's speech (which, as it were, repeats the stages of phylogenesis) of similar word formations (woof-woof - dog, to me-mews - to eat, bi-bi - machine, etc.).

Traditional linguistics completely denies the soundness of this hypothesis. Firstly, there are few onomatopoeic words in the language, and secondly, “in order to imitate sounds with combinations of sounds

surrounding human nature, you need to have a very flexible speech, which implies its long previous development. "

Studies by S. V. Voronin showed that in languages ​​- developed and unwritten - a significant number (more than was traditionally thought) of words with onomatopoeic nature (ideophones). At the same time, the nature of the ratio of sound and the reality depicted by it is much more complex than the mere imitation of sounding phenomena. We talked about this in the first chapter, where, as the reader remembers, we told about a special section of psycholinguistics - phonosemantics. A good example is the words from the language of the African tribe Ewe, which denote the gait of a person. Their sound can be transmitted like this: boho-boho and pi-pi-pi. The first denotes the clumsy heavy step of an overweight person, the second is an elastic seed walk.

Summing up the analysis of the onomatopoeic hypothesis, we can say that it (in the form in which it is customary to present it in textbooks) as a whole is not confirmed. However, to discard the rational grain, which contains this theory, should not be. If we supplement the concept of imitation of the sounds of reality with a sound image of the phenomena of reality (sound symbolism), if we confirm it with phonosemantics data, then the explanatory power of this hypothesis will increase dramatically.

2. The inter-theory theory of the origin of a language was expressed by ancient Greek philosophers who called themselves Epicureans. Similar thoughts can later be found in the writings of the German enlightener of the second half of the 18th century. I. Herder. The theory is that primitive people instinctive animal cries turned "natural sounds", expressing the emotional states (interjections) from which the words of a language were formed.

Criticizing this theory, traditional linguistics indicates that there are few interstitial words in languages ​​(even less than onomatopoeic). In addition, the inter-theory theory explains only the emergence of the expressive function of the language, without affecting others. functions.

Acknowledging the validity of the critics, let us recall the data of the children's speech given in the third part of the book. The first child’s phrases do not so much convey any information as they express the emotional state in connection with this

by the situation. And the utterances of a primitive man hardly contained lectures on abstract topics. The main task of household communications of our ancestors was to infect the interlocutor with the author's emotion of speech.

An indirect confirmation of the inter-theory theory can be observations of the speech of modern adolescents. One of the authors of this book had a chance (when he was at school as a teacher) to attend the disco of high school students. Listening to the dialogue of three girls (15 years old), he compiled the most frequent vocabulary of their usage: Bah !; Her! (her-my!); What are you? That's awesome !; Actually!; Nishtyak !; Wow!; Business !; Funny !; Fly away !; Atas !; and so on. Using a set of cited lexemes (mostly of an inter-character character), the girls talked for quite a long time, expressing their opinions about those present. They did it no worse than our primeval ancestors.

3. The labor theory of the origin of the language (it is also called the theory of "labor shouts") originated in the XIX century and was most fully formed in the works of L. Noir and C. Bucher. The essence of this hypothesis is the assumption that the language originated from the sounds accompanying the joint work activity of people.

Soviet linguistics hurried to “pass over to the archive” the labor theory, defining it in the pages of the textbooks “vulgar”. Meanwhile, this concept contains a lot of fair. Without going into its analysis, we note important and fair (from the point of view of modern psycholinguistics) provisions: a) the language emerged in the process of social interaction of people, b) language signs are secondary to non-verbal methods of communication. Given that neither Noire nor Bücher was able to show “how” the phonetic and lexical-grammatical system of each national language is formed, the principle of the origin of sound communication was guessed correctly.

3. The gesture theory of the origin of the language was formulated in the XIX century. V. Wundt, in the XX century. its supporter was N. Ya. Marr).

Domestic linguistics categorically rejects this concept too. In the authoritative textbook of A. A. Reformatsky we read: "... gestures always appear as something secondary for people who have a sound language." The theoretical data that today has

holingvnstic, allow us to assert the diametrically opposite. Observations of speech ontogenesis, the results of phonosemantic studies, experiments with primates allow us to say with responsibility and certainty that the gestural theory today is the most convincing part of the authoritative hypothesis of linguistic phylogenesis. Before we substantiate this statement with scientific facts, let us point out that the above-mentioned concepts - onomatopoeic, interjection and labor - in their positive aspects confirm and complement the gestural theory.

We give the psycholinguistic arguments in favor of this concept. A favorite way of modeling phylogenetic processes in science has long been the transfer of the facts of a child’s speech development to the field of historical processes. It must be said that there is a certain reason in this kind of comparison. Therefore, we will also begin with an appeal to the facts of speech ontogenesis and once again recall the works of EI Isenina. Without repeating what was said in the previous chapter, we note the principal novelty of the researcher’s observation results: before the child masters the language as a phono-lexical-grammatical structure, he creates a special non-verbal (mainly gestural) proto-language system. Together with protoponyms and images of reality, the primary communicative system will form the basis of a universal subject code (according to Zhinkin); it will also form the basis for the formation of sound speech. We emphasize once again: the data of psycholinguistics show that in ontogenesis “at first there was a meaningful gesture and emotional phonation”, and then a “meaningful sound”.

Another area to which we turn in search of “information for reflection” on the nature of linguistic phylogenesis is the observations and experiments conducted in the 1960s – 1970s. of our century on tested humanoids by American psychologists (spouses R. and B. Gardner, R. Foute, D. Primak, and others). Before discussing these experiments in more detail, we refer the reader to the fascinating book “Monkey, Man, Language” by Y. Lendel (M., 1981).

It must be said that zoopsychologists have long, stubbornly and unsuccessfully tried to teach the most developed humanoid (chimpanzee) sound language. The question arose: what prevents a monkey from mastering human communication - structural deficiencies

articulatory apparatus or imperfection of mental abilities and brain structure. Until the 60s of our century, by a majority vote, the preference was given to the second assumption. However, analysis of the chimpanzee voice apparatus, which was done by the American scientist F. Lieberman, made it possible to say: any attempt to teach monkeys to speak is doomed to failure. But after all, as we have said in the second chapter, there are various ways of transmitting information, including gestural communication of the deaf-and-dumb. And if a chimpanzee has an articulation apparatus underdeveloped, then his hands are very much like human hands. Maybe a monkey is capable of sign language?

It was from such an assumption that the American scholars of Gardner proceeded when they took up an 11-month-old chimpanzee named Washo. The success of the pupil not only fully met the expectations, but surpassed the wildest hopes of the researchers. During the three years of study, chimpanzees learned to use 132 signs of the American sign language in conversations with their "adoptive parents"; moreover, she was able to understand several hundred other signs that people used to refer to it. Subsequently, the results achieved by Washoe were repeated by other chimpanzees (Lucy, Moya, Pili, etc.). It is interesting that in their communicative development monkeys often displayed features similar to those we can meet in the child's speech evolution. Here, firstly, it is necessary to attribute the development of the figurative meaning of a sign, secondly, the invention of new signs (remember children's word-making), thirdly, the development of the syntactic structure of speech, etc.

The figurative meaning developed mainly on the basis of similarity. So, the “I hear” Washho sign (the index finger touches the ear) signified any strong or strange sound, as well as the wrist watch, when asked to let them listen. On the basis of the transfer of the meaning of the sign, Washo even learned to swear. The attendant Jack did not pay attention to the chimpanzee's requests for her to drink. Then she began to enter a sign with the value “dirty” into the signal of access to it. It turned out: "Dirty Jack, give a drink." New "words-gestures" monkeys formed on the basis of different principles. For example, the chimpanzee Lucy assigned the name “alligator” to Y. Lendel (biting his fingers) on the grounds that he had crocodile images embroidered on his shirt

fishing Washo, riding with R. Gardner in a boat and seeing a swan for the first time, called him a “waterbird” (consistently depicting the signs “drink-liquid” and “bird”). By the same principle invented new signs Lucy. So, she called watermelon a difficult sign “drink-fruit”, and radish “scream-hurt-food”, obviously bearing in mind the spicy taste of a vegetable.

Combining signs, monkeys made simple sentences from them, and they preferred the order of “words-gestures”, in which the subject of action is in the first place, the action is in the second place, and the object is in the third place (for example, “you tickle Washo”; "Roger - tickle - me"). In other words, chimpanzees showed a notion of subject, action, and object. By the way, a comparison of the structures of children's speech and the combination of the signs of Washo shows some coincidence of structural schemes. It is interesting that sometimes chimpanzees began to communicate with the help of the deaf-and-dumb language they had mastered, not only with humans, but also between themselves.

Experiments with monkeys continue. However, the facts already cited allow us to draw conclusions not only about their communicative capabilities, but also about the primary ways of communicating our ape-like ancestors.

The confirmation of the truth of the gesture theory can be found in the facts of neurophysiology, which studies the brain organization of human activity. We have already dealt with the problems of the relationship between the brain and the language. Our book has already talked about the fact that in the left hemisphere of the brain there is a special center that guides the process of generating speech. This center is adjacent to a more general area of ​​the brain that controls the movements of the arm (right). It is not by chance that when a child has a delay in speech development, speech therapists recommend that he actively sculpt small figures from plasticine or clay in a variety of ways, practicing fine finger motor skills. The motor activity of the hands can have an effect (stimulate) the activity of speech-generation.

An American researcher, Doreen Kimura, drew attention to the fact that damage to the left hemisphere in deaf-and-dumb people, who had previously successfully used gestural speech, entails movement disorders similar to speech disintegration in normally speaking people who have had the same disease. In other words, a brain disorder of the same type

speaking and deaf people led to a violation of speech -sound and gestures.

Turning to the study of the gestures of normal subjects, Kimura found that right-handers (whose left hemisphere is associated with speech and the right hand) in the process of communication make much more free movements with the right hand than with the left. People with a more developed left hand (and a dominant, speech right hemisphere) are more active in gesturing with their left hand.

These and many other observations allowed the scientist to suggest a phylogenetic connection of gesture and sounding speech. Moreover, according to Kimura's hypothesis, the language developed in the left hemisphere because it was already adapted for some types of communicative activity. The evolutionary advantages offered by the development of a clever hand manipulation proved to be a useful basis for building a communication system that was at first gestural and used her right arm, but later began to use her voice musculature.

One of the Russian philosophers wrote in connection with the problem that arose: “In phylogenetic terms, there is a contradiction: language arises from need (i.e., people's need for communication — IG, K. C), and the need is formed in the process of people's life, no language. You cannot feel the need for something that has never existed. Ссылкой на то, что эта потребность создается в процессе труда, мы этого противоречия не преодолеваем, так как процесс труда лежит вообще в основе жизнедеятельности человека, и необходимо выяснить, как он привел к потребности в том, чего не существовало». Философ предлагает снять противоречие тем, что признать первоначальное наличие (до языка в его нынешнем понимании) коммуникативно-сигнальной системы. Она-то постепенно развилась в знаковую систему языка именно на такой «предъязыковой» системе в качестве базиса. Аналогом такому гипотетическому базису язык в филогенезе можно считать и детский «предъязык», и знаковое (жестовое) поведение обезьян в эксперименте.

Итак, следует признать в качестве достоверной гипотезы, что:

1. Коммуникативная деятельность человека в существенных своих элементах выросла из коммуникативных систем животных

предков древнего человека; она была уже дана им, будущим питекантропам, неандертальцам и синантропам.

2. Когнитивный уровень высших антропоидов настолько высок, что, по свидетельству психолога с мировым именем Ф. Кликса, можно говорить а «способности к разумному решению задач, не выводимому из простой последовательности проб и ошибок», о «потребности в кооперации». Один из важнейших признаков (проявлений) высокоразвитых когнитивных способностей высших животных является сочетание прогнозирования с опосредствующим использованием действия инструмента (орудия) для достижения цели.

Instinct in itself is not able to determine the actions of an animal in unusual conditions of communication with a person or when solving its tasks. If philosophers recognize two types of mediation of human activity - an instrument and a sign, then it must be admitted - in the face of facts - that humanoids are capable (of course, at their level) to such mediation. And the evolution (phylogenesis) of a person receives additional confirmation of continuity, both with respect to cognitive abilities and with respect to communicative means.

L. A. Firsov called the non-verbal means of communication of our "younger brothers" (including the phonation of animals) as their "proto-language" ("primary language"), and their level of thinking - "conceptual within certain limits." We would prefer to call it "proto-conceptual." But the essence of this does not change. It is important to note that there is no reason to consider the most ancient means of human communication and even a human-like transitional type to be exclusively “soundless”, only “gestural and mimic”: the sound signal system of animals (and not only them) has already been given as the basis for the development of sound articulated human speech , NCC in the communication of the present - evidence of a synthetic ancient communicative system. Therefore, in each of the four theories of the origin of language discussed above, there is a meaning, since each of them describes some one side of phylogenesis.S. Voronin, an expert in the field of phonosemantics, concludes in his book: "... the language has a graphic origin, and the language sign at the initial stage of phylogenesis is naturally (primary) motivated, graphic."

На практике путь первоначального развития коммуникации, по справедливому мнению Б. В. Якушина, выглядит, как путь от «озвученной пантомимы к членораздельной речи». Согласно концепции ученого, зарождение и первые этапы развития языка протекали в двух планах: в реальном социально-значимом взаимодействии членов коллектива и в игровых культовых проявлениях.

Одна из причин превращения нечленораздельного сопровождения действия - в увеличении разнообразия реальных (трудовых, боевых) ситуаций, в которых приходилось бывать первобытному человеку. Разнообразие это, в свою очередь, было связано с обостряющейся конкуренцией между племенами в условиях демографического кризиса, вынужденной миграцией и т. д. Множество ситуаций, все более сложная деятельность в их рамках требовала как аналитизма мышления, так и его способности к синтезу, к схематизации ситуаций.

Another equally important reason is the development of ritual and mythological functions of sound communication. From the soundtrack of the syncretic action, in the center of which was pantomime, primitive man proceeded to create a complex system of magical texts that carry information about the world and ways of organizing relationships with this world. The soundtrack of the magical rites was cast into verbal formulas that were passed from one generation to another, improving in the lexical and grammatical incarnation.

Gradually, word sentences developed from elementary actions sounded, followed by isolating the subject and predicate groups, etc. This is how the articulate speech arose.