[lbo-talk] Chomsky on sociobiology

Jerry Monaco monacojerry at gmail.com
Thu Jun 8 08:19:17 PDT 2006


B,

You are correct, development of the FOXP2 is somehow related to the development of language, though the problem is that we don't know exactly how this happened in the course of evolution. It is a small part of the debate between Hauser, Fitch, Chomsky on one side, and Pinker and Jackendorff on the other side of how to interpret the evidence of FOXP2.

The title of such articles ("Scientists Identify a Language Gene") have to be taken with a grain of salt. Of course most people won't be able to interpret the limiting and tentative implications of the actual scientific articles that discuss how and why FOXP2 is "a" language gene because they are buried in the professional journals. But you know all of this, I am sure.

JM

On 6/8/06, B. <docile_body at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Carrol Cox wrote:
>
> "That language was a factor in human evolution _rather than_ an _invention_ of an already evolved 'biologically modern human species' seems highly unlikely. (This may be what Ted means when he speaks of language as our 'creature.' See the work of Ian Tattersall. [I am familiar with two of his books: _Becoming Human: Evolution and Human Uniqueness_ (Harcourt, 1998)and _The Monkey in the Mirror: Essays on the Science of What Makes Us Human_ (Harcourt, 2002).] In one of his essays he speculates that _homo sapiens_ had been around for as long as 50,000 years before 'inventing' language."
>
> To Cox and others,
>
> From what I understand, the development of the FOXP2 gene about 200,000 years ago in humans seems tied to our ability to produce language the special way we do. Below is an article from National Geographic on the subject. It's an article written for layfolk like me, not for experts in the field. Apparently a more detailed article is available from the October 2001 edition of Nature. Comrade Cox will be delighted to see the first sentence below has his favorite term, "hardwired," in it.
>
> -B.
>
> =========
> Scientists Identify a Language Gene
> Bijal P. Trivedi
> National Geographic Today
>
> October 4, 2001
>
> Researchers in England have identified the first gene to be linked to language and speech, suggesting that our human urge to babble and chat is innate, and that our linguistic abilities are at least partially hardwired.
>
> "It is important to realize that this is a gene associated with language, not the gene," said Anthony Monaco of the University of Oxford, England, who led the genetic aspects of the study.
>
> The gene is required during early embryonic development for formation of brain regions associated with speech and language.
>
> The gene, called FOXP2, was identified through studies of a severe speech and language disorder that affects almost half the members of a large family, identified only as "KE." Individuals with the disorder are unable to select and produce the fine movements with the tongue and lips that are necessary to speak clearly.
>
> Their findings are published in the October 4 issue of the journal Nature.
>
> [...]
>
> http://ngnews.com/news/2001/10/1004_TVlanguagegene.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>

-- Jerry Monaco's Philosophy, Politics, Culture Weblog is Shandean Postscripts to Politics, Philosophy, and Culture http://monacojerry.livejournal.com/

His fiction, poetry, weblog is Hopeful Monsters: Fiction, Poetry, Memories http://www.livejournal.com/users/jerrymonaco/

Notes, Quotes, Images - From some of my reading and browsing http://www.livejournal.com/community/jerry_quotes/



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list