The Origin of Language: Innate and Conventional Accounts

The Origin of Language: Innate and Conventional Accounts How can language be created? There are only two sayings: either by direct instruction from God; then this human birth was a lot and rich. And either idiomatic; by imitation of the sounds of nature or by placement of the initial human group. This article is about the invalidity of the term in its two branches and therefore the necessity of divine intervention. Why is human language different from animal language? If we have a lot of research into the ability of some birds to learn up to 500 words, so do chimpanzees, dogs and other experiments. Chomsky states: "Whoever knows a language has mastered a set of rules and principles that define a distinct and infinite set of sentences each with a fixed form and a fixed or probable meaning. The distinctive use of this knowledge, even at the lowest level of intelligence, is creatively free ... One can thus immediately explain a vast and unlimited field of sayings without feeling unfamiliar or strange ... and if so, it is complete folly to think of the 'evolution' of human language from animal systems of communication."[1] This is a powerful text from the chief linguist Chomsky and it differentiates between sign language between animals and abstraction and delineation of meanings characteristic of man. In this Descartes says: "If I teach a crow to say to his lady 'good-day' when he sees her coming, it can only be by making the word the expression of one of his passions.....so all the things which he teaches dogs, horses and apes to perform are merely expressions of her fear, hope or joy.... What language are we talking about specifically? Is it primitive as the language of children? Is it one that needs divine intervention? Let's mention the answer first, then we will go into the details, and the answer is that what we are talking about is all stages of language. The meditator in the psychology books after Wittgenstein, Chomsky and Freige sees their profound effect in the inseparability of language and thought, which is an integral relationship between the organism and its environment where language is understood through activity, or in other words: the child acquires thought and language as if watching a film made up of scenes of his life and then programming it to give other films! The child is drawing from the ideas and words of the (experimental) that were strange. In response to Sanders-Pierce’s argument that our mental abilities have evolved through normal processes of natural selection, so that we are able to solve the problems we face in the world of experience or nature, Chomsky says: “But this argument is not strong. Perhaps you can imagine that chimpanzees have an innate fear of snakes, and therefore they remain in us because of their caution, but those who do not have this specific biological characteristic will become extinct. Indeed, the occurrence of this partial consensus seems to be a lucky surprise.” Some said it might be evolutionary leaps. - This is the problem of the primitive language of the child, the first man must be guided contextually and verbally by the world of the maker, otherwise the animal fate is inevitable. The experience of the child, who was imprisoned by her father until the age of thirteen and suffered from a severe intellectual failure evident and much protested by Chomsky in his books, including the book mentioned in the margin. Language Learning: A film programmed by a creator (a game, as Wittgenstein sees it) and then teaching names and then thinking inside words and thus creating new words within the rules (nominal and actual sentences for example) and creating innovative ideas. The terminologists jumped from programming to teaching names directly because of their sense of attachment to the pronunciation of the meaning, perhaps, and this is a mistake because the signal education has two problems explained by Wittgenstein in his book (philosophical research) summarized them as follows: - Teaching the child the language is like learning chess, the horse in the game can only be a scientist and aware of the rules of the game of squares and limits of movements, and then the name includes a direct awareness of the child of a sentence: This name is so! See, for example, when referring to a box as a black box, does the child realize that the word “box” is a reference to shape or color? How can he understand what is meant? If you feel your fingers to understand that you are referring to shape, this will be in rare cases. But in absolute terms, how will he realize that I am a simple name and not a compound? And how will he understand that this is the simplest and not the simplest? We come to the final problem in the stages of language, which is to get out of the influence and abstraction of meanings, but to put them in other places that are not realistic, such as assignments and possibilities. “The competence of an adult, or even a young child, is so great that we have to attribute to him a knowledge of language beyond anything he has learned. Compared to the number of sentences that a child can easily produce or interpret, the number of seconds is ridiculously small,” says Chomsky. The problem of extrapolation and generalization from limitations is the same as the problem of language! I will give an example with numbers and it is also evident in the distinction between human language and animal logic. Chomsky says: "Prove that some birds can be taught to count to 7, and thus say that birds can count, which is wrong because the most important characteristic of the counting system is that the series of numbers can go on endlessly, you can always add one and this has nothing to do with the fact that counting things in birds is an independent queen. Some civilizations still don’t use the queen of counting – their languages don’t have the syntax of infinitely many words, and they can learn if placed in another environment. It is correct to say that she is a queen who was used only late by evolutionary standards. It cannot be claimed that those who were able to count and solve the problems of calculation were able to survive! The closest they came to is the result of something else, made available for use when circumstances demanded it ... to call any language system of a world other than the world of man as language is a misleading metaphor."[5] I would like to conclude with these two phrases, one of which is for Descartes to say: “There is no such form in our environment except for very small numbers which can in no way touch our senses too closely ... so when we first encounter in childhood a triangular form painted on paper, it cannot be this form that shows us how to imagine the true triangle ... the idea of the triangle was in us before.”[6] The other is Plato's: "Engineering students begin to think after delivery about certain things as basic assumptions." Margins: * It is noted that every text of Chomsky in his books says the word "divine reason" means an invisible reason and not the initiator, as well as the word instinct developed from the animal. [1] Noam Chomsky, “Knowledge of Language”, Times Literary Supplement, 15 May 1969. Quoted by: John Cottingham, Rationalism, Center for Cultural Development, translated by Mahmoud Mossef al-Hashemi, p 143. [2] Letter to Newcastle 23 November 1646 in Descartes Philosophical Letters, Translated by Anthony Kenny, Oxford University Press (1970), p207. Quoted by: John Cottingham, Rationalism, Center for Cultural Development, translated by Mahmoud Mossef al-Hashemi, p 143. [3] Noam Chomsky, Language and Problems of Knowledge, Toubkal 1990, translated by Dr. Hamza bin Qabalan, p222. [4] Noam Chomsky, “Recent Contributions to the Theory of Innate Ideas” repr. in Stephen P. Stich (editor.) Innate Ideas, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1975, p123. Quoted by: John Cottingham, Rationalism, Center for Cultural Development, translated by Mahmoud Mossef al-Hashemi, p. [5] Noam Chomsky, Language and Problems of Knowledge, Toubkal 1990, translated by Dr. Hamza bin Qabalan, p. [6] Elizabeth S. Haldane, G. R. T. Ross, The Philosophical Works of Descartes, Cambridge at the University Press (January 1, 1969). Fifth Objections and Replies, Volume II, p227. Quoted by: John Cottingham, Rationalism, Center for Civilizational Development, translated by Mahmood Mohsin al-Hashemi, p. [7] Plato, The Republic, p. - Reza Zeidan. — Source: Brahin Center website - Published on 2014-02-02 (archived at the Internet Archive) https://www.braheen.com/articles/philosophy/نشأة-اللغة-بين-الأقوال-الفطرية-والاصطلاحية