Abstract

Sverker Johansson provided a very useful piece of work in which he skillfully reviews most aspects and scientific areas that have dealt with the Neanderthal language issue, including (but not limited to) genetics, archaeology, linguistics and modeling. Johansson’s main conclusion is that Homo neanderthalensis had some form of language, at the very least, a proto-language, which he understands as “a system possessing lexical semantics but not syntax” (Johansson 2013: 6). At the same time, he notes that many aspects are still obscure, and that the data reported until now is still not conclusive. In particular, “whether they had syntactic language can be neither confirmed nor refuted” (p. 23). We agree with Johansson when he says that Neanderthals had to count on some form of language. The amount of evidence he has reviewed points in this direction without doubt. We also agree with him in conceding Neanderthals a much more sophisticated capacity for oral production than as sometimes been depicted in the past. Nevertheless, we think that the real, productive debate is whether or not Neanderthals had the same faculty of language that anatomically modern humans (henceforth, AMHs) have. The author distances himself from this debate and, at the end, he does not take a stance. According to Johansson, the main reasons for not taking any clear position in this regard are related to an inherent problem of the sources of evidence and of the methodology:

Highlights

  • Sverker Johansson provided a very useful piece of work in which he skillfully reviews most aspects and scientific areas that have dealt with the Neanderthal language issue, including genetics, archaeology, linguistics and modeling

  • We think that the real, productive debate is whether or not Neanderthals had the same faculty of language that anatomically modern humans (AMHs) have

  • We entirely agree with Johansson regarding the additional difficulty incorporated by an extinct species, we think that we can proceed with a null hypothesis: In our opinion, current evidence supports that the Neanderthal language was not like

Read more

Summary

Johansson’s approach to Neanderthal language

Sverker Johansson provided a very useful piece of work in which he skillfully reviews most aspects and scientific areas that have dealt with the Neanderthal language issue, including (but not limited to) genetics, archaeology, linguistics and modeling. We entirely agree with Johansson regarding the additional difficulty incorporated by an extinct species, we think that we can proceed with a null hypothesis: In our opinion, current evidence supports that the Neanderthal language was not like. AMH’s because it lacked modern syntax (and only because of this) This is a plausible conclusion that can be reached from the very data reviewed by Johansson. Some aspects of Johansson’s approach, both related to the evidence and the methodology need to be improved. It is this circumstance that hinders him from reaching any firm conclusion about this issue

The nature of language
The substratum of the language faculty
Effects of introgression
Archaeological evidence
Some remarks on the methodology
A stringent biolinguistic approach to Neanderthal language
Findings
New York
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call