Abstract
There is an overwhelming archeological and genetic evidence that modern speech apparatus was acquired by hominins by 600,000 years ago. On the other hand, artifacts signifying modern imagination, such as (1) composite figurative arts, (2) bone needles with an eye, (3) construction of dwellings, and (4) elaborate burials arose not earlier than 70,000 years ago. It remains unclear (1) why there was a long gap between acquisition of modern speech apparatus and modern imagination, (2) what triggered the acquisition of modern imagination 70,000 years ago, and (3) what role language might have played in this process. Our research into evolutionary origin of modern imagination has been driven by the observation of a temporal limit for the development of a particular component of imagination. Modern children not exposed to recursive language in early childhood never acquire the type of active constructive imagination called Prefrontal Synthesis (PFS). Unlike vocabulary and grammar acquisition, which can be learned throughout one’s lifetime, there is a strong critical period for the development of PFS and individuals not exposed to recursive language in early childhood can never acquire PFS as adults. Their language will always lack understanding of spatial prepositions and recursion that depend on the PFS ability. In a similar manner, early hominins would not have been able to learn recursive language as adults and, therefore, would not be able to teach recursive language to their children. Thus, the existence of a strong critical period for PFS acquisition creates an evolutionary barrier for behavioral modernity. An evolutionary mathematical model suggests that a synergistic confluence of three events (1) a genetic mutation that extended the critical period by slowing down the prefrontal cortex development simultaneously in two or more children, (2) invention of recursive elements of language, such as spatial prepositions, by these children and (3) their dialogic communications using these recursive elements, resulted in concurrent conversion of a non-recursive communication system of their parents to recursive language and acquisition of PFS around 70,000 years ago.
Highlights
Association of Wernicke’s and Broca’s areas with language is well-known
The Prefrontal Synthesis (PFS)-related artifacts are highly correlated with each other in time and geography and are associated with Homo sapiens diffusion out of Africa around 70,000 years ago. This abrupt change toward modern imagination has been characterized by paleoanthropologists as the “Upper Paleolithic Revolution” (Bar-Yosef 2002), the “Cognitive revolution” (Harari 2014, and the “Great Leap Forward” (Diamond 2014) and it is consistent with acquisition of PFS sometime shortly before 62,000 years ago (for a more skeptical position, see (Mcbrearty and Brooks 2000)
We will never know the extent of Homo heidelbergensis neurological control of their speech, considering that chimpanzee communication system already has 20 to 100 different vocalizations (Mitani et al 1992, Slocombe and Zuberbuhler 2007, Slocombe et al 2008), it is likely that the modern-like remodeling of the vocal apparatus in Homo heidelbergensis extended their range of vocalizations by orders of magnitude
Summary
Association of Wernicke’s and Broca’s areas with language is well-known. Dreaming has a completely different neurological mechanism, as dreaming is not controlled by the LPFC (Braun 1997, Siclari et al 2017, Solms 1997). LPFC is inactive during sleep (Braun 1997, Siclari et al 2017) and patients whose LPFC is damaged do not notice change in their dreams (Solms 1997). In order to Language evolution to revolution: the leap from rich-vocabulary non-recursive
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.