Monday, November 14, 2016

This blog is dedicated to a new, absolutely new way of accounting for the evolution of language. The former posts gave the readers first clues to my attitude to language evolution. Here I show the book's table of contents. All three chapters, and especially the second take different roots in explaining the developments of human evolution and language evolution.
Sounds from the Garden of Eden: How Vocal expressions Evolved to Language
Table of Contents

Chapter 1 | Primordial Circumstances 7                                      
The Magic of Words 7
1. The Scientific Approach. 8
2. The origin. 13
3. Factual Evidence. 15
4. What are we looking for? 19
5. What was the starting point? 25
6. What category of problem is it? 29
7. The Effects of Bipedalism. 33
8. A Foot Unable to Grasp. 36
9. Why do we use sound, of all means
of communication? 40
10. The Initial Motive for Vocal Communication. 47
11. Additional Necessary Conditions, and the
Roles of Survival Demands and Intelligence. 49
12. Evolution-related Problems. 52
13. Brain Size Increase is the Outcome of
Information Processing Activity and
New Functions. 70
13-1. Why did the brain size of chimpanzees,
elephants, and humans increase? 74
The effect of diet on brain size. 76
Does body mass affect brain mass? 77
13-2. How did the elephant’s body
and brain size evolve? 80
13-3. The Reason for a Brain’s Increase in Size. 82
13-4. The Reason for Human Brain Size Increase. 84
13-5. The Branching of Two Species from
a Common Ancestor. 84
To conclude. 89
14. Interim Conclusion. 90
                                        A major point in this chapter is the issue of brain growth. The brain is not a food processor as many scholars suggest. Read this chapter to find out among other issues the true cause to the enlargement of the brain. (human's and all other)

Chapter 2 | The Evolution of Speech 93
1. What must be accounted for? 93
2. The Sequence of our Arguments. 96
3. A Phonological Explanation of the Vocal Tract. 103
4. The Beginning: Guttural Sounds. 111
4-1. Early Australopithecine Sounds. 112
4-2. Baby Sounds. 119
4-3. Distress Sounds of Adults. 125
4-4. The Phonetics of Currently Known Languages. 126
4-5. The Evidence of Arabic. 132
4-6. Arabic vis-a-vis Ancient Semitic Languages. 134
4-7. The Evidence of Sumerian. 140
4-8. Guttural Sounds as Linguistic Fossils. 143
5. The Process of Analogous Expressions
Acquiring Symbolic Properties. 146
6. Real Words of a Primitive Language. 159
7. Analogous, Symbolic, and Verbal Expressions
of Homo habilis. 164
8. The Origin of Phonology. 167
9. The Course of Evolution of Sounds into Phones. 174
10. So how did expressive sounds
become phones? 179
To summarize this section. 182
11. Utterances, Phones, Words. 183
12. Phones as Parts of the Structure
and Function of Language. 186
13. Labial Sounds, the Origin of Consonants
and Vowels. 195
An interim summary 199
14. The Diversification of Sound Expression—the
Emergence of Lingual and Palatal Sounds
and the Origins of Consonant-vowel Sequences. 200
15. The Transformation of Sounds into
Consonants and Vowels. 207
16. The Emergence of Early Consonantal Sounds,
and of Vowels. 212
17. The Emergence of Vowel Integration. 215
Speech consisting of phones was a trivial,
accidental effect of evolution. 222
18. An Interim Summary. 223
19. A Theory Based on Both Assumptions
and Facts. 225
20. Language’s Evolutionary Stage at the
Time of the Emergence of Homo Sapiens. 227
21. The Emergence of Words. 232                                          
22. The Evolution towards Modern
Languages—Part I. 237
23. Phonetic “Inflection”. 246
24. The Progress towards Modern Languages,
Part II. 251
25. Diversification, Categorization,
and Symbolism. 262
26. The Evolution of Parts of Speech—
the Forming of Prepositions and Conjunctions. 267
27. The Origins of Prepositions. 272
28. The Evolution of Speech Parts—
Verbs and Nouns. 281
29. Further Notes on the Evolution of Verbs. 295
30. A Further Analysis of Words and
the Evolution of Word Categories. 300
31. The Statistics of Biblical Hebrew Consonants. 308
Biblical Hebrew letters supposed pronunciation 310
32. Brief Notes in the so-called “Emergence”
of Syntax. 321
33. The so-called “Emergence” of Syntax. 326
34. Words as Syntactic Fossils. 328
35. The Role of Syntax. 333
36. The Main Features of Syntax. 334
37. The Abstract and Metaphoric Nature
of Language. 346
                                                This second chapter develops a phonetic theory to account for the evolution of language, suggesting that human evolution as a whole was most of all constrained by the development of speech.

Chapter 3 | On Language Relations 351
1. Introduction. 351
2. Comparing Hebrew and Hausa. 355
2-1. Phonology. 356
2-2. Verbs. 361
2-3. Plural Form. 367
2-4. Noun-forming. 369
2-5. Adjective-forming Patterns. 370
2-6. Definiteness. 371
2-7. Pronouns and Demonstrative Pronouns. 371
2-8. Evidence of Hausa and Chadic Languages’
Relationship with Semitic Languages. 372
2-9. A Comparison of Vocabularies. 379
• Kinship term 379
• Number names 380
• Color names 380
2-10. Conclusion. 380
3. More Notes on pro Afro-Asiatic
Phylum Arguments. 382
4. Morphemes that can be Attributed to Common
Ancestry. 386
5. Languages’ Relations and Family Resemblance. 393
Phonetic Changes 396
Vowel Changes 396
Syntactic Changes 396
6. Every Language, without Exception,
is the Result of Merging Features of
Earlier Languages. 399
7. The Evolution of Semitic Languages. 405
Index of terms 425
Index of authors 435
Index of Languages 438
English Bibliography 441
Hebrew Bibliography 452
Annex 455
                         The third chapter argues that the common view of proto languages and language families is wrong, and in order to explain correctly the relationships between languages we must find out all the contacts any language had. The proto and family terms are no more than preferring some past contacts to all other during the language history.

Saturday, November 5, 2016

The making of a word
 Etymology  is very popular. Almost everyone enjoys suggesting and learning of words' origins. We know the popular etymologists, and the professional. An instance of popular etymology we find in the Hebrew Bible. The name of the Israelite leader Moses was in Hebrew 'Moshe'. The Biblical writer  tied this name to the Hebrew root 'masha', meaning  "take out of the water", as the story tells about the daughter of Pharaoh who found the baby Moses in the river and brought him to the Egyptian palace.
But surely, the Semitic research revealed  that 'moshe', or Moses is a biblical version of the Egyptian word for 'child', or 'son'.
Are we satisfied with this resolution? and the Egyptian word, where had it come from?
When we look for a word at the etymological dictionary, there is a list of the word's preceding forms in ancient languages, as well as cognates in contemporary languages.
The word 'child' resulted out of Gothic 'kilthei', meaning 'womb'. the word 'chip' came from Old Saxon 'kip', meaning 'axle', 'stave'.
Still I have to ask, are we satisfied with such resolutions, when we look for the origin of language?
While usually linguists meet their wishes if they succeed to show the complete net of connections within the language family, one cannot be satisfied with such results, as they never go beyond a shallow depth.
The most ancient samples of written language, of 5 thousand years ago, and even the mostly doubted reconstructions of proto languages, never take us to to anything really different from nowadays spoken languages.
Do we have to accept that speech has emerged so much very similar to our own way of speaking?
Such an assumption must be rejected. Everything we know about the evolution of human beings must tell us that speech originated very differently from spoken languages.
Yet the etymology of historic languages must not be neglected, as it does hold some hints directing us to our end.
And those hints are unfortunately skipped, almost always, almost by all scholars working in this field.
 Those hints are easy to be skipped, as they look obvious, very much obvious, not worthy of reminding.
That every word is a consequence of similar, preceding word, - so what? and the changing of 'k' to 'ch', again, what's the news?
But when we collect such hints in very many languages, and we identify a common pattern of regular and constant changes in all languages, namely that the changes of the phonetics of new words that result from preceding words have only one direction, like that of the 'k' to 'ch': From the back of the vocal tract to its front: From the throat to the front part of the tongue and lips - then you get something of importance.
In my book (shown below) I brought an abundant evidence showing the transformation of speech from the back of the vocal tract to its front to be a principal fact of the evolution of language, neglected so far by all scholars.