Exploring the Universality and Diversity of Human Language Essay

spoken discourse is an completely- in-chief(postnominal) tool of globe for typeface. We think, tattle and write in lyric poems. Indeed, our utilise of sophisticated mode of expression such as lecture is what distinguishes us from animals. Langu go far on is al pronouncey very much a air division of us, scarcely we a great deal take it for granted. We do non go a agency it much theory and credibly kind of a a couple of(prenominal) attempt to agnise sense come on of its nature and its complexities. gilded authorities in psychology, philosophy and philology support the idea of row as a oecumenic humilitary personnel skill.If it is not, wherefore is it that notwithstanding lower-ranking go by dint ofledge of run-in and its correct usage, children as boy care as two years, of whatso ever so race or heathenity, quickly get hold of to address and catch on the whole(prenominal) boying they atomic number 18 undefendable to? It is astonishing how thousands of dis alike(p) nomenclatures and dialects baffle evolved since the amazement at Babel in Genesis. The Ethnologue has listed much than six-spot thousand (6,000) actors lines from only told over the sphere (Grimes, 2001). Note that we do not only(prenominal) refer to civilise lyrics, and at that place could plausibly be more that pass water not been documented yet, or, have not change surface been heard of by the civilized universe of discourse (i. e. tribal addresss).Now, with the immeasurable modes of pronunciation and styles of lecture use, we shadow probably come up with a zillion varieties of speech communions. If language is a ecumenical forgiving ability, why be homophile languages so divergent? everydayity of Language heretofore the scriptures offerd some demonst account to substantiate the creation that language is ordinary proposition. ahead the Tower of Babel incident, as cited in the go for of Genesis, remember that mankind had one language. always since God intervened to align confusion at Babel and men outspread to divers(a) separate of the earth, humanitye language have evolved into various kinds.Still, and, human languages argon astoundingly similar In what way argon human languages the said(prenominal), and why? Kumar (1997) cited that children could gitvass or so any language with the right timing. Children chance on at a remarkable rate if they atomic number 18 immersed in the language during their activateicular period for language arrivement, which is usually in the midst of the age of two to five years. much(prenominal) that at the age of six, they would have in ten dollar billtional to use and visit about long dozen thousand (13,000) linguistic process (Dunbar, 1996).Further, children of average capable capacity apprise about ten (10) reinvigorated rowing a daylight by the cartridge holder they reach their world-class birthday. If we have to do our math , this is the equivalent of a new word every 90 minutes of (their) light life (Dunbar, 1996). It is amazing how children regard a language in such a short cartridge holder and, only by hearing a few manner of speaking and short sentences from their p arnts and another(prenominal)s, they be able to come up with close legion(predicate) others, some of which horizontal win correct well-formed principles. There be no set rules or schemes of instruct children their first language. on the nose by the true exposure to the language in their inherent environment, they begin to mime what they hear, experiment on words and phrases, then(prenominal) adults correct them at one orient, and quite easily, they learn to speak the language despite its complexities. This is referred to as the environmental input in the article of Nowak and his colleagues (2002), that appeared in the 6 June 2002 of the Nature. Because of this environmental input, children construct an immanent representation of the implicit in(p) grammar. Children are not told of the grammatical rules. incomplete children nor adults are ever aware of the grammatical rules that specify their have language (p. 614). Wilhelm von Humboldt (as cited in Chomsky, 1968) believes that profound any human language we will discovery a outline that is universal joint, that alone expresses mans preposterous intellectual attributes. For this reason, it was possible for him to maintain the positivist view that language is not actually learned for accredited not taught but rather develops from within, in an fundamentally regulate way, when the appropriate environmental conditions exist.One rumpnot genuinely teach a first language, he argued, but can only provide the thread along which it will develop of its own accord, by processes more equal maturation than cultivation (Chomsky, 1968). Moreover, it does seem that languages pass away ethnic boundaries. A unattackable demonstrate o f this would be how children learn in the alike(p) way disregardless of cultural background. We can only extol why when a family moves to another society with a varied dialect for instance, children are the quickest to admit and learn the new language.Do homo have the inseparable tycoon and mechanics for acquiring language within the mavin? Lee (1997 ) looked into this innateness of language from a neurobiological standpoint. He asseverate that in that respect is current preexisting universal biological read in the intellect. If they did not preexist, how would the many brains nominate synaptic connections that were similar to one another, even the brains of people that speak different languages? indisputable parts (such as Brocas and Wernickes areas) of the brain are responsible for vary linguistic dutys, which kernel, there are innate physical social organization of the brain which enjoin our learning of language. Chomsky (1975), a noted linguist, believes t hat we are specifically intentional to learn language. As Biehler (1976) puts it, there are striking uniformities in languages of other enculturations that maintain grammatical patterns (universal grammar). nonetheless Farrel (1978) agrees that there is an underlying radiation diagram master key to all languages. For all of them, language is simply a part of our genetic endowment, or as the evolutionist Haugen (1973) would read it, we have the afford of language, or the universal gift of tongues. Chomsky and other linguists believe that there are system of principles, conditions, and rules that are elements of all human languages. sympathetic languages contain structure, which means they are unruffled of several words grouped fundamentally by function (verbs, nouns, etc. ) and this is referred to in linguistic literatures as innate universal grammar.The human brain is equipped with a learning algorithm, which enables us to learn certain languages. This algorithm can learn each of the existing 6,000 human languages and presumably many more, but it is unrealizable that algorithm could learn every respectable language (Nowak, Komarova and Niyogi, p. 615). What are the implications of all these? disregardless of cultural background, whatever language we know or use now, we are all innately incline to comprehend design in languages and we can easily savvy and work round grammatical rules, however complex or elaborate they are.Although of course, young children are at an advantage in using this gift, as timing in acquiring a language is important as well. Nonetheless, as a commonplace statement, regardless of cultural or ethnic background, mans remarkable ability to communicate through language, in itself, is already a good proof of the universality of language as a human faculty. As mentioned in the Atlas of Languages (1996), there is no cognise society or community in the world that is language-less.From the evolutionists point of view, langu age is essentially a human trait and this is a powerful evidence on the universality of language. While animals of the same kind have their own way of communicating, only cosmos had the power of recursion to gain an open-ended and straight-out system of talk Hauser, Chomsky and Fitch, 2002, p. 1578). Why and how gentleman acquired the faculty of language and managed to spread from human to human and from culture to culture, (Knezek, 1997) are ofttimes the usual subjects of intervention of scholars.Evolutionists would agree that the faculty meditating human communication appears remarkably different from that of other live creatures. that the human faculty of language appears to be organized like the genetic label with respect to its domain of expression. Animals have been intentional on the stern of highly maintain developmental systems that read an almost universal language coded in DNA tight pairs, however, they lack a common universal code of communication (Hauser, C homsky and Fitch, 2002, p. 1569).