The problem of the origin of the language is very complex and has been completely solved. It is not purely linguistic, its solution can only be achieved through the joint efforts of representatives of history, philosophy, geology, anthropology, biology and semiotics. This problem should be solved within the framework of a comprehensive program "the origin of man, language, society, consciousness." The data available to modern science is sufficient only to put forward general hypotheses. Even in ancient times, people were interested in the question of how and why people began to speak. Vendina noted that there are 2 approaches to solving this problem:

1) the language appeared naturally

2) the language was created artificially, by some active, creative force

The second point of view prevailed for a long time. The differences were only about who created the language.

In ancient linguistics, the question was formulated as follows: was the language created "by establishment" or "by the nature of things."

The first answer to the question of the origin of language is given by religion. The Almighty created everything on earth. This hypothesis has been called "divine, or creational, or logosic." Logos has several varieties:

1) Vedic

2) biblical

3) Confucian

Plato is a supporter of this theory. At the heart of the logos theory is the idea of ​​people receiving language from some higher powers.

AT recent decades from time to time the hypothesis of extraterrestrial origin person.

Starting from the 18th century, the problem of P.I. was posed as scientific and philosophical. Scientific theories of the origin of language appeared. Among the conditions in which language arose, we can distinguish factors related to evolution human body and factors associated with the transformation of the primitive herd into society. scientific theories can be divided into two groups: biological and social.

Biological explain the origin of language by the development of the speech apparatus, brain, and sense organs. They consider the emergence of language as the result of a long development of nature and man, while rejecting the divine p.

The most famous biological theories are onomatopoeic and interjection .

onomatopoeic - explains p.i. the evolution of the hearing organs that perceive the sounds of the surrounding world. Democritus is a supporter.

Language arose from the conscious or unconscious desire of a person to imitate the sounds of the surrounding world. The basis for such views was that in all languages ​​of the world there are onomatopoeic words: woof-woof, meow-meow, ku-ku. However, there are few such words and they are different in different languages. In addition, the most common words do not detect even a hint of imitating any sounds.

Interjection - explains p.i. the feelings a person experiences.

The first words according to this theory are cries, interjections, due to sensory perception. In the course of further development, cries acquired symbolic meaning obligatory for all members of this community. Darwin is a supporter of this theory, as well as the Brothers Grimm. If in the sound theory the external world was the impetus, then the interjection theory was the stimulus for the n. considered inner world of a person, and common to both theories is the recognition, along with sound language presence of gestures.

These theories focus on the development of the mechanism of speaking, but they ignore social factor and this has led to skepticism towards them.

Social theories explain p.i. social needs that have arisen in labor and as a result of the development of human consciousness.

The social contract theory considers language as a conscious invention and creation of people. Diodorus Siculus, Jean Jacques Rousseau, Adam Smith.

The German philosopher Noiret put forward a working theory of non-fiction, or the theory of labor cries. According to this theory, language arose in the process of joint labor activity of primitive people as a means of optimization and coordination. By this cries, at first involuntary, gradually turned into symbols of labor processes. Initially, the language was a set of vowel roots. This theory can be perceived as a variant of the interjection theory. In more complex form, in last third In the 19th century, Engels also formulated the labor theory of p. General Process Engels presents the development of man and society as the interaction of labor, consciousness, and language.

evolutionary . The German scientist Humboldt explained P.I. development of the mind and senses. The birth of the language was due to the inner need of mankind. Language is not only a means of communication between people, it is inherent in their very nature and is necessary for spiritual development person. Resonates with biology.

Language and thinking

Language is a system of verbal expression of thoughts. But the question arises, can a person think without resorting to language?

Most researchers believe that thinking can exist only on the basis of language and in fact identify language and thinking.

Even the ancient Greeks used the word " logos» to denote a word, speech, spoken language and at the same time to denote the mind, thought. They began to separate the concepts of language and thought much later.

Wilhelm Humboldt, the great German linguist, founder general linguistics as a science, he considered language to be the formative organ of thought. Developing this thesis, he said that the language of the people is its spirit, the spirit of the people is its language.

Another German linguist August Schleicher believed that thought and language are as identical as content and form.

Philologist Max Muller expressed this thought in an extreme form: “How do we know that the sky exists and that it is blue? Would we know the sky if there were no name for it?... Language and thinking are two names for the same thing.”

Ferdinand de Saussure (1957-1913), the great Swiss linguist, cited in support of the close unity of language and thought figurative comparison: “language is a sheet of paper, thought is its front side, and sound is the reverse side. You can't cut the front without cutting the back. Similarly, in language, neither thought can be separated from sound, nor sound from thought. This can only be achieved by abstraction."

And finally, the American linguist Leonard Bloomfield argued that thinking is talking to oneself.

However, many scientists adhere to the opposite point of view, believing that thinking, especially creative thinking, is quite possible without verbal expression. Norbert Wiener, Albert Einstein, Francis Galton and other scientists admit that they do not use words or words in the process of thinking. mathematical signs, and vague images, use the game of associations and only then translate the result into words.

On the other hand, many manage to hide the scarcity of their thoughts behind an abundance of words.

Many creative people - composers, artists, actors - can create without the help of verbal language. For example, composer Yu.A. Shaporin lost the ability to speak and understand, but he could compose music, that is, he continued to think. He retained a constructive, figurative type of thinking.

The Russian-American linguist Roman Osipovich Yakobson explains these facts by saying that signs are a necessary support for thought, but inner thought, especially when it is a creative thought, willingly uses other systems of signs (non-speech), more flexible, among which there are conditional generally accepted and individual ( both permanent and occasional).

Some researchers believe that we have a very clear anticipation of what we are going to say, we have a sentence plan, and when we formulate it, we have a relatively clear idea of ​​\u200b\u200bwhat we are going to say. This means that the plan of the sentence is not carried out on the basis of words. The fragmentation and curtailment of reduced speech is a consequence of the predominance of non-verbal forms in thinking at this moment.

Thus, both opposing points of view are well founded. The truth most likely lies in the middle, ie. Basically, thinking and verbal language are closely related. But in some cases and in some areas, thinking does not need words.

6. Language and speech.
A language is a certain code, a system of signs and rules for their use. This system includes units different levels: phonetic (sounds, intonation), morphological (parts of a word: root, suffix, etc.), lexical (words and their meanings) and syntactic (sentences). Described this system in grammars and dictionaries.
Speech is understood as the activity of people in the use of a language code, the use of a sign system, speech is a language in action. In speech, language units enter into various relationships, forming countless combinations. Speech always unfolds in time, it reflects the characteristics of the speaker, depends on the context and situation of communication.
Product speech activity become specific texts created by speakers orally or writing. If a language exists regardless of who speaks it (in Latin or Sanskrit, for example, no one has been speaking for a long time), then speech is always tied to the speaker. Only speech individual person may be right or wrong, corrupted or improved. Language is an objective given; it is beyond our efforts to destroy or mutilate it; on the contrary, we choose the style of behavior in the language ourselves. For successful communication the existence of a developed language is not enough. Important role plays the quality of its use or the quality of speech of each speaker, the level of communicative language competence of the interlocutors.
Under the communicative language competence is understood as a set of linguistic (knowledge of the language system), sociolinguistic (knowledge of social norms: speech etiquette, the rules of communication between representatives different ages, gender and social groups) and pragmatic (skills of using language tools for certain functional purposes, recognizing different types of texts, the ability to choose language tools depending on the characteristics of the situation of communication, etc.) knowledge and skills that allow one or another activity to be carried out using speech means.

There are a number of hypotheses about the origin of the language, but none of them can be confirmed by facts due to the huge remoteness of the event in time. They remain hypotheses, since they can neither be observed nor reproduced in an experiment.

Religious theories

Language was created by God, gods or divine sages. This hypothesis is reflected in the religions of different nations.

According to the Indian Vedas (XX century BC), chief god gave names to other gods, and holy sages gave names to things with the help of the main god. In the Upanishads, religious texts from the 10th century B.C. it is said that being created heat, heat - water, and water - food, i.e. alive. God, entering into the living, creates in it the name and form of the living being. What is absorbed by a person is divided into the grossest part, the middle part and the subtlest part. Thus, food is divided into feces, meat and mind. Water is divided into urine, blood and breath, and heat is divided into bone, brain and speech.

Labor hypotheses

Spontaneous jump hypothesis

According to this hypothesis, the language arose abruptly, immediately with a rich vocabulary and language system. Hypothesized by a German linguist Wilhelm Humboldt(1767-1835): “Language cannot arise otherwise than immediately and suddenly, or, more precisely, everything must be characteristic of the language at every moment of its existence, thanks to which it becomes a single whole ... It would be impossible to invent a language if its type was no longer embedded in the human mind. In order for a person to be able to comprehend at least one word not just as a sensual impulse, but as an articulate sound denoting a concept, the entire language and in all its interconnections must already be embedded in it. There is nothing singular in language; each individual element manifests itself only as part of the whole. No matter how natural the assumption of the gradual formation of languages ​​may seem, they could arise only immediately. A person is a person only because of language, and in order to create a language, he must already be a person. The first word already presupposes the existence of the whole language.

Jumps in the emergence of biological species also speak in favor of this seemingly strange hypothesis. For example, when developing from worms (which appeared 700 million years ago) to the appearance of the first vertebrates - trilobites, 2000 million years of evolution would be required, but they appeared 10 times faster as a result of some kind of qualitative leap.

Animal language

1. Animal language is innate. He doesn't have to learn from animals. If the chick hatched in isolation, then he owns " vocabulary", which is supposed to have a chicken or a rooster.
2. Animals use language unintentionally. The signals express them emotional condition and are not intended for their associates. Their language is not an instrument of knowledge, but the result of the work of the sense organs. The gander does not report danger, but with a cry infects the flock with its fear. The thinking of animals is figurative and not connected with concepts.
3. Animal communication is unidirectional. Dialogues are possible, but rare. Usually these are two independent monologues, pronounced simultaneously.
4. There are no clear boundaries between animal signals; their meaning depends on the situation in which they are reproduced. Therefore, it is difficult to count the number of words and their meanings, to understand many "words". They do not put words into phrases and sentences. On average, animals have about 60 signals.
5. In the communication of animals, information not about oneself is impossible. They cannot talk about the past or the future. This information is operational and expressive.

However, animals are able to assimilate the signals of animals of other species (“Esperanto” of ravens and magpies, which is understood by all the inhabitants of the forest), that is, to passively master their language. Such animals include monkeys, elephants, bears, dogs, horses, pigs.

But only a few developed animals are able to actively master someone else's speech (reproduce words and sometimes use them as signals). These are parrots and mockingbirds (starlings, crows, jackdaws, etc.). Many parrots "know" up to 500 words, but do not understand their meaning. It's different with people. A tax collector in Stockholm provoked dogs by imitating 20 kinds of barks.

Since the speech apparatus of monkeys is poorly adapted to pronouncing sounds human language, spouses Beatrice and Allende Gardners taught the chimpanzee Washoe sign language (up to 100 - 200 words American language gestures for the deaf and dumb - amslena ( amslang), more than 300 combinations of several and words, and Washoe even learned to independently compose simple phrases like “dirty Jack, give me a drink” (offended by a zookeeper), “water bird” (about a duck). Other monkeys have been taught to communicate by typing messages on a computer keyboard.

Human origin and language

The brain of a chimpanzee is about 400 grams (cc), a gorilla is about 500 grams. Australopithecus, the predecessor of man, had the same brain. Archanthrope appeared about 2.5 million years ago.

• First stage - homo habilis (man of skill).

  He worked stones. Brain - 700 gr.

  This is the stage of transition from monkey to man. The approximate boundary separating the brain of a monkey from a person is approximately 750 gr.

• Second phase - Homo erectus(upright man).

  Introduced various types: Pithecanthropus, Sinanthropus, heidelberg man. It originated about 1.5 million years ago. Knew fire. The mass of the brain was 750 - 1250 gr. Apparently, during this period, the beginnings of speech already appeared.

Paleoanthropist appeared about 200-400 thousand years ago.

Homo sapiens (reasonable man) - this is already the species to which we belong - was first presented in the form of a Neanderthal. He made tools from stone, bone, wood. Buried the dead. The weight of the brain even reached 1500 gr. more than the average for a modern person.

Neoanthrope lived about 40 thousand years ago. Represented by Cro-Magnon man. Height 180 cm. Brain - 1500 gr. Perhaps we are not the descendants of Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon man, but of another branch of protohumans, whose fossil remains have not been preserved.

Modern man

On average, the weight of the brain of a man is 1400 grams, women - 1250 grams, the brain of a newborn weighs about 350 grams. Since the 19th century, the brain has become heavier in men by 50 grams, in women by 25 grams.

The maximum weight - 2000 grams - was with I. S. Turgenev, at least 1100 grams - with French writer Anatole France.

The heaviest female brain- 1550 grams - belonged to the killer.

The yellow race has a slightly larger brain than the white race.

Humans have the highest brain to body weight ratio of 1 to 40-50. Dolphin is in second place. An elephant has a larger brain than a human. Therefore, it is not the absolute weight that is more important, but the relative one. Women have smaller brains on average due to their lower body weight, and the ratio is the same.

Language is the second signaling system

The thinking of animals is at the level of the first signal system, that is, the system of direct perception of reality created by the senses. These are direct concrete signals.

Human thinking is at the level of the second signal system. It is created not only by the sense organs, but also by the brain, which turns the data of the sense organs into second-order signals. These second signals are signal signals.

The second signaling system, i.e. speech is a distraction from reality and allows for generalization.

website hosting Langust Agency 1999-2019, link to the site is required

LINGUISTICS

1. Scientific and branch structure external linguistics

The division of linguistics into internal and external was first carried out by the largest Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913) in his famous "Course of General Linguistics" (1916). This division suggests various points perspective on learning linguistic phenomena. Internal linguistics explores language as such, it abstracts from non-linguistic objects. External linguistics, on the contrary, studies language along with certain non-linguistic phenomena. Its task is to study such properties of the language that other objects have.

What is the scientific and sectoral structure of external linguistics? What kind scientific branches are part of the external linguistic disciplines?

External linguistics occupies an intermediate position between proper linguistics and other non-linguistic sciences. It borrows its sectoral structure from the non-linguistic sciences. The question arises: what kind of science? How to present them in the system?

Obviously, the classification of sciences should be made on an objective basis. In revealing the sectoral structure of science as a whole, we must follow the structure of the objective world. What are the components of modern world? It includes four types of objects - physical (dead), biological (alive), psychological and cultural. In other words, our world includes four components - dead nature, wildlife, psyche and culture. Each of these components is studied by the corresponding science. Dead nature is studied by physics, Live nature- biology, psyche - psychology and culture - cultural studies (or cultural studies).

The sequence in which we named the data of science is not accidental. It was in this sequence that the evolutionary

rationed the subjects of their research. In fact, primary in origin is dead, inorganic matter. Living, organic matter emerged from its bowels. Thanks to biophysical evolution, in turn, the psyche arose - the ability to ideally reflect the material world. Particularly great progress in the development of this ability was achieved by our animal ancestors - the great apes. In his mental development they are ahead of all other animals.

What caused the transition of apes to humans? Due to the fact that the thinking of great apes has reached such a degree of development that they were able to see in the world what can be changed, transformed, improved, improved. From the moment this ability bore its first fruits, the history of mankind began. Already the very first products of the transformative activity of our ancestors (processed animal skins used as clothing, primitive tools, etc.) were products of culture.

Culture is everything that was created by man as a result of his influence on nature and himself. Thanks to the development of culture, people have become and are becoming people more and more. more. The higher the cultural level of a person, the further he broke away from his animal ancestor. It refers to specific person, individual people and, finally, to humanity as a whole. In order for mankind to become more and more human, it must develop its culture.

What are the components of culture? First of all, we must divide it into material and spiritual. The difference between them is that the first is created to meet the needs of the biological, and the other - to meet the needs of the spiritual. Main Components material culture are food, clothing, housing and technology. The main components of spiritual culture, in turn, include religion, science, art, morality, politics and language.

Any product of culture is studied by culturology, the disciplinary structure of which depends on which particular component of culture is studied by the corresponding culturological science. So, religion is studied by religious studies, science - by science of science, art - by art history, morality - by ethics, politics.

tika - political science and language - linguistics. In turn, the products of material culture are studied by plant growing, animal husbandry, and so on.

What is the place of philosophy in the structure of science? The specificity of this science is that it studies the general (or most general) properties of any - physical, biological, psychological or cultural - object. Accordingly, we can say that philosophy rises above other sciences. We can present the original model of modern science as follows:

Philosophy

Within the framework of cultural studies, we can single out, on the one hand, religious studies, art history, science of science, ethics, political science and linguistics, and on the other hand, those sciences that are associated with clothing, food and other products of material culture (including technical sciences).

Based on the disciplinary structure of science as a whole, we will be able to answer the question of what is the scientific and branch structure of external linguistics. The latter follows from the connection of linguistics with philosophy, physics, biology, psychology and other non-linguistic sciences. That is why the composition of the main external linguistic disciplines includes five sciences - the philosophy of language (linguophilosophy), linguophysics, biolinguistics, psycholinguistics and linguistic cultural studies (linguoculturology). Linguistic philosophy studies language along with all kinds of objects, while linguophysics studies physical properties language, biolinguistics - biotic properties of the language, psycholinguistics - mental and linguoculturology - cultural properties of the language. In turn, in the composition latest science includes the following disciplines:

1. Linguistic Religion.

2. Linguistic science.

3. Linguistic art history.

4. Linguistics.

5. Linguistic political science.

6. Linguistics.

7. Linguistics.

8. Lingvocybernetics.

The first of these disciplines studies the relationship of religion to language, the second - the relationship of science to language, the third - the relationship of art to language, the fourth - the relationship of morality to language, the fifth - the relationship of politics to language, the sixth - the relationship to language from religion, science, art and other products of culture, the seventh is the relation of technology to language, and the eighth is the relation of cybernetics to language.

2. Philosophy of language. Excursion

in the history of science

and its disciplinary structure

The philosophy of language originated in ancient times. In Antiquity, the problem of the origin of language was especially popular. Moreover, she took central position among other linguo-philosophical issues until the 19th century. At the end of the XX century. Two books have been published in which fascinating form describes the history of its development. These are the works of O.A. Donskikh "The Origin of Language as a Philosophical Problem" (Novosibirsk, 1984) and B.V. Yakushin "Hypotheses about the origin of the language" (M., 1984).

Even before Plato, there was a dispute in Greece between "naturalists" and "conventionalists". The supporter of the first was Heraclitus, the supporter of the others - Democritus. Heraclitus and his followers believed that the connection between names and things is natural (natural), and Democritus and his students - that this connection is conditional, that it is the result of an agreement (convention) between people.

The dispute between "naturalists" and "conventionalists" is described in Plato's dialogue Cratylus. Socrates speaks on behalf of Plato himself in his dialogues. He usually plays the role of an arbiter, dialectic

tika - a person who has the ability to resolve disputes. In this dialogue, Cratylus and Hermogenes are arguing. The first is a supporter of the "naturalists", and the second is a supporter of the "conventionalists". “Every being has a correct name,” says Cratyl, “innate from nature, and not that is the name that some people, having agreed to call it that, call it, while uttering a particle of their speech, but a certain correct name is innate to both Hellenes and barbarians, the same thing for everyone ... ”(Freidenberg O.M. Antique theories of language and style. - M .; L., 1936. P. 36). Hermogenes does not agree: “I cannot believe that the correctness of the name lies in anything other than a treaty and an agreement. After all, it seems to me, what name someone establishes for what, such will be the correct name; after all, no name is innate to anything by nature, but belongs to a thing on the basis of the law and custom of those who established this custom and call it that ”(ibid.). What position did Plato take in this dispute?

Through the mouth of Socrates, Plato first says that Cratylus is also right,

and Hermogenes, but then he convicts them of one-sidedness and ultimately joins the "naturalists". Yes, Plato believed, in the language there are both names created by nature and names created by agreement. Therefore, there are grounds for the claims of Cratylus and Hermogenes. But the whole point is how to create new words. They should be created, according to Plato, in accordance with the nature, the essence of the designated things. How to do it? It depends on what kind of name we are going to create - primary (i.e. non-derivative, in modern terminology) or secondary (i.e. derivative). In the first case, the task of the author of a new word is to reflect the essence of the designated thing with the help of sounds, and in the second - with the help of significant parts of the word. So, everything is round, soft, smooth, sliding, etc. should be indicated with the sound [l], and hard, sharp, sharp, etc. - with the help of sound [p]. Plato laid the foundations of the theory of sound symbolism in his Cratylus. According to this theory, it turns out that sounds, like words, have some, albeit not sufficiently defined, meaning. There are supporters of this theory in modern science(see: Zhuravlev A.P. Sound

and meaning. - M., 1981).

The philosophy of language in the Middle Ages developed within the framework of theology. "Church Fathers" Basil of Caesarea (4th century), Gregory

Nissky (IV century), Aurelius Augustine (IV-V centuries), John of Damascus (VII-VIII centuries), as shown by Yu.M. Edelstein (see: Problems of language in the monuments of patristics// History linguistic teachings. Medieval Europe/ Ed. A.V. Desnitskaya and S.D. Katsnelson. - M.; L., 1985. S. 157-207), were by no means religious fanatics and obscurantists. They were creative people and managed to bring a lot of new things into the development of the philosophy of language. They raised, in particular, for the first time questions about communication in animals, about non-verbal thinking and inner speech people, etc. Long before F. Engels, Gregory of Nyssa considered the development of human hands as a prerequisite for the emergence of language. “... The assistance of the hands,” he wrote, “helps the need for the word, and if someone calls the service of the hands a feature of a verbal being - a person, if he considers this the main thing in his bodily organization, he will not be at all mistaken ... The hand freed his mouth for words” (ibid., p. 189).

Many theories about the origin of the language arose in modern times. In the XVII-XVIII centuries. onomatopoeic (G. Leibniz), interjection (D. Locke), social contract (J.-J. Rousseau) and other theories are substantiated. However, during this period there is a clear expansion subject area philosophy of language. It began to include, in particular, issues related to the study of the communicative and cognitive functions of the language. Most scientists believed that the main function of language is the function of communication. It was believed that the main purpose of language is to be a means for conveying thoughts and feelings. However, some philosophers of language saw the main purpose of language in being a means of knowledge. They highlighted cognitive function language. Johann Adelung belonged to such scientists. Language, he believed, is a means that allows a person to make more clear those ideas that enter his consciousness. Without a linguistic form, they remain "dark" in it. He interpreted the cognitive function as "clarifying".

major philosopher XIX in. became Wilhelm von Humboldt. Like I. Adelung, he believed that the main purpose of language is to be an instrument of knowledge. He wrote: “A person manages to master his thoughts better and more reliably, to clothe them in new forms, to make imperceptible those fetters that he imposes on fast

the company and unity of pure thought in its forward movement is constantly dividing and reuniting language ”(Humboldt V. Language and Philosophy of Culture. - M., 1985. P. 376). In addition, language affects cognition, according to W. Humboldt, due to the fact that it contains singular point view of the world: the one occupied by the people who created this language. People are compelled to perceive the world through the prism of their mother tongue, since they, along with the assimilation of this language, cannot but accept the special worldview contained in this language. W. Humboldt taught to see in language not a simple garment of ready-made thoughts, but a means for the formation of thought itself.

Highlighting the cognitive function of language, W. Humboldt did not forget about its other functions. Interpreting the communicative function of language, he noted, in particular, that complete mutual understanding between people in the process speech communication impossible, since the speaker and listener always have individual ideas about the world. The great German scientist also presents his thoughts on the third function of language - pragmatic. This function is that with the help of language people can encourage each other to action. W. Humboldt wrote about this: “The fact that language makes it necessary in the process of thought formation is constantly repeated in the entire spiritual life of a person - communication through language provides a person with confidence in his abilities and encourages action” (W. Humboldt. Selected Works on Linguistics. - M., 1984. S. 77). In other words, communication (word) turns into practice (deed), and the communicative function - into pragmatic.

The pragmatic function of language became the subject of special consideration in linguo-philosophical works of the 20th century. Boris Malinovsky did a lot to study it. He believed that it given function is central to the language. This is especially noticeable, he said, in children's language. The child uses language mainly for pragmatic reasons: he induces adults with the help of language to do certain actions that he needs. In the XX century. stands out in a special area of ​​knowledge and ontogenetic linguistics. As a result, the philosophy of language acquired in the 20th century. rather extensive disciplinary structure. It includes the following disciplines:

1. Linguosemiotics.

2. Linguistic epistemology.

3. Lingvopraxeology.

4. Phylogenetic linguistics.

5. Ontogenetic linguistics.

The first of these disciplines of the philosophy of language studies the communicative function of language, the second - its cognitive (cognitive) function, the third - pragmatic (practical, praxeological), the fourth - the origin of language in mankind, the fifth - the origin of language in an individual (child).

3. Lingvosemiotics. Language as a special system of signs

A. Augustine pointed out the sign nature of the language, however modern ideas about linguistic semiotics began to take shape primarily under the influence of F. de Saussure. Linguosemiotics is the science of the communicative function of language. The essence of this function is that language is a means of conveying the speaker's thoughts and feelings to the listener. This function is carried out due to the sign nature of the language.

The identification of the sign nature of a language becomes possible when the language begins to be studied along with other sign systems - the alphabet for the deaf and dumb, the system of road signs, etc. These systems are studied by semiotics - the science of signs. Semiotics occupies an intermediate position between internal linguistics and semiotics. Hence its two-root name. F. de Saussure became the founder of modern linguistic semiotics.

The Swiss scientist for the first time scientifically substantiated the need to study the language in a number of other sign systems. “Language,” he wrote, “is a sign system that expresses concepts, and therefore, it can be compared with writing, with the alphabet for the deaf and dumb, with symbolic rites, with forms of courtesy, with military signals, etc. etc. He is only the most important

these systems” (F. Saussure, de. Works on linguistics. - M., 1977. P. 54). And then we read: "Who wants to discover true nature language, should first of all pay attention to the fact that

in it has in common with other systems of the same order ... "

F. de Saussure considered the sign to be a bilateral (bilateral) entity, i.e. I saw in him not only the material, but also the ideal side. This view is shared by many today. However, more correct, in my opinion, is the point of view of Charles Morris, according to which the sign is recognized as a one-sided (monolateral) entity. The concept of "sign", according to C. Morris, includes only the material carrier of an idea. The substantiation of the legitimacy of this point of view on the nature of the sign was carried out by V.Z. Panfilov in his book "Gnoseological Aspects of philosophical problems linguistics” (M., 1982. Ch. 2). He showed why the sign is a monolateral entity. The fact is that one of the fundamental properties of a sign (along with substitution, i.e. with the property of replacing some other object) constitutes its convention (arbitrariness). It consists in the fact that the signs of the thing denoted are not repeated (or, in any case, should not be repeated by necessity) in the signs of the sign itself. This explains why the same objects can be called differently in different languages.

What happens if we include in the sign as such and its meaning? In this case, we must attribute the property of convention to meaning, and therefore, consider that it does not reflect objective reality, but is the result of the subjective arbitrariness of speakers of a given language (if we are dealing with linguistic signs). Proponents of the bilateral theory of the sign must come to equalize the external and inner sides sign units in relation to conventionality. In relation to semantics, this is not possible, since the semantic side of any sign unit cannot be recognized as arbitrary. It reflects one or another fragment of objective reality.

Insisting on the bilaterality of the sign, F. de Saussure could not but come to the conclusion that linguistics as a whole should take the position of one of the semiotic disciplines. He wrote: “Linguistics is only part of this general science(sciences of signs. -

§ 81 origin of language

So, the primitive language cannot be investigated and experimentally tested.

However, this question has interested mankind since ancient times.

Even in the biblical legends, we find two conflicting solutions to the question of the origin of the language, reflecting different historical eras perspectives on this issue. In the first chapter of the book of Genesis it is said that God created with a verbal spell and man himself was created by the power of the word, and in the second chapter of the same book it is said that God created “silently”, and then led to Adam (i.e. to the first man) all creatures, so that a man gives them names, and whatever he calls, so that it will be in the future.

In these naive legends, two points of view on the origin of the language have already been identified:

1) language is not from a person and 2) language is from a person. In different periods of the historical development of mankind, this issue was resolved in different ways.

The extrahuman origin of language was initially explained as a “divine gift”, but not only ancient thinkers gave other explanations for this issue, but also the “church fathers” in the early Middle Ages, who were ready to admit that everything comes from God, including the gift of speech, doubted so that God could turn into a “school teacher” who would teach people vocabulary and grammar, from where the formula arose: God gave man the gift of speech, but did not reveal to people the names of objects (Gregory of Nyssa, IV century AD).

Since antiquity, there have been many theories about the origin of the language.

1. The theory of onomatopoeia comes from the Stoics and received support in the 19th and even 20th centuries. The essence of this theory is that the “languageless person”, hearing the sounds of nature (the murmur of a stream, the singing of birds, etc.), tried to imitate these sounds with his speech apparatus. In any language, of course, there are a number of onomatopoeic words like ku-ku, from them like cuckoo, cuckoo, bark, grunt, pig, ha-hanki, etc. But, firstly, there are very few such words, firstly secondly, “onomatopoeia” can only be “sounding”, but then how to call “mute”: stones, houses, triangles and squares, and much more?

It is impossible to deny onomatopoeic words in language, but it would be completely wrong to think that language arose in such a mechanical and passive way. Language arises and develops in a person together with thinking, and with onomatopoeia, thinking is reduced to photography. Observation of languages ​​shows that there are more onomatopoeic words in new, developed languages ​​than in the languages ​​of more primitive peoples. This is explained by the fact that, in order to "imitate sound", one must perfectly be able to control the speech apparatus, which a primitive person with an undeveloped larynx could not master.

2. The theory of interjections comes from the Epicureans, opponents of the Stoics, and lies in the fact that primitive people turned instinctive animal cries into “natural sounds” - interjections accompanying emotions, from where all other words allegedly originated. This view was supported in the 18th century. J.-J. Rousseau.

Interjections are included in vocabulary any language and can have derivative words, as in Russian: ax, ox and ahat, groan, etc. But again, there are very few such words in languages ​​and even less than onomatopoeic ones. In addition, the reason for the emergence of language by supporters of this theory is reduced to an expressive function. Without denying the presence of this function, it should be said that there is a lot in the language that is not related to expression, and these aspects of the language are the most important, for which the language could have arisen, and not just for the sake of emotions and desires, which animals are not deprived of, however, they do not have a language. In addition, this theory assumes the existence of a “man without language”, who came to language through passions and emotions.

3. The theory of "labor cries" at first glance seems to be a real materialistic theory of the origin of language. This theory originated in the 19th century. in the writings of vulgar materialists (L. Noiret, K. Bucher) and boiled down to the fact that language arose from the cries that accompanied collective labor. But these “labour cries” are only a means of rhythmizing labor, they do not express anything, not even emotions, but are only an external, technical means at work. Not a single function that characterizes the language can be found in these “labor cries”, since they are neither communicative, nor nominative, nor expressive.

The erroneous opinion that this theory is close to the labor theory of F. Engels is simply refuted by the fact that Engels does not say anything about “labor cries”, and the emergence of language is associated with completely different needs and conditions.

4. From the middle of the XVIII century. the so-called social contract theory emerged. This theory was based on some opinions of antiquity (the thoughts of Democritus in the transmission of Diodorus Siculus, some passages from Plato's dialogue Cratylus, etc.)1 and in many respects corresponded to the rationalism of the 18th century itself.

Adam Smith proclaimed it the first opportunity for the formation of a language. Rousseau had a different interpretation in connection with his theory of two periods in the life of mankind: the first - “natural”, when people were part of nature and language “came” from feelings (passions), and the second - “civilized”, when language could be a product "social agreement".

In these arguments, the grain of truth lies in the fact that in the later epochs of the development of languages ​​it is possible to “agree” on certain words, especially in the field of terminology; for example, the system of international chemical nomenclature was developed at the international congress of chemists different countries in Geneva in 1892.

But it is also quite clear that this theory does not give anything to explain the primitive language, since, first of all, in order to “agree” on a language, one must already have a language in which they “agree”. In addition, this theory assumes consciousness in a person before the formation of this consciousness, which develops along with the language (see below about F. Engels' understanding of this issue).

The trouble with all the theories outlined is that the question of the origin of language is taken in isolation, without connection with the origin of man himself and the formation of primary human groups.

As we said above (Chapter I), there is no language outside of society and there is no society outside of language.

Existing for a long time various theories the origin of the language (meaning the spoken language) and gestures also do not explain anything and are untenable (L. Geiger, W. Wundt - in the 19th century, J. Van Ginneken, N. Ya. Marr - in the 20th century) . All references to the existence of supposedly pure “ sign languages” cannot be supported by facts; gestures always act as something secondary for people who have a spoken language: such are the gestures of shamans, intertribal relations of the population with different languages, cases of using gestures during periods of prohibition of the use of spoken language for women among some tribes standing at a low level of development, etc.

There are no “words” among gestures, and gestures are not connected with concepts. Gestures can be indicative, expressive, but by themselves they cannot name and express concepts, but only accompany the language of words that has these functions.

It is just as unjustified to derive the origin of the language from the analogy with the mating songs of birds as a manifestation of the instinct of self-preservation (Ch. Darwin) and even more so from human singing (J.-J. Rousseau in the 18th century, O. Jespersen in the 20th century) or even “fun” (O. Jespersen).

All such theories ignore language as a social phenomenon.

We find a different interpretation of the question of the origin of language in F. Engels in his unfinished work “The Role of Labor in the Process of the Transformation of Apes into Humans”, which became the property of science in the 20th century.

Based on a materialistic understanding of the history of society and man, F. Engels in his "Introduction" to the "Dialectics of Nature" explains the conditions for the emergence of language in the following way:

“When, after a thousand years of struggle, the hand finally differentiated from the leg and a straight gait was established, then man separated from the monkey, and the foundation was laid for the development of articulate speech ...”.

W. von Humboldt wrote about the role of the vertical position for the development of speech: “The vertical position of a person also corresponds to the speech sound (which is denied to the animal)”, as well as H. Steinthal and J. A. Baudouin de Courtenay.

Vertical gait was in human development both a prerequisite for the emergence of speech, and a prerequisite for the expansion and development of consciousness.

The revolution that man introduces into nature consists, first of all, in the fact that human labor is different from that of animals, it is labor with the use of tools, and, moreover, made by those who should own them, and thus progressive and social labor. No matter how skillful architects we consider ants and bees, they “do not know what they are doing”: their work is instinctive, their art is not conscious, and they work with the whole organism, purely biologically, without using tools, and therefore no progress in their work no: both 10 and 20 thousand years ago they worked in the same way as they work now.

The first human tool was the freed hand, other tools developed further as additions to the hand (stick, hoe, rake, etc.); even later, a person shifts the burden to an elephant, a camel, an ox, a horse, and he only manages them, finally, a technical engine appears and replaces the animals.

Simultaneously with the role of the first instrument of labor, the hand could sometimes act as instruments of communication (gesture), but, as we saw above, this is not connected with “incarnation”.

“In short, people who were forming came to the point that they had a need to say something to each other. Need created its own organ: the undeveloped larynx of the monkey was slowly but steadily transformed by modulation for more and more developed modulation, and the organs of the mouth gradually learned to pronounce one articulate sound after another.

Thus, it is not the mimicry of nature (the theory of “onomatopoeia”), not the affective expression of expression (the theory of “interjections”), not the senseless “hooting” at work (the theory of “labor cries”), but the need for reasonable communication (by no means in the “public contract”), where the communicative, semasiological, and nominative (and, moreover, expressive) functions of the language are carried out at once - the main functions without which the language cannot be a language - caused the appearance of the language. And language could arise only as a collective property necessary for mutual understanding, but not as individual property one or another incarnated individual.

F. Engels presents the general process of human development as the interaction of labor, consciousness and language: “First, labor, and then articulate speech together with it, were the two most important stimuli, under the influence of which the brain of a monkey gradually turned into a human brain ...”2 “ The development of the brain and the feelings subordinated to it, the increasingly clearer consciousness, the ability for abstraction and inference had a reverse effect on labor and language, giving both more and more impetus to further development. “Thanks to the joint activity of the hand, the organs of speech and the brain, not only in each individual, but also in society, people have acquired the ability to perform increasingly complex operations, set themselves ever higher goals and achieve them.”

The main propositions arising from Engels's doctrine of the origin of language are as follows:

1) It is impossible to consider the question of the origin of language outside the origin of man.

2) The origin of the language cannot be scientifically proven, but one can only build more or less probable hypotheses.

3) Some linguists cannot solve this issue; thus this question is subject to resolution of many sciences (linguistics, ethnography, anthropology, archeology, paleontology and general history).

4) If the language was “born” together with the person, then there could not be a “languageless person”.

5) Language appeared as one of the first “signs” of a person; without language man could not be man.

6) If “language is the most important means of human communication” (Lenin), then it appeared when the need for “human communication” arose. Engels says so: "when there was a need to say something to each other."

7) Language is called upon to express concepts that animals do not have, but it is the presence of concepts along with language that distinguishes man from animals.

8) The facts of a language, to varying degrees, from the very beginning must have all the functions of a real language: language must communicate, name things and phenomena of reality, express concepts, express feelings and desires; without it, language is not "language".

9) Language appeared as a spoken language.

This is also mentioned by Engels in his work “The Origin of the Family, private property and the state” (Introduction) and in the work “The role of labor in the process of transformation of apes into humans”.

Consequently, the question of the origin of the language can be resolved, but by no means on the basis of linguistic data alone.

These solutions are hypothetical in nature and are unlikely to turn into a theory. Nevertheless, the only way to solve the question of the origin of the language, if based on the real data of languages ​​and on general theory development of society in Marxist science.

THEME 6

HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF LANGUAGES

Questions:

1. The problem of the origin of the language

2. Development of languages ​​and dialects in different historical eras

3. Historical changes in the vocabulary of languages:

a) Milestones in development

b) Borrowing from other languages

1. The problem of the origin of language

The problem of the origin of human language is part of a more general problem of anthropogenesis (the origin of man) and sociogenesis, and it must be solved by the concerted efforts of a number of sciences that study man and human society. The process of becoming a person species Homo sapiens ("reasonable man") and at the same time as beings "the most social of all animals" continued for millions of years.

The forerunners of man were not those types of great apes,

that exist now (gorilla, orangutan, chimpanzee, etc.), while others,

reconstructed from fossils found in different parts Old

Sveta. The first prerequisite for the humanization of the ape was the deepening division

the functions of her fore and hind limbs, the assimilation of a straight gait and an upright position of the body, which freed her hand for primitive labor operations.

By freeing the hand, as F. Engels points out, "a decisive step was taken for the transition from ape to man"2. It is no less important that the great apes lived in herds, and this later created the prerequisites for collective, social labor.

Known for excavations ancient species great apes,

those who have mastered a straight gait are Australopithecus (from Latin australis "southern" and other Greek.

pothykos "monkey"), who lived 2-3 million years ago in Africa and the southern parts

Asia. Australopithecus did not yet make tools, but already systematically used

as tools for hunting and self-defense and for digging up roots, stones, branches, etc.

The next stage of evolution is represented by the oldest man of the era

early (lower) Paleolithic - first pithecanthropus (lit. "monkey-man") and

other close varieties that lived about a million years ago and

somewhat later in Europe, Asia and Africa, and then by the Neanderthal3 (up to 200 thousand years

ago). The Pithecanthropus was already hewing around the edges of the pieces of stone that he used

like an ax - tools of universal use, and knew how to use fire, and the Neanderthal made from stone,

bones and wood are already specialized tools, different for different operations, and, apparently, knew initial forms division of labor and social organization.

“... The development of labor,” as F. Engels pointed out, “necessarily contributed to

closer rallying of the members of society, because thanks to him, they became more frequent

cases of mutual support, joint "activities, and the consciousness of benefit became clearer

this joint activity for each individual member. In short,

formed people came to the fact that they had a need for something

tell each other." At this stage, there was a big leap in the development of the brain:

study of fossil skulls shows that the Neanderthal brain was almost

twice that of Pithecanthropus (and three times that of a gorilla), and already

revealed signs of asymmetry of the left and right hemispheres, as well as a special development of areas corresponding to Broca's and Wernicke's zones. This is consistent with the fact that the Neanderthal, as the study of the tools of that era shows, mainly worked right hand. All this suggests that the Uneanderthal already had a language: the need for communication within the team "created its own organ."

What was this primitive language? Apparently he performed in

primarily as a means of regulating joint labor activity in

the emerging human team, i.e., mainly in the appellative and

contact-establishing, and also, of course, in an expressive function, as

we observe this at a certain stage of development in a child. "Consciousness"

primitive man was captured not so much by objects environment in

set of objectively inherent features, how much "the ability of these

items to "satisfy the needs" of people" 3 . The meaning of the "signs" of the primitive

language was diffuse: it was a call to action and at the same time an indication of the tool

and product of labor.

The "natural matter" of primitive language was also profoundly different from

"matter" of modern languages ​​and, undoubtedly, in addition to sound formations, widely

used gestures. In a typical Neanderthal (not to mention Pithecanthropus)

the lower jaw did not have a chin protrusion, and the oral and pharyngeal cavities were in total

shorter and of a different configuration than that of a modern adult (oral cavity

rather resembled the corresponding cavity in a child in the first year of life). This is

speaks of rather limited opportunities for the formation of a sufficient amount

differentiated sounds. The ability to combine the work of the vocal apparatus with

the work of the organs of the oral cavity and pharynx and quickly, in a split second, move from one

articulation to the other was also not yet developed to the required extent. But little by little

the situation changed: “... the undeveloped larynx of the monkey slowly but steadily

transformed by modulation for more and more developed modulation, and the organs of the mouth

gradually learned to pronounce one articulate sound after another.

In the era of the late (upper) Paleolithic (about 40 thousand years ago,

if not earlier) Neanderthals are replaced by neo°ntrop, i.e. "new person",

or Homo sapiens. He already knows how to make composite tools (such as an ax 4-

handle), which is not found in Neanderthals, knows a multi-colored rock

painting, in terms of the structure and size of the skull, does not fundamentally differ from

modern man. In this era, the formation of a sound language is completed,

already acting as a full-fledged means of communication, a means of social

consolidation of emerging concepts: “... after multiplying further

developed ... the needs of people and the activities by which they

satisfied, people give separate names to entire classes of ... objects” 2 . The signs of the language gradually acquire a more differentiated content: from the diffuse word-sentence, individual words are gradually distinguished - prototypes of future names and verbs, and the language as a whole begins to act in the fullness of its functions as an instrument for cognizing the surrounding reality.

Summing up all the above, we can say in the words of F. Engels:

“First labor, and then articulate speech along with it, were the two most

main stimuli, under the influence of which the brain of a monkey gradually turned into

human brain" 3 .