Newsgroups: sci.lang
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!news.kei.com!ub!acsu.buffalo.edu!ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu!v187ef4y
From: v187ef4y@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu (Patrick J Crowe)
Subject: Re: More Proto-World
Message-ID: <Cy7Ez6.MCx@acsu.buffalo.edu>
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Sender: nntp@acsu.buffalo.edu
Nntp-Posting-Host: ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu
Organization: University at Buffalo
References: <37pqr1$ffn@tardis.trl.OZ.AU> <38cds2INNbgr@SUNED.ZOO.CS.YALE.EDU> <hubey.782882530@pegasus.montclair.edu> <38guat$cdo@ucrmath.ucr.edu>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 1994 01:06:00 GMT
Lines: 29

In article <38guat$cdo@ucrmath.ucr.edu>, jdolan@ucrmath.ucr.edu (james dolan)
 writes...
>patrick j crowe writes:
> 
>-If 'language' arose after humans spread out over the world, there is
>-no Proto-World to reconstruct.
> 
>i don't see why this should follow; can you explain your reasoning?

OK, let's draw a tree to represent the spread of ancestral humans across
the globe:

				/\
			      /   \
			    /\     \*
			 */   \     \
			/      \*     \
etc.
As language-less humans spread across the globe, actual language (as 
opposed to the mere capacity for language) arises in different places,
represented by *'s.  Thus, if each of these independent inventions of
language have surviving decendants, there is no Proto-World from which
all languages are derived.

NB - the tree above is not claimed to represent the true spread of humanity,
nor do I have an opinion either way on the singularity of the origin of
language.

-Pat Crowe, SUNY at Buffalo 
