asteartea, uztaila 27, 2021

Bichakjian (2000): "... languages have been steadily replacing the ancestral implements with ever more advantageous alternatives (linguistically more powerful and biologically less costly),..."

Bernard H. Bichakjian hizkuntalariak zioén an bere "Reply to Suddendorf on Bichakjian on Language-Complexity" (2000):

My target article, which showed that, ... languages have been steadily replacing the ancestral implements with ever more advantageous altenatives (linguistically more powerful and biologically less costly), provided data that clearly suggest there is no empirical support for the steady state conception, and that language evolution is a gradual process with roots going very far back in time. Indeed, just as industry started with primitive tools and weapons and steadily evolved into the sophisticated hardware available to us to day, so language began with an improvised set of features which consistently remodelled into ever more efficient instruments of thought and communication.[Bichakjian, "Language Origin and Language Evolution", Psycoloquy, 2000]

eta referituz ki kontrastea artén sintaxi buruazkena eta sintaxi burulehena (zeini deitzen dión the modern word order), egiten ditú ondoko reflexioak (an bere artikulua titúlatzen "Language evolution and the complexity criterion", 1999): 

The shift from the head-last to the head-first order constitutes an important step in the expression of thought and thence in thinking itself. The ancient order is based on a global perception and requires a processing that is also global. The sequence victoriam reportavit or aere perennius can only be interpreted when the entire utterance has been heard, i.e., when the phrase-final head has been uttered. Instead, in the head-first languages, the analysis begins immediately and goes on as the modifiers unfold. The ancient model requires therefore a global interpretation, whereas the modern one lends itself to a progressive analysis.

...

The modern word order has therefore a double advantage: in the first place, it allows for the coding and decoding of linguistic messages with a minimum of mental effort, since it taxes the working memory of speakers and listeners as little as possible; and, in the second place, because the processing of linguistic messages is facilitated, it makes it possible to conceive and express increasingly more complex thoughts [Bichakjian, "Language Evolution and the Complexity Criterion", Psycoloquy, 1999]

Gauza da ze prozesu gradual horretan munduko mintzaira guztiek ez dutela iritsi ber estadioa simultaneoki (nola nahiago genuken), halako moduan ze gaur egun, suerte txarrez, existitzen dirá diferentzia ondo nabarmenak artén erraztasun komunikatiboak zein sintaxi ezberdinek eskaintzen dituzten. Eta soluzioa soilik datorke ti jarráitu bidea an norabide egokia harik irítsí estadio sintaktiko bat non diferentziak ez diren jada esanguratsuak (behar dirá aukera burulehen funtzionalak). Bichakjian-ek dioenez (ikus goragoko aipua):

Indeed, just as industry started with primitive tools and weapons and steadily evolved into the sophisticated hardware available to us to day, so ... [Bichakjian, 2000]

Edonola ere, esan behar da ze, teknologia linguistikoak bádu konponente oso inportante bat zein den ezberdina respektu beste teknologia edo erreminta batzuk: konponente soziala, halan ze bere evoluzioa ez da hain erraza, nahiz, gure ikuspegitik, ez den hain zaila ere, eta dudagabe, eman daitezke aurrerapusu oso errazak, emanez bide ki beste aurrerapusu batzuk... (gradualki, asmoz eta jakitez). [1334] [>>>] [A9] [A10] [A11]

Etiketak: , , ,