Thinking It and Speaking It
37
In a way, it is an amazing insight to realize that the only way to communicate
a whole thought or image from person to person is to decompose it into small
units, each representable in a single shaped sound. What is most wondrous
of all, however, is that a spoken sentence contains not merely the individual
words, but coded into the sentence is all the structural information needed
so the stream of words can be reconstituted by the listener and restored as a
Gestalt whole. Understood in this way, language is an invention of staggering
genius. Rules of grammar can now be viewed in a new light. They are not
primarily intended to clarify our meaning when we speak, but are the hidden
rules which a listener must use to rebuild the structured frame of a whole
thought from a series of words.
Actually, this invention is not unique to human communication, but is a
fundamental principle of the living world. The complete specification of a
living individual, with every detail of its organs and how the organs function
together, is an indivisible Gestalt plan. When an organism reproduces, the
holistic plan of the animal’s body is unspooled and expressed linearly in the
language of DNA. Then, in the process of gestation, the words of the DNA language are transformed back into a whole organism. The coded DNA sequence
is not limited to encrypting an individual’s traits, but encodes step-by-step
chemical instructions for assembling a whole individual. In that sense, it is
like a grammatically correct sentence, whose correct grammar is the key to
reconstituting the original whole thought.
One of the great issues being debated in academic circles today is the origin of human language. Some people say that language is a cultural innovation, created purposefully by people in early societies to exchange plans and
thoughts. Others maintain that language has biological foundations and is an
adaptive trait that evolved with our species. This view has been promoted by
the linguistic scientist Noam Chomsky, whose writings and courses at MIT
have brought his perspective to a wide audience. There is strong evidence for
this position: For one thing, it is known that specific brain areas are specialized
in producing and decoding speech. 6
It is also argued that considering how complex language is, one cannot
account for the speed with which children learn their native tongue, except by
assuming that certain linguistic functions are innate. In addition, studies have
been made of children born deaf and mute who live together in special schools:
The most famous case are the deaf children of Nicaragua, who communicate
in a sign language which they developed spontaneously, and which has a clear
grammatical structure close to that of spoken languages. Linguists believe they
could not have invented such a grammar if its roots did not already exist in
the human mind. 7
37
In a way, it is an amazing insight to realize that the only way to communicate
a whole thought or image from person to person is to decompose it into small
units, each representable in a single shaped sound. What is most wondrous
of all, however, is that a spoken sentence contains not merely the individual
words, but coded into the sentence is all the structural information needed
so the stream of words can be reconstituted by the listener and restored as a
Gestalt whole. Understood in this way, language is an invention of staggering
genius. Rules of grammar can now be viewed in a new light. They are not
primarily intended to clarify our meaning when we speak, but are the hidden
rules which a listener must use to rebuild the structured frame of a whole
thought from a series of words.
Actually, this invention is not unique to human communication, but is a
fundamental principle of the living world. The complete specification of a
living individual, with every detail of its organs and how the organs function
together, is an indivisible Gestalt plan. When an organism reproduces, the
holistic plan of the animal’s body is unspooled and expressed linearly in the
language of DNA. Then, in the process of gestation, the words of the DNA language are transformed back into a whole organism. The coded DNA sequence
is not limited to encrypting an individual’s traits, but encodes step-by-step
chemical instructions for assembling a whole individual. In that sense, it is
like a grammatically correct sentence, whose correct grammar is the key to
reconstituting the original whole thought.
One of the great issues being debated in academic circles today is the origin of human language. Some people say that language is a cultural innovation, created purposefully by people in early societies to exchange plans and
thoughts. Others maintain that language has biological foundations and is an
adaptive trait that evolved with our species. This view has been promoted by
the linguistic scientist Noam Chomsky, whose writings and courses at MIT
have brought his perspective to a wide audience. There is strong evidence for
this position: For one thing, it is known that specific brain areas are specialized
in producing and decoding speech. 6
It is also argued that considering how complex language is, one cannot
account for the speed with which children learn their native tongue, except by
assuming that certain linguistic functions are innate. In addition, studies have
been made of children born deaf and mute who live together in special schools:
The most famous case are the deaf children of Nicaragua, who communicate
in a sign language which they developed spontaneously, and which has a clear
grammatical structure close to that of spoken languages. Linguists believe they
could not have invented such a grammar if its roots did not already exist in
the human mind. 7