Bull. Hiroshima Inst. Tech. Research Vol. 52 (2018) 7– 13

ArticleThe Origin of Language

Naoki ARAKI*(Received Oct. 31, 2017)

Abstract
There have been a lot of discussions of the origin of language. Some people think that the origin ofwords is onomatopoeias. Meanwhile, according to expressive theories, the origin of words and language is the innate cries of pain or pleasure produced by nonhuman animals. Others insist that language originated as a means of communication. Another theory holds that a learned vocalization systems, more like birdsong than innate calls, formed a middle term in language evolution. Others claimthat gestures provided a middle stage in language evolution. Max Müller thinks that all human languages have a single common origin. For Charles Darwin, the origin of language is the imitation ofnatural sounds, the voices of other animals, and man’s cries. Noam Chomsky claims that the origin of
language is mutation of brain cells. Ferdinand de Saussure insists that it is meaningless to ask a question of the origin of language. After all, what is the origin of language?
Key Words: the origin of language, onomatopoeias, communication, birdsong, gestures, mutation

brought them unto Adam to see what he would call

Introduction

them; and whatsoever Adam called every living crea-

Research on the origin of language was bannedture, that was the name thereof. And Adam gave

because of its speculative character by the Société Lin-

names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to

guistique de Paris in 1871. But nowadays a lot ofevery beast of the field.

(Genesis 2, 19-20)

research is being pursued based on demonstrative
data from interdisciplinary perspectives. Meanwhile

But here, not the origin of language but the origin

Saussure is skeptical about the question of the origin

of words is depicted. This passage implies that wordsof language for some reason. Is his thinking on theare arbitrary. Later in Cratylus, Plato discusses whether

question plausible?

words are conventional or related to meanings theysignify.

1. Histor y of the Origin of Language

Next, Johann Gottfried Herder insists that the

According to W. Tecumseh Fitch, language origins are mentioned in the Bible for the first time in theorigins of words are onomatopoeias in his Essay on theOrigin of Language (1772):

Western tradition (Fitch 2010: 390):[…] his [Herder’s] core notion was that vocal
And out of the ground the Lord God formed every

imitation, once present, would allow our ancestors tobeast of the field, and every fowl of the air; andsignify all those natural sources of sound (animals,* Department of Information Systems and Management, Faculty of Applied Information Science, Hiroshima Institute of Technology,
Hiroshima 731-5193, Japan. E-mail: araki@cc.it-hiroshima.ac.jp
─ 7 ─

Naoki ARAKI

wind, etc.) in a way that would be readily understood

The eighteenth-century French philosopher Abbé

by others. The theory of onomatopoeia thus solves,

Étienne Bonnot de Condillac was one who thoughtwith one stroke, two crucial problems: how the crucial

that language originated in bodily gesture, […] Jean-linguistic link between sound and meaning could be

Jacques Rousseau, Condillac’s near contemporary,

made, and how this link, once made, would automati-also noted the priority of gesture [over spoken lan-cally be understood by others. […] Indeed, many

guage]. In his 1782 Essay on the Origin of Languages,

onomatopoetic words exist in present-day languages,

he wrote: “Although the language of gesture and spo-

across the planet.

ken language are equally natural, still the first is easier(Fitch 2010: 391)

and depends less upon convention. For more things
Meanwhile, according to expressive theories, theaffect our eyes than our ears. Also visual forms are

origin of words and language is the innate cries of pain

more varied than sounds, and more expressive, saying

or pleasure produced by nonhuman animals:

more in less time.” […] Another to recognize theimportance of gesture was the German philosopher

Expressive theories seek the origin of words andFriedrich Nietzsche. […] In 1900 Wilhelm Wundt, thelanguage in the innate cries of pain or pleasure pro-founder of the first laboratory of experimental psychol-

duced by nonhuman animals. In contrast to the ono-ogy at Leipzig in 1879, wrote a two-volume work on

matopoetic theory, which emphasizes the importancespeech and argued that a universal sign language wasof cognition in the relation between words and con-the origin of all languages. […] [The British neurolo-

cepts, expressive theories seek to ground language in

gist MacDonald] Critchley was a little evasive as toinnate emotional expressions such as screams orwhether he thought language originated in manual

laughter. […] the seeds of speech are to be found in

gestures, but at one point he did suggest that gesture

the various innate cries with which humans, like othermust have predated speech in human evolution. […]animals, come equipped at birth. Thus the first word

Echoing Rousseau, he [Giorgio Fano, an Italian phi-for ‘pain’ would be a simulated groan of pain, and forlosopher] argued that language must have originally‘pleasure’ a sigh of pleasure.

been mimed but accompanied by emotional cries. […](Fitch 2010: 392)

like earlier authors, such as Rousseau and Fano, [theFurthermore, we have three other theories con-anthropologist Gordon W.] Hewes appealed to signcerning the origin of language than the onomatopoetic

language as evidence that language can be accom-and expressive theories mentioned above.

plished by the hands, without voicing. This point was

The first theory insists that “language originatedsubsequently strengthened by the work of Ursula

as communication (Fitch 2010: 393),” in other words,

Bellugi and Edward S. Klima revealing American Sign

“language is first and foremost a social tool (Fitch

Language (ASL) to be a full language, affected by spe-

2010: 393).”

cific brain injury in very much the same way that

The second theory holds that “a learned vocaliza-

spoken language is. Another who appreciated that signtion system, more like birdsong than innate calls,

language is a truly grammatical language was William

formed a middle term in language evolution (Fitch

C. Stokoe, who taught at Gallaudet University, […]2010: 393).”

Stokoe teamed with the anthropologist David F.

The third theory claims that “gestures provided a

Armstrong and the linguist Sherman Wilcox in a bookmiddle stage in language evolution (Fitch 2010: 393).”

proposing that language evolved from manual ges-

This idea was discussed by Condillac: Essai sur l’origine

tures, […] Armstrong also continued to write on thedes connaissances humaines (1747), “who based his

gestural origins of language. […] evidence from differ-hypothesis on observations of deaf-mutes communi-

ent sources in support of the gestural theory has

cating in what today would be called signed language

accumulated over recent decades. One important(Fitch 2010: 393).” Michael C. Corballis says about thisdevelopment was the discovery of mirror neurons.

theory, developing “the idea that expressive language
originated not in animal calls but in bodily gesture”:
─ 8 ─(Corballis 2017: 124-128)

The Origin of Language

According to Corballis, Friedrich Nietzsche says395).” Fitch says:in Aphorism 216 from his 1878 book Human, All Too
Although Müller himself saw the true beginnings

Human:of language as a saltation, just as unexplainable by
Imitation of gesture is older than language, andscientific means or Darwinian argument as the origin

goes on involuntarily even now, when the language ofof life itself, he did have his own theory for the origin

gesture is universally suppressed, and the educatedof the “roots” in a somewhat mystical “resonance”

are taught to control their muscles. The imitation of

between the vibrations all objects create when struck

gesture is so strong that we cannot watch a face inand the phonetic form of the roots. (Fitch 2010: 397)

movement without the innervation of our own face
Then, how did Charles Darwin deal with the ori-(one can observe that feigned yawning will evoke
natural yawning in the man who observes it). The

gin of language?

imitated gesture led the imitator back to the sensation
expressed by the gesture in the body or face of the one

With respect to the origin of articulate language,

being imitated. This is how we learned to understand[…], I cannot doubt that language owes its origin to

one another; this is how the child still learns to under-

the imitation and modification of various natural

stand its mother. In general, painful sensations weresounds, the voices of other animals, and man’s own

probably also expressed by a gesture that in its turn

instinctive cries, aided by signs and gestures.
(Darwin 2004: 109)

caused pain (for example, tearing the hair, beating thebreast, violent distortion and tensing of the facialmuscles). Conversely, gestures of pleasure were them-

For Darwin, the origin of language is the imitation

selves pleasurable and were therefore easily suited toof natural sounds, the voices of other animals, andthe communication of understanding (laughing as aman’s cries and this has been going on as a gradualsign of being tickled, which is pleasurable, then served

process:

to express other pleasurable sensations).
As soon as men understood each other in gesture,

The formation of different languages and of dis-a symbolism of gesture could evolve. I mean, one

tinct species, and the proofs that both have been devel-

could agree on a language of tonal signs, in such a way

oped through a gradual process, are curiously parallel.

that at first both tone and gesture (which were joined

But we can trace the formation of many words further

by tone symbolically) were produced, and later only

back than that of species, for we can perceive how they

the tone.

actually arose from the imitation of various sounds.

(Corballis 2017: 125-126)(Darwin 2004: 112-113)
It may be due to mirror neurons that “feigned
Darwin’s natural selection, as we can guess, isyawning will evoke natural yawning in the man who
observes it.” Also this may be true of the fact that “thealso applied to the preservation of words:

imitated gesture led the imitator back to the sensation
The survival or preservation of certain favoured

expressed by the gesture in the body or face of the one

words in the struggle for existence is natural selection.

being imitated.”(Darwin 2004: 113)

On the other hand, Max Müller thinks that all
human languages have a single common origin. In

In this way, Darwin applied his theory of natural

other words, “Müller believed that comparative linguists could reconstruct the original shared language

selection to human language:of all mankind (Fitch 2010: 395).” He “dismissed theonomatopoetic and interjection [expressive] theories

Darwin recognizes the distinction between thefor word origins because they can’t account for theevolution of the language faculty and of a particular

vast majority of contemporary words (Fitch 2010:

language, seeing the former as crucial. He suggests

─ 9 ─

Naoki ARAKI

that a crucial first step in language evolution was anof feelings has evolved through the process of natural

overall increase in intelligence (consonant with theselection and survival of the fittest proposed byincrease in brain size characteristic of the hominid

Darwin:line: data unavailable to Darwin). Considering andrejecting a gestural origin for language, he suggests[…] it is simply by a kind of process of naturalthat the first protolanguage was musical, and that thisselection and survival of the fittest that the voice has

stage was driven by sexual selection (by analogy withgained the upper hand, and come to be so much thelearned bird song). The bridge between such a musi-

most prominent that we give the name of language

cal protolanguage and true, meaningful, language(‘tonguiness’) to all expression.

(Whitney 1875: 291)

would again have been driven by increased intelligence, and once this was in place, the origin of actual

Next, according to Whitney, human beings comewords would have been eclectic, including both ono-

to use imitative or onomatopoetic utterances as thematopoeia and expressive imitations. The most impor-reproduction of the natural tones and cries:

tant missing piece of the puzzle was a better underWe have regarded the reproduction, with intent tostanding of the complexity of language (especiallysyntax).”(Fitch 2010: 398-399)

signify something, of the natural tones and cries, as
the positively earliest speech; but this would so imme-Thus, Darwin denies that gesture is the origin ofdiately and certainly come to be combined with imitative or onomatopoetic utterances, that the distinction

language.

in time between the two is rather theoretical than

2. Whitney’s Origin of Language

actual. Indeed, the reproduction itself is in a certain

Whitney, whose books Saussure has read andpraised, says about the origin of language:

way onomatopoetic it imitates, so to speak, the cries of
the human animal, in order to intimate secondarily
what those cries in their primary use signified directly.

The basis [of the origin of language] was the(Whitney 1875: 294-295)

natural cries of human beings, expressive of their feelings, and capable of being understood as such by theirfellows.

Whitney takes up an illustration of his idea:(Whitney 1875: 287)[…] if we had the conception of a dog to signify,

According to Whitney, the origin of language is[…] if it [the instrumentality or the means] were

human beings’ cries of their feelings. He explains foun-voice, we should say “bow-wow.” (Whitney 1875: 295)

dation of his idea as follows:
So Whitney thinks that the origin of language is
Spoken language began, we may say, when a cryhuman beings’ cries of their feelings followed by ono-of pain, formerly wrung out by real suffering, and seen

matopoetic or imitative utterances. His idea is a mix-

to be understood and sympathized with, was repeatedture of some theories of the origin of language. As ain imitation, no longer as a mere instinctive utterance,

matter of fact, Saussure must have read Whitney’s idea

but for the purpose of intimating to another, “I amof the origin of language. But as we shall see later,(was, shall be) suffering;” when an angry growl, for-

Saussure does not agree with Whitney’s idea of themerly the direct expression of passion, was repro-

origin of language at all.

duced to signify disapprobation and threatening; andthe like. This was enough to serve as foundation for all

3. Chomsky’s Origin of Languagethat should be built upon it [the origin of language].

Chomsky says that the origin of language has(Whitney 1875: 288-289)

been studied from a viewpoint of animal communication such as calls of apes and so on. But he thinks that

Moreover, Whitney says that voice used as cries

this is a waste of time because human language is─ 10 ─

The Origin of Language

ways and to communicate using an altogether newquite different from animal communication systems:

type of language. We might call it the Tree of KnowlThere is a long history of study of origin of lan-edge mutation. Why did it occur in Sapiens DNA

guage, asking how it arose from calls of apes and sorather than in that of Neanderthals? It was a matter offorth. That investigation on my view is a complete

pure chance, as far as we can tell. But it’s more impor-waste of time, because language is based on an entirelytant to understand the consequences of the Tree ofdifferent principle than any animal communication

Knowledge mutation than its causes. What was sosystem. It’s quite possible that human gestures […]special about the new Sapiens language that it enabled

have evolved from animal communication systems, but

us to conquer the world?

(Harari 2011: 23-24)

not human language. It has a totally different principle.
Harari might have read about Chomsky’s idea of(Chomsky 1988: 183)

the origin of language. Furthermore, Harari says that
Then, how does Chomsky explain the origin ofhuman language evolved as a way of gossiping:human language? He makes clear his idea about it,
A second theory agrees that our unique language

saying this is just a speculation:

evolved as a means of sharing information about the
Now for some speculation about human evolution.

world. But the most important information that needed

Perhaps at some time hundreds of thousands of years

to be conveyed was about humans, not about lions andago, some small change took place, some mutationbison. Our language evolved as a way of gossiping.

took place in the cells of prehuman organisms. And for

According to this theory Homo sapiens is primarily areasons of physics which are not yet understood, thatsocial animal. Social cooperation is our key for survival

lead to the representation in the mind/brain of theand reproduction. It is not enough for individual men

mechanisms of discrete infinity, the basic concept ofand women to know the whereabouts of lions andlanguage and also of the number system. That made itbison. It’s much more important for them to know who

possible to think, in our sense of thinking. So now

in their band hates whom, who is sleeping with whom,humans—or prehumans—could go beyond just react-

who is honest, and who is a cheat. […] The new lin-

ing to stimuli and could construct complex structures

guistic skills that modern Sapiens acquired aboutout of the world of their experience, and now, theseventy millennia ago enabled them to gossip forworld of their imagination. Perhaps that was the origin

hours on end. Reliable information about who could beof human language.

trusted meant that small bands could expand into

(Chomsky 1988: 183)

larger bands, and Sapiens could develop tighter andChomsky’s insistence that the origin of language

more sophisticated types of cooperation.
(Harari 2011: 25-26)

is mutation is quite the same thing as saying that
nobody knows the origin of language or that God gives
human beings language. In other words, it is safe toThus, Harari claims that human language evolved

say that he does not explain anything about the origin

through gossiping, saying that even today our com-of language. Yubal Noah Harari says the same thing as

munications are full of gossiping:

Chomsky’s idea:
The gossip theory might sound like a joke, but
The appearance of new ways of thinking and com-

numerous studies support it. Even today the vastmunicating, between 70,000 and 30,000 years ago,

majority of human communication—whether in theconstitutes the Cognitive Revolution. What caused it?

form of emails, phone calls or newspaper columns—is

We’re not sure. The most commonly believed theory

gossip. It comes so naturally to us that it seems as if[Chomsky’s theory?] argues that accidental genetic

our language evolved for this very purpose.

mutations changed the inner wiring of the brains of
Sapiens, enabling them to think in unprecedented
─ 11 ─

(Harari 2011: 26)

Naoki ARAKI

was not spoken the day before or which was not spo-

4. Saussure’s Origin of Language

ken in the same way the day before.

The following passage concerning the origin of(Saussure 2006: 102)

language is found in Saussure’s Course in General
Linguistics:

Therefore, for Saussure, “in truth language is not
an entirely defined and delimited in time (Saussure

No society, in fact, knows or has ever known lan-

2006: 103).” So Saussure says that language has nei-guage other than as a product inherited from preced-

ther death nor birth, taking up Latin and French,

ing generations, and one to be accepted as such. That

which was a dialect of Latin:

is why the question of the origin of speech is not soimportant as it is generally assumed to be. The ques-

It follows that on no given day could one havetion is not even worth asking; the only real object lin-

drawn up the death certificate of the Latin language,

guistics is the normal, regular life of an existing idiom.

and similarly on no day could one have registered the

A particular language-state is always the product ofbirth of the French language. The people of France

historical forces, and these forces explain why the sign

have never woken up and said bonjour in French,

is unchangeable, i.e. why it resists any arbitrary sub-where they went to bed the previous evening saying

stitution.

‘good night’ in Latin.

(Saussure 1959: 71-72)(Saussure 2006: 100)

Here, Saussure insists that it is meaningless to

According to Saussure, language is a continuum

ask a question of the origin of language because lan-

without any beginning or end. If Saussure’s line ofguage is just only the product of previous generations

reasoning is right, to ask a question of the origin ofand “the actual birth of a new language has never been

language will be like asking a question of the source

reported anywhere in the world (Saussure 2006: 102).”of a river. The source of a river depends on where we

So we cannot find the origin of language anywhere as

identify the existence of the river. In other words, that

Morio Tagai says in his Genealogy of Thoughts on thedepends on the definition of a river, “What is a river?”

Origin of Language:
Looking at language and wondering at what preIf language, “which was not spoken the day

cise moment such a thing ‘started’ is as intelligent as

before,” does not exist, we have only one conclusion

looking at the mountain stream and believing that by

that—“the origin of language” does not exist. A pas-

following it upstream you will reach the exact location

sage from a student’s lecture notebook, which we haveof its spring. Countless things will show that at any

seen at the outset—“The question of the origin of

moment the STREAM exists when one says that it

language does not have the importance we give. The

comes into being, […](Saussure 2006: 63)

question does not even exist. (Saussure 1997:
11-12)”—means the same thing as this. The statement

If Saussure is right, then research concerning thethat “the origin of language” does not exist means thatorigin of language will be a waste of time. After all, any

language has nothing to do with “birth” and “death,”

attempt to investigate the origin of language will leadthat is to say, it has nothing to do with “beginning” andto an infinite regress. In other words, the question of“end.” (My translation)

the origin of language depends on what language is.

(Tagai 2014: 376-377)

According to Saussure, there has been no lan-

Conclusion

guage, which was not spoken the day before because

If the origin of language is a question that can be

language is always a heritage from previous genera-answered, it is necessary that we make it clear whattions:

language is. As Saussure points out, in order to answer
the question we need to clarify what it means that[…] we have never known of a language which

language comes into being. If we cannot do so, the─ 12 ─

The Origin of Language

origin of language dates back to the past ad infinitum,kind. Vintage Books. 2011.

which leads to an infinite regress. But it seems that noSaussure, Ferdinand de. Cours de Linguistique Générale

convincing discussions of this matter have been made(Course in General Linguistic, translated by Wadeso far although a lot of research is being pursued.

Baskin). Philosophical Library. 1959.

Therefore, the origin of language may not be a ques-

Saussure, Ferdinand de. Deuxième Cours de Linguis-tion but a pseudo-question.

tique Générale (1908-1909), d’après les cahiersd’Albert Riedlinger et Charles Patois (Saussure’s

References

Second Course of Lectures on General Linguistics

Chomsky, Noam. Language and Problems of Knowl-(1908-1909) From the Notebooks of Albert

edge: The Managua Lectures. The MIT Press.

Riedlinger and Charles Patois) French text edited

1988.

by Eisuke Komatsu, English translation by George

Corballis, Michael C. The Truth about Language: What
it is and Where it Came from. The University ofWolf. Pergamon Press. 1997.
Saussure, Ferdinand de. Écrits de Linguistique Générale

Chicago Press. 2017.

(Writings in General Linguistics, translated byDarwin, Charles. The Descent of Man, and Selection in

Carlos Sanders and Matthew Pires). Oxford Uni-

Relation to Sex, with an introduction by James
Moore and Adrian Desmond. Penguin Books.

versity Press. 2006.
Tagai, Morio. Genealogy of Thoughts on the Origin of2004.

Language. Kodansya. 2014. (in Japanese)

Fitch, W. Tecumseh. The Evolution of Language. Cam-

Whitney, William Dwight. The Life and Growth of Lan-bridge University Press. 2010.

guage: An Outline of Linguistic Science. D. Appel-

Harari, Yubal Noah. Sapiens: A Brief History of Human-─ 13 ─

ton and Company. 1875.