Hi, tired and weird-brained, might all be nonsense; don't take it too
> I am interested in schema which define complex movements
> like reaching and grasping.
- They are simple. A baby can do it. Even an early born.
Having the automatic systems drive a car while being docked off
seems to be a lot for them, though. And it took them ages to get the
difference of the connected meaning between a green and red light, and
I slightly distrust them with that till this day.
>But all possible movements
> are not stored as plans in the brain.
Not all, but many.
> John Annett has proposed that
> "Just as the verbal/linguistic system ...
I can talk without the language structurer left out front.
(But that's tricky, as grammar is gone and the contents of what should
be several sentences mix, and certain vocabulary is gone and so on,
but that'd be a bit too long to explain.)
(Actually I could probably already be dead several centuries and still
be babbling... ;-)
> ...can interpret a population of words and phrases, so ... the action
> system stores a 'vocabulary' of elementary actions or
> action prototypes".
(Didn't get that one and am too lazy to fetch my dictionary, been up
all night and am tired. I regret that especially the neuros can never
express their stuff in a way that as a foreigner and of another field
you have it a bit easier to follow. Wonder how many ideas get lost
that way; my English is better than that of most of my country; guess
with a lot of their stuff others get even less. I assume there might
be readers from many countries, and that a lot would not say much even
if they new something, because they might not even get the question or
believe their English is not good enough to answer.)
...Hm, not sure, but maybe got it; too tired to be sure if I
translated that right.
Sorry, in case that first bit had to do with the uptake, then of
course the stuff about speaking was in the wrong place; that are two
> ... that the language function emerged 'catastrophically' by
> adapting preexisting neuronal circuitry for the analysis
> of syntax.
...Or emerged by adapting preexisting neuronal circuitry's analysis
of impending/emerging 'catastrophies' to sound to tell the next bloke
that the thingie with the BIG teeth coming from behind him does not
look cute at all...
If having the suspicion that the other one might not be intersted in a
longer conversation and not wanting to take too much of his precious
time, it might be shortened to pointing at the sabertoothed tiger and
summoning it up to: "O ! (..h shit!)"
And it was 'catastrophically' advanced by women's curiosity about
inner matters of others, getting data about matters none of their
business, the discovery of being able to talk bad stuff about someone
behind her/his back and that language is power...
The females' discovery of gossipping might have been THE catapult of
language development... ;-)
> On an evolutionary scale, the preexisting
> circuitry is likely to be concerned with movement.
Possible. Could be.
Maybe a looong time ago.
Seems very emotion connected, though. Especially when excluding the
And the only time I perceived the language structurer it seemed like a
dark island, because nearby was stuff to do with colour.
> In the Artful Universe ...
Imagine to be able to create something like the universe as a piece
Wonder who you'd show it to and what they came up with?
> the rhythmic gyrations of primitive dance
(- That depends on the dance. Do (?)folkdancing and there are some
that do require quite some capacities and many to me seem structured
to combine well with the music and to trigger certain emotional
> Could evolution be marked by the development of
> appropriate 'vocabularies' from movement through music
> and dance (which came first? I suppose music via
> drumming to simulate the heart beat?) to speech?
Music also has to do with hormones.
Humming requires something to be there in the throat,
you need it to speak the normal way and to sing.
I am not sure if they were such seperate developments.
Dance maybe was later.
Once you can generate sounds and discover that you can stimulate your
emotions with certain frequencies and movements, then I guess it is
not that far to dance ...and eventually the techno disco...
> But where does music fit in? Did music precede language?
- I'd say that depends on how you define language.
There is the old way of communicating that of humans today mainly the
practicers of magic use, and that one seems by far older than the
origin of today's language to me, and many other beings (f.e.mammals,
birds, some fish, etc.) and even some others (plants, shrooms)
understand some of it and many communicate in it and are
understanding part of the communications of others, though "abilities"
there seem to differ a lot.
So I guess this is sort of the "interplanetary language".
Then there are primitive tones like hissing, grunts and shouts and
such stuff, I think those have been there for a long time. If I think
about mammals and birds a lot of sounds come to my mind.
I guess they might be regarded like some fraction of the other way.
I assume developing and using the language structurer is the last.
Music might have come once our throat (don't know the English terms,
to do with two membranes and other stuff, area of Adam's Apple),
had developed to the point of generating quite different (heights of)
There might have been a sexual role. Compare: Rock Star
And others. Compare: EnChanting
> Presumably evolution progressed through non sessile < --?
> organisms, moving organisms, communicating organisms
Many of the non-moving ones communicate.
And in many ways.
And not just with their kind.
Some trees do not just use the old way of communicating to exchange
data with some other trees, but might also communicate with their
roots with others, f.e. certain mushrooms. And they might transit
stuff down there.
Even though many of the non-moving ones are not conscious, they are
still aware of a lot and also communicate.
A lot of the sea-weird-ones (don't know the English names) have odd
...I am not sure if you are aware of it, but with the ways some of the
practicers of magic communicte you can transfer incredible amounts of
data straight into areas of the brain of the other one, via distances
of amounts of kilometers that I doubt you'd believe me.
With a lot of what you write about language and communication I have
the feeling that you do not understand how many of the other ones
So much directly to the e-letter.
Some other babbling:
The spoken language is in you.
It is hardware.
With the hardware programs are sound-programs
You just have to transit to a certain inner stage and they will go
semi-automatically. Then you can observe what words and word-melodies
they generate in what situations.
I sometimes like it when driving a car.
Normal cursings and comments are simply not appropriate enough
and too limiting to express exactly WHAT I think & feel about certain
other drivers, where I estimate their I.Q. to be and what I'd like to
do with them and their vehicle... ("Scottie, beam...") ,
and also when driving is boring it creates some side entertainment.
( "...his money to some poor place in India, his papers, the motor &
all oil & gas into the sun, the rest of the junk-can into a shallow
water-hole near some place near Nyala in Sudan, enrich the water-hole
with nasty beings, beam some skunks on the driver's lap and my
grandmother and two Ferenghi onto the seats in the back. And ..."
... Thoughts & emotions that would be too long to put in normal words
with the mentioned method can be expressed quite rapidly and with the
sounds of expressions that feel appropriate; German and Klingon are
just too soft languages in comparison... ;-)
If you do that you can sense how language came to be and why there
are so many languages.
(More seriously : )