Which was first?

Question

Since the very beginning of our existance as consciouss creatures, the Homo Sapiens seeks ways to express themselves, their feelings, desires, wishes, dreams and thoughts.
Through language, art, music, inventions, philosophies we express our inmost personallities shaping our world.

So, I wonder, which was the first used by humans to express themselves - the drawing (cave paintings, prehistoric symbols, even building patterns?) or the spoken language?

Answer 1

There is a great deal of evidence to suggest depiction preceded language as it (language) is currently defined. In fact, some of the leading theories about language evolution suggest that visual depictions and representations must have come before an abstract, representative language. Before Homo Sapiens, or one of our ancestors (as several other species had complex tool use, representative imagery, and possibly a simplistic language), became cogniscent they would have had neither language nor depiction as either would indicate a level of awareness not yet attained. Once we (Homo Sapiens for convenience sake) became sentient, simplistic depiction would have come long before language. One person noted dance as possibly coming first, and some anthropologists have suggested that music, along with dance, may have indeed given rise to language.

This is a very complex and possibly unknowable question. People here have responded that language must have been necessary to communicate tool usage required for depiction. Firstly, no tool use is necessary for depcition, but even if it were, language is not necessary for tool technology to exist. Also, it should be noted that the earliest and probably most prevalent early "art" no longer exists or has not been found if it does. Cave paintings in France were not the first such depecitions; that has been proven. What exactly was the earliest, and where it occured, is not known with any certainty. However, some people take red ochre usage in Europe to indicate body painting and symbolic representation existed possibly 350,000 years ago. Others believe (probably rightly) that portable "art" began in Africa almost congruently with the evolution of the species, but this art no longer exists and so this cannot be proven. The only evidence that really supports language development before representative depiction is the biological development of Brocca's Bulge, which can be seen in fossil and skeletal remains in some skulls. However, the presence of Brooca's Bulge does not necessarily mean that language was already present, and the purpose of this area of the brain as controlling language has been coming into question recently. If it does control language acquisition, it probably also controls general symbolic and abstract thought processes, and so equally supports abstract depiction coming before language.

For more information I suggest reading Mithen, Hayden, Halverson, Bedarnick, White, and Marshack, just to name a few prominent scientists who have examined such topics. Many fields of study including archaeology, physical anthropology, biology, psychology, and more, yield different (sometimes supportive sometimes argumentative) views about this question and you should research it very thoroughly before drawing a conclusion for yourself. In the end, the answer is largely a personal preference.

Answer 2

Language most certainly developed first, since it is the true hallmark of the leap forward into being Homo Sapiens. Of course, at what point language moved into self expression and creativity rather than "Hey! An antelope!" or "Watch out, bears!" is open to debate.

I think the oral tradition developed first, and I would say the first visual expressions probably started with the body - painting, clothes, piercings, etc. (Just think how helpful it is to distinguish visually one tribe from another, or how so many different variations in human appearance evolved.) Next, I would assume beauty was added to functional items - e.g. water vessels. Then I believe the last to develop would have been purely symbolic works like cave paintings.

Answer 3

No one is aware of. We can organization some of the identified dwelling and extinct languages into MANY language households (Indo-European is only one), however there also are many language isolates. We can not hyperlink the language households with the proof we presently have. We have no idea while or how human conversation started (so "grunts' or "signal language" is natural hypothesis, arm chair linguistics without a proof to again it up). We have no idea if homo sapiens advanced with spoken language already (ancestral human species MAY have had language). Even if homo sapiens used to be the primary or most effective species to talk, we have no idea if there used to be most effective ONE language that varied such a lot we can not inform now that there used to be just one, or if specific homo sapiens populations built language independently, in specific locations and probably at specific instances. I have an opinion approximately what by and large occurred, however it is mere hypothesis.

Answer 4

Ian Tattersall, a prominent paleoanthropolgist who wrote a book called "Becoming Human." which I read and liked, suggested that humans developed language about 50,000 years ago when symbolic objects first started appearing in the fossil record. I found this theory to be absolutely ridiculous but I acknowledge he is an expert. It makes much more sense to me that our inherent language ability probably evolved for at least a million years. So our language, in my opinion, came before the symbolic objects and art. Our ancestors probably needed the language to help teach the young and to help with the hunt. I suspect it was used early on to express their inner feelings and desires.

Answer 5

Language without a doubt. God taught Adam all the words in WRITTING and I strongly believe that it was the most rich language ever. (since it was God's language) From that language derived all the other languages. Just like all the races derived from one source. The human allways knew how to talk since ever. Some language are less sophisticated than others but there were never a non-talking human like you see in movies.

Answer 6

It seems the written language and cave paintings would have come after. Because they required tools. Basic language would have had to come first in order to convey that the use of tools was needed. Based on this Apes must have a form of language they understand. Because they do make tools.

Answer 7

language of corse. just becuase it isnt writin doenst mean we havent been talking. there are many forms of verbal communication, dolphins, merh cats. whales. birds, shall i go on. they all "talk" but the communication is basic, only conveing the simplist things. greetings, mood, sex, play, danger. attention getting, so on. complexe commucation, that of human kind. is far more complexe because we have much more information to convy. the first cave painting date back less then a 100,000 yrs but hominids like man have been "talking" for much much longer

bonus - photo-visual displays by some species of aqua-marine life froms are another method of comunication. creature that desplay these "light show" live in such depths where light doesnt permiate

Answer 8

I would imagine it would have been speach, though not a type of language we may understand. I would imagine they used grunts and sounds, which may have meant certain things. Then, later found an object to draw with.

Answer 9

Our closest primate relatives hoot and screech at each other and seem to be able to convey stuff like 'look out snake!' or 'Food here' or 'I am the boss' or 'No you are not the boss' etc.
Chimps in the wild don't tend to draw each other diagrams.
Sound based communication seems the logical answer.

Answer 10

We are thought to have had speech (around 200,000 yrs ago) long before we began expressing ourselves through art (around 50-60,000 yrs ago).