Xref: utzoo sci.lang:9529 talk.origins:14340 sci.bio:4693
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!uflorida!gatech!psuvax1!rutgers!cmcl2!panix!mls
From: mls@panix.uucp (Michael Siemon)
Newsgroups: sci.lang,talk.origins,sci.bio
Subject: Re: Announcement of book worth attention.
Summary: Sounds interesting -- could you summarize a bit?
Keywords: language origins, anthropology, humans
Message-ID: <1991Apr3.025237.10337@panix.uucp>
Date: 3 Apr 91 02:52:37 GMT
References: <1991Apr2.204906.9048@lgc.com>
Followup-To: talk.origins
Organization: PANIX - Public Access Unix Systems of NY
Lines: 29

In article <1991Apr2.204906.9048@lgc.com> cl@ (Cameron Laird) writes:

>I recommend attention to

>	1990.	Bickerton, Derek.  Language & Species.
>		The University of Chicago Press.

>I paraphrase his key claim:  language didn't come to our
>ancestors so that they could communicate; it was so that
>they could understand--internally represent--their world

>Is there interest in these newsgroups in discussing these issues?

Despite its inherent speculativeness, I'd say it is *highly*
appropriate material in the groups you have posted to.  As a
matter largely unconstrained by clear evidence, it may be better
in talk.origins (where I've directed follow-ups) than in the sci.
groups -- but be sure to put Ted Holden in your kill files if
you want to follow up in talk.origins (Ted is convinced that we
were all telepathic before Velikovsky's Venus started us on a
relatively short few thousand years of language use :-))

I, for one, would be very interested what evidence Bickerton can
adduce towards his thesis, and how he uses it.
-- 
Michael L. Siemon			"The watchwords of creativity are 
m.siemon@ATT.COM			slopiness, poor fit, quirky design
	- or -				and above all else, redundancy."
panix!mls@cmcl2.NYU.EDU				-- Stephen J. Gould