Tamil oldest language on earth, Sanskrit first in the universe?

[sravna]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp Email Share Link

Just an Intuition. Any views? A related logical thought that the earlier rishis were from a different part of the universe

 

[sravna]

I am in no way putting down earth. My personal belief is that earth is a great planet, among the most blessed in the universe as much as those from where the rishis originated. Yes I also strongly believe the rishis originated from a different solar system.

Views welcome.

 

[sravna]

I would call earth as the only nirguna planet with both science and spirituality employing each other, maintaining their essence and evolving towards pinnacle.

Sorry to be off the topic but views on this are also welcome

 

[sravna]

Science at least when significantly evolved can be logic that is magical

Spirituality on the other hand can be seen as the reverse, magic that is logical

Truth ultimately is one.

 

[Suresh ente sure]

Just an Intuition. Any views? A related logical thought that the earlier rishis were from a different part of the universe

If we propose this theory to western linguist . They will roll their eyes . Legends should always be legend even i find it amusing when people say tamil created by agathiar on shiva instruction

 

[renuka]

Since I know Sanskrit and also teach it, let me answer this.
Honestly its a very rich scientific language but when it is not a pre requisite for experiencing the state of balance.

In the state of balance every experience is coded and our brain translates it into the default language of our brain.

So one whose default language of the brain is English would decipher his experience and relate them in English, another who speaks Tamil would relate it in Tamil.

The oldest language in the world is the inner voice spoken in the sound of silence.

 

[renuka]

I am in no way putting down earth. My personal belief is that earth is a great planet, among the most blessed in the universe as much as those from where the rishis originated. Yes I also strongly believe the rishis originated from a different solar system.

Views welcome.

Then you should read the book by Shri M, Apprenticed to a Himalayan Master where he explains how Nagas came to earth from space through light orbs and taught the world all about Kundalini etc.

Its lots about space travel.

Even works of Ibn Arabi, he talks about other planet beings in contact with humans.

Sadguru makes everyone human.
He even said Shiva is a human and the saptarishis were human too.

So God knows!

 

[renuka]

Science at least when significantly evolved can be logic that is magical

Spirituality on the other hand can be seen as the reverse, magic that is logical

Truth ultimately is one.

Spirituality is NOT logical magic.
Its just that we havent mapped out its operating system yet.

There is surely law of subtle physics too.
Just that we do not know much about it yet.

For eg some Siddhas can materialize objects..its because the know the mechanics of combining the 5 elements.
Its all logic finally.

Even in Islam, the phrase Kun Fayakun ( Be and it is) is used to denote the act of creation or to will anything in existence.
It is not a magic wand situation ,rather its about jump starting the act of grossification for manifestation to happen.

Saints like Ibn Arabi say that the Kun Fayakun ability is also present in those who have acheived certain level of spiritual enlightenment.

It comes as no surprise as we all know Sage Vishwamitra created an entire parallel heavens for Trisanku.

 

[sravna]

The favourite star system for fully spiritually evolved beings is the vega star system. Saptarishis may have come from there is my belief.

Another belief of mine is that there is a ruler of the universe whose knowledge is more along the paradigm of science and the mother of all fights great is going on between them and the vegans. The vegans are more like out of the world beings trying to establish Dharma across the physical universe.

Any views?

 

[shivashares]

Just an Intuition. Any views? A related logical thought that the earlier rishis were from a different part of the universe

There is no such evidence that rishis and sages have come from different parts of the universe, it's all in the myth. Even if one takes such a possibility at face value, then also Tamil should have been the universal first language, just a common-sense approach will make this possibility more acceptable, then unnecessarily crediting the same in favor of Sanskrit. If Tamil is the first language spoken on earth, how we designed it, when Sages came from different planets and spoke a different language called Sanskrit, it is highly unlikely. If sages have come from different planets, they must have spoken Tamil only, and that is the reason, Tamil became the first language on Earth and we have supporting evidence for the same, Lord Shiva is considered an alien (and such theories are in circulation on the net too), and he is the one who chaired the first Tamil Sangam, so when Lord Shiva himself chaired first Tamil Sangam, and he taught us Tamil, it is certainly possible that Tamil is the first language on the universe. Further, the pandits and scholars have already agreed that Sanskrit is a composed language (the very name 'Sanskrit' confirms this), so it is designed as linga franka for a purpose on earth and the purpose was to write slokas, puranas, and a couple of epics and this it was called 'Deva Basha' too, it was mistaken as a language spoken by devas based on false propaganda.

It is even more interesting when we read about the sage Agastiyar, he is the one and only sage who figures in each and every Purana despite the fact that the time period between each of the Puranas is thousands of years. He is accepted as a Tamil saint and he too has chaired the Tamil Sangam. Based on the fact that he had an enormous life span as it is evident from his appearance in all the Puranas, it is either a myth or if one does not take it as myth, then it goes without saying that Tamil happens to be the numero uno language on this universe. Any which way Sanskrit is no way close to the antiquity of Tamil. Please do not have such crazy thoughts and tarnish the image of a divine language called Tamil.

 

[mahe_magesh]

Since I know Sanskrit and also teach it, let me answer this.
Honestly its a very rich scientific language but when it is not a pre requisite for experiencing the state of balance.

In the state of balance every experience is coded and our brain translates it into the default language of our brain.

So one whose default language of the brain is English would decipher his experience and relate them in English, another who speaks Tamil would relate it in Tamil.

The oldest language in the world is the inner voice spoken in the sound of silence.

I’m happy there are wise people like you amongst us! Thanks!

 

[sravna]

There is no such evidence that rishis and sages have come from different parts of the universe, it's all in the myth. Even if one takes such a possibility at face value, then also Tamil should have been the universal first language, just a common-sense approach will make this possibility more acceptable, then unnecessarily crediting the same in favor of Sanskrit. If Tamil is the first language spoken on earth, how we designed it, when Sages came from different planets and spoke a different language called Sanskrit, it is highly unlikely. If sages have come from different planets, they must have spoken Tamil only, and that is the reason, Tamil became the first language on Earth and we have supporting evidence for the same, Lord Shiva is considered an alien (and such theories are in circulation on the net too), and he is the one who chaired the first Tamil Sangam, so when Lord Shiva himself chaired first Tamil Sangam, and he taught us Tamil, it is certainly possible that Tamil is the first language on the universe. Further, the pandits and scholars have already agreed that Sanskrit is a composed language (the very name 'Sanskrit' confirms this), so it is designed as linga franka for a purpose on earth and the purpose was to write slokas, puranas, and a couple of epics and this it was called 'Deva Basha' too, it was mistaken as a language spoken by devas based on false propaganda.

It is even more interesting when we read about the sage Agastiyar, he is the one and only sage who figures in each and every Purana despite the fact that the time period between each of the Puranas is thousands of years. He is accepted as a Tamil saint and he too has chaired the Tamil Sangam. Based on the fact that he had an enormous life span as it is evident from his appearance in all the Puranas, it is either a myth or if one does not take it as myth, then it goes without saying that Tamil happens to be the numero uno language on this universe. Any which way Sanskrit is no way close to the antiquity of Tamil. Please do not have such crazy thoughts and tarnish the image of a divine language called Tamil.

Sir,

I am definitely not tarnishing the image of Tamil. I speak Tamil at home and love the language. The logic behind the Intuition that rishis are from a different part of the universe is this. The rishis are considered to have attained the pinnacle of spiritual development. It takes innumerable births to reach that stage. But according to science there is no evidence that humans were so advanced and evolved at the time rishis existed.

Let us consider that the concept of yugas was working. We have talked about the Gods avatars only from the latest mahayuga beginning with Satya Yuga. Nothing has been said about what happened during the previous mahayugas.

There are two possibilities. One is nothing happened and the inhabitation of earth happened from the current mahayuga. If such advanced thinking as we see from the scriptures and puranas are seen in such inhabitants it is very likely they came from another part of the universe which was sufficiently advanced already. If something happened during the previous mahayugas why has nothing been said about them even though the concept of time and yugas were well developed.

Another possibility is that we dismiss the concept of yugas but if so how come people with such advanced thinking were existing when there are no evidences that evolution was happening to the point of such advanced thinkers on earth. These people had extremely well developed minds and the truths they grasped are of the highest order which are yet to be matched by science even now.

The logical inclination is to conclude that they were indeed from a different part of the universe and since the language they employed was sanskrit, it should predate any language on earth because no other language talked about events that went such further back in history of the earth.

It is said that Tamil was created by Agastya. But before that he should definitely have spoken some other language and Sanskrit would seem to be that knowledge.

 

[sravna]

If the rishis came to earth from somewhere else then earth indeed should be special. That supports my intuition that earth is a blessed planet.

My intuition again about the home of those rishis would be the vega star system also called as Abhijit. Krishna mentions that star when he says He is Abhijit among stars.

I believe not all the star systems have that spiritual aura but our solar system is very strongly one of them.

 

[sravna]

It seems that earth though is a late starter. If we accept the alien origin of the rishis then spirituality is an established knowledge in the universe. On earth however we are seeing science develop as an authentic source of knowledge though very much in the beginning stage.

To explore the yuga logic and hypothesize that kali yuga supports scientific knowledge than spiritual knowledge would not be far fetched. It is also very likely that there are early developers of that source of knowledge and maybe even controlling the universe. That is my intuition too.

The physical universe I believe is caught between two paradigms of knowledge though I feel the vegans are more keen on establishing dharma than interested in control per se.

Discussion welcome folks

 

[shivashares]

I’m happy there are wise people like you amongst us! Thanks!

Sir,

I am definitely not tarnishing the image of Tamil. I speak Tamil at home and love the language. The logic behind the Intuition that rishis are from a different part of the universe is this. The rishis are considered to have attained the pinnacle of spiritual development. It takes innumerable births to reach that stage. But according to science there is no evidence that humans were so advanced and evolved at the time rishis existed.

Let us consider that the concept of yugas was working. We have talked about the Gods avatars only from the latest mahayuga beginning with Satya Yuga. Nothing has been said about what happened during the previous mahayugas.

There are two possibilities. One is nothing happened and the inhabitation of earth happened from the current mahayuga. If such advanced thinking as we see from the scriptures and puranas are seen in such inhabitants it is very likely they came from another part of the universe which was sufficiently advanced already. If something happened during the previous mahayugas why has nothing been said about them even though the concept of time and yugas were well developed.

Another possibility is that we dismiss the concept of yugas but if so how come people with such advanced thinking were existing when there are no evidences that evolution was happening to the point of such advanced thinkers on earth. These people had extremely well developed minds and the truths they grasped are of the highest order which are yet to be matched by science even now.

The logical inclination is to conclude that they were indeed from a different part of the universe and since the language they employed was sanskrit, it should predate any language on earth because no other language talked about events that went such further back in history of the earth.

It is said that Tamil was created by Agastya. But before that he should definitely have spoken some other language and Sanskrit would seem to be that knowledge.

Just to devils advocate you, especially the last para.. let me quote,

"It is said that Tamil was created by Agastya. But before that he should definitely have spoken some other language and Sanskrit would seem to be that knowledge."

As per your view, Sanskrit is older than Tamil.... but then we do not have any evidence to prove that. The oldest stone carving or clay tablets with Sanskrit script ( I mean Devnagari script) is found much later (perhaps, around Gupta Dynasty). Further, we have traced out plenty of stone inscriptions during the Ashoka period, but none were Sanskrit, they are all in Prakrit or a language prior to that. So it is very unlikely, that sage-like Agastya who appears in all the 18 Puranas spoke Sanskrit as a medium of communication.

The oldest stone carvings of Sanskrit were found in Athipara in Rajasthan and in Junath in Gujarat. This stone carving is dated 100 AD (1st Century AD). Whereas, Tamil's oldest stone carving is from Mangulam in Madurai and PullimaanKombai in Theni and these carvings are from 600 BC (6th Century BC). The difference is a huge 700 years.

In India from 600 BC to 1800 AD, some 60,000 carvings were discovered which belong to Tamil but starting from 600 BC till now, only 4000 carvings of Sanskrit have been discovered.

Further, a good number of Sanskrit words have etymological roots in the Tamil language... take for instance the word 'aarati' (a fire ritual in front of God). The word 'aarati' has roots in Tamil and it was adapted into Sanskrit. Aaram in Tamil is a circle ( we say poo aaram, a garland which is in a circle) and the suffix 'thee' in Tamil is 'fire'. Thus a fire ritual in a circular fashion is aptly called 'theeyin-aaram" or "aarathee". Not only this we have plenty of words in Ramayana and Mahabaratha too which are of Tamil origin. For instance, the Kishkanda king 'Vaali"; is a Tamil name " Val" in Tamil is tail, he is described in the Ramayana as the monkey with biggest tail, thus he was aptly called in Tamil as 'Vaalan' or 'Vali" (I can list down some good number of words added to the Sanskrit language which are undisputably Tamil), so it is very unlikely that Sanskrit existed in the whole universe as the first language.

 

[shivashares]

Since I know Sanskrit and also teach it, let me answer this.
Honestly its a very rich scientific language but when it is not a pre requisite for experiencing the state of balance.

In the state of balance every experience is coded and our brain translates it into the default language of our brain.

So one whose default language of the brain is English would decipher his experience and relate them in English, another who speaks Tamil would relate it in Tamil.

The oldest language in the world is the inner voice spoken in the sound of silence.

 

[shivashares]

You have answered well, but the question here is the antiquity of languages. If you say, let me quote:

" The oldest language in the world is the inner voice spoken in the sound of silence".

It is perfectly ok for all logical and sensible people. Nonetheless, the discussion here is about a language that could be used as a medium of communication. As silence cannot be used as a medium of communication ever (exception being "mounam angikaara lakshanam"), we have to meaningfully choose other options available. Is Hebrew the older language or Sanskrit the older one is the right question ( and not Silence or Hebrew /Sanskrit)? The comparison of Hebrew and Sanskrit is an apple to apple comparison 'cos both were once in vogue, both were linga franca, both are departed languages now (if one does not agree to that, at least its a fact that they are on ventilators).

Consequently, 'silence' cannot be accepted as the correct answer. Correct me if I am wrong.

 

[v.karthigeyan]

Just to devils advocate you, especially the last para.. let me quote,

"It is said that Tamil was created by Agastya. But before that he should definitely have spoken some other language and Sanskrit would seem to be that knowledge."

As per your view, Sanskrit is older than Tamil.... but then we do not have any evidence to prove that. The oldest stone carving or clay tablets with Sanskrit script ( I mean Devnagari script) is found much later (perhaps, around Gupta Dynasty). Further, we have traced out plenty of stone inscriptions during the Ashoka period, but none were Sanskrit, they are all in Prakrit or a language prior to that. So it is very unlikely, that sage-like Agastya who appears in all the 18 Puranas spoke Sanskrit as a medium of communication.

The oldest stone carvings of Sanskrit were found in Athipara in Rajasthan and in Junath in Gujarat. This stone carving is dated 100 AD (1st Century AD). Whereas, Tamil's oldest stone carving is from Mangulam in Madurai and PullimaanKombai in Theni and these carvings are from 600 BC (6th Century BC). The difference is a huge 700 years.

In India from 600 BC to 1800 AD, some 60,000 carvings were discovered which belong to Tamil but starting from 600 BC till now, only 4000 carvings of Sanskrit have been discovered.

Further, a good number of Sanskrit words have etymological roots in the Tamil language... take for instance the word 'aarati' (a fire ritual in front of God). The word 'aarati' has roots in Tamil and it was adapted into Sanskrit. Aaram in Tamil is a circle ( we say poo aaram, a garland which is in a circle) and the suffix 'thee' in Tamil is 'fire'. Thus a fire ritual in a circular fashion is aptly called 'theeyin-aaram" or "aarathee". Not only this we have plenty of words in Ramayana and Mahabaratha too which are of Tamil origin. For instance, the Kishkanda king 'Vaali"; is a Tamil name " Val" in Tamil is tail, he is described in the Ramayana as the monkey with biggest tail, thus he was aptly called in Tamil as 'Vaalan' or 'Vali" (I can list down some good number of words added to the Sanskrit language which are undisputably Tamil), so it is very unlikely that Sanskrit existed in the whole universe as the first language.

I am glad that Shivashares is using verifiable evidence to support the fact that Tamil is older than Sanscrit.

 

[renuka]

You have answered well, but the question here is the antiquity of languages. If you say, let me quote:

" The oldest language in the world is the inner voice spoken in the sound of silence".

It is perfectly ok for all logical and sensible people. Nonetheless, the discussion here is about a language that could be used as a medium of communication. As silence cannot be used as a medium of communication ever (exception being "mounam angikaara lakshanam"), we have to meaningfully choose other options available. Is Hebrew the older language or Sanskrit the older one is the right question ( and not Silence or Hebrew /Sanskrit)? The comparison of Hebrew and Sanskrit is an apple to apple comparison 'cos both were once in vogue, both were linga franca, both are departed languages now (if one does not agree to that, at least its a fact that they are on ventilators).

Consequently, 'silence' cannot be accepted as the correct answer. Correct me if I am wrong.

Honestly, it does not really matter to me which language is the oldest.
What is important is how we communicate with the current day languages.

I dont consider Sanskrit or Hebrew as a departed languages, its very much alive for those who use it in their lives.

I still see Sanskrit alive in your user name itself.

Coming to those on ventilators, we dont have enough evidence about the mind of a person on ventilators.
There are those who have come out of their grave situations and told docs that they were very much able to think but just could not elicit and response.

So you see..one on a ventilator could very much be mentally chanting OM NAMAH SHIVAYA.

I am not correcting you if you are right or wrong.
You are fully entitled to a valid opinion which need not be graded on the error scale.

Last but not least, silence is the language we all use before we communicate to anyone.

We all contemplate in silence before we decide anything.
So silence is a pre requisite for communication.

Also its only in silence we speak to God in unspoken words.

 

[sravna]

Just to devils advocate you, especially the last para.. let me quote,

"It is said that Tamil was created by Agastya. But before that he should definitely have spoken some other language and Sanskrit would seem to be that knowledge."

As per your view, Sanskrit is older than Tamil.... but then we do not have any evidence to prove that. The oldest stone carving or clay tablets with Sanskrit script ( I mean Devnagari script) is found much later (perhaps, around Gupta Dynasty). Further, we have traced out plenty of stone inscriptions during the Ashoka period, but none were Sanskrit, they are all in Prakrit or a language prior to that. So it is very unlikely, that sage-like Agastya who appears in all the 18 Puranas spoke Sanskrit as a medium of communication.

The oldest stone carvings of Sanskrit were found in Athipara in Rajasthan and in Junath in Gujarat. This stone carving is dated 100 AD (1st Century AD). Whereas, Tamil's oldest stone carving is from Mangulam in Madurai and PullimaanKombai in Theni and these carvings are from 600 BC (6th Century BC). The difference is a huge 700 years.

In India from 600 BC to 1800 AD, some 60,000 carvings were discovered which belong to Tamil but starting from 600 BC till now, only 4000 carvings of Sanskrit have been discovered.

Further, a good number of Sanskrit words have etymological roots in the Tamil language... take for instance the word 'aarati' (a fire ritual in front of God). The word 'aarati' has roots in Tamil and it was adapted into Sanskrit. Aaram in Tamil is a circle ( we say poo aaram, a garland which is in a circle) and the suffix 'thee' in Tamil is 'fire'. Thus a fire ritual in a circular fashion is aptly called 'theeyin-aaram" or "aarathee". Not only this we have plenty of words in Ramayana and Mahabaratha too which are of Tamil origin. For instance, the Kishkanda king 'Vaali"; is a Tamil name " Val" in Tamil is tail, he is described in the Ramayana as the monkey with biggest tail, thus he was aptly called in Tamil as 'Vaalan' or 'Vali" (I can list down some good number of words added to the Sanskrit language which are undisputably Tamil), so it is very unlikely that Sanskrit existed in the whole universe as the first language.

Sir,

I did some research on yugas. I had mentioned that there is no record of previous mahayugas. It seems after each mahayuga which comprises of four yugas knowledge gets lost and has to be given afresh. If Ramayana happened during the treta yuga of this mahayuga it would have happened during the treta yuga of the previous mahayugas and the following mahayuga but with the needed variations. So Vedas would be written by vyasa and rishis at the end of dwapara yuga for the sake of kaliyuga people. At a larger time scale is a manvantara which is composed of 71 mahayugas and which is ruled by a manu. The 71 mahayugas have the same the same code to guide people which will I believe undergo subtle variations in the next manvantara.

So it is possible and likely that earth was inhabited before the current mahayuga. The evidence of carvings and other such things lose force when we consider the possibility that inhabitation of earth was of far far greater antiquity. It seems logical that it was of such great antiquity given the mental development of the rishis.

Now coming to the issue to understand whether tamil or sanskrit is older we need to understand the people who spoke them. The same characters and events keep coming in each mahayuga though with variations. The saptarishis are denoted by stars which indicates the extraterrestrial origins. These are the ones who keep coming to earth and give the needed knowledge. Their language of communication is sanskrit which indicates that sanskrit could possibly be a universal language and maybe the first.

Regarding the oldest language on earth one can go by carvings and other archaeological findings which seem to point to Tamil. By oldest language on earth I mean language indigenous to earth.

 

[sravna]

Tamil might well have divine origins. I am inclined to believe in that. This is my theory. God created something universal and another specific for a planet. Sanskrit is the universal language and Tamil for earth. All other languages should derive from these two. The physical world is always a mix of universal and indigenous.

 

[renuka]

Tamil might well have divine origins. I am inclined to believe in that. This is my theory. God created something universal and another specific for a planet. Sanskrit is the universal language and Tamil for earth. All other languages should derive from these two. The physical world is always a mix of universal and indigenous.

Sravna, believe me, no language is specifically more divine than the other.
Every language is frequency of uttered words and everything came from God, so all languages are divine.

I think we sometimes get carried away that some things are more divine than others.






E

 

[sravna]

Sravna, believe me, no language is specifically more divine than the other.
Every language is frequency of uttered words and everything came from God, so all languages are divine.

I think we sometimes get carried away that some things are more divine than others.






E

Ok. Agree. We will stick to what is oldest.

 

[sravna]

Actually I do not want to be divisive. But I will strive to present truths or atleast logical arguments and prejudice be addressed.

 

[prasad1]

I did not want to join this thread. But I do follow Dr. Renuka's post.

I do not understand the heading?

Tamil oldest language on earth, Sanskrit first in the universe​

If Tamil is the oldest language, how can Sanskrit be the first language, it seems like a contradiction.

All languages are Human-made, there is no divinity in the language. Human beings created god. God or Brahman is the basis of everything, but not an active god.

In Judaism and Christianity, it is unclear whether the language used by God to address Adam was the language of Adam, who as name-giver (Genesis 2:19) used it to name all living things, or if it was a different divine language. But since God is portrayed as using speech during creation, and as addressing Adam before Gen 2:19, some authorities assumed that the language of God was different from the language of Paradise invented by Adam, while most medieval Jewish authorities maintained that the Hebrew language was the language of God, which was accepted in Western Europe from at least the 16th century and until the early 20th century.

Divine language - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The Divine Source​

In most religions, it is believed that language is a God-given gift to human species. In Christianity, God gave Adam the kingdom of all animals in the Garden of Eden and the first thing Adam did was to name these animals. That is how language started according to religious sources. Today people speak many different languages rather than only one language because ancient humans became too proud and they tried to build the Tower of Babel in order to reach God. So, God punished them by separating their languages.

People tried to discover the original divine language which was spoken by our most ancient ancestors. They assumed that if a child was brought up without hearing any language, the first word the child would utter would be in this divine language.

The Divine Source​

In most religions, it is believed that language is a God-given gift to human species. In Christianity, God gave Adam the kingdom of all animals in the Garden of Eden and the first thing Adam did was to name these animals. That is how language started according to religious sources. Today people speak many different languages rather than only one language because ancient humans became too proud and they tried to build the Tower of Babel in order to reach God. So, God punished them by separating their languages.

People tried to discover the original divine language which was spoken by our most ancient ancestors. They assumed that if a child was brought up without hearing any language, the first word the child would utter would be in this divine language.

2. The Natural Sound Source​

• ‘The “Bow-bow” Theory’​

All languages have sounds that mimic the natural sounds. These are called onomatopoeic words. Some examples from Turkish are şırıl şırıl, hav hav, miyav, lıkır lıkır, etc. One belief is that human languages originated from these onomatopoeic words that mimic the sounds of entities or actions to which they refer. Thus, for example, miyav originally would be a word to refer to cats.

• ‘ The “Pooh-pooh” Theory’​

According to this assumption language originated with the use of sounds that reflect emotions such as pain, fear, hunger, surprise, and the sounds of laughter and crying, etc. Some examples of these sounds are üf, ayyy, yaa, vay, etc. However, these sounds of emotion do not necessarily exist in the vocabulary of human language. Therefore, it is not plausible to assume that sounds of emotion are the basis for human language.

• ‘The “Yo-heave-ho” Theory’​

According to this proposal, early human beings used some sounds when they were doing some collaborative work. For example, when they were lifting a huge animal that they hunted, they used sounds to do their task for physical coordination and to reach their message to their friends that they share the burden of their job. It is claimed that these sounds eventually turned out into a language.

3. The Oral-Gesture Source​

People use some nonverbal communication when they speak. For example, we wave hands to say good-bye; we nod our heads to show our approval or to mean ‘yes’, we produce a sound by our tongue when we mean ‘no’. The oral-gesture source suggests that language started with the gestures that we use by our mouth and other speech organs.

4. Glossogenetics​

Our ancestors became bipedal (standing and walking on their two legs) about 3.5 million years ago. When these humans could stand on their two legs, their larynx (a speech organ behind Adam’s apple in the human throat) changed in a way to allow humans to produce vowel and consonant sounds in human languages. Human language developed as a result of this evolutionary change.

​

5. Physiological Adaptation​

Unlike human beings, no other species can use language because other animals have a very different physiology than human beings. Modern human beings have vocal tract for speaking. Human mouth is small, which makes it easier to open and close for fast speech production. Human teeth are in upright position and are regular in size, which allows us to produce sounds such as, f and v. Human mouth has a complicated muscle system, which allows us to produce various vowels. Our tongue can move backwards, forwards, up and down. This allows us to produce various speech sounds. In fact without these speech organs, human beings could not have spoken.

In addition, to these changes, human brain has gone through a number of changes, it became much bigger and specialized for language.

Researchers have claimed that human beings adapted all these physiological changes throughout their history and these changes caused the emergence of human language.

1. The origins of language

1. The Divine Source In most religions, it is believed that language is a God-given gift to human species. In Christianity, God gave Adam the kingdom of all animals in the Garden of Eden and the f…

linguisticsunimet.wordpress.com