Frank Kogan

a normal evolutionary view of the development of mental faculties would say that to acquire language would involve the mustering of (neural) resources that might have been used otherwise, or not developed and supported (nutritionally).

it's the convoluted path (simple to follow, but at some point the unobvious choice leads to the jackpot) vs the complex path (an obvious choice with a lot of ground to cover and problems to solve.

so it's an interesting alternative, but the complexity threshold or 'only one tallest tree' argument still seems valid. and cos hom sap is singular in so very many features, it's 'easy' to suggest than any of these, or combiantion thereof is also necessary.

again, so many lovely theories. what i like are all the confliciting theories about what was the primary 'driver'. My favourites tend to be about forming larger social groups for some reason. the resource-based rewards (nat selection gold!) for organised behaviours leading to larger groups, leading to strategies to cope with them, that lead to the mental faculties that form the basis of language. language as grooming/social-control.

<arthur c clarke>perhaps i like these because it suggests that in the super-connected age of t'internet developing new strategies for such social intereactions will lead us somewhere else again.</arthur c clarke>