Evolving Communication

Kate Stacey

These two authors agree in most of the parts but because of their different point of view [Diamond: physiological and ethological/ Graslund archeological and anatomical] they seem to have a different point of view even when they are trying to explain the same thing.

They both agree that animal communication especially among higher primates is more complex than human might think. Graslund says “Despite the complexities of the human brain it has no basic structures that cannot be found among other primates and higher mammals.” (Page 106) Diamond gives us an example of the vervet and tells us that “the call [vervet’s call] is clearly a voluntary communication, not an automatic expression of fear at the sight of a leopard” (P148)

They also agree that after our ancestors branched off from other species, their language evolved along with their biological evolution and there was time that they spoke proto- language.

From page 166 to 167 Diamonds describes the Great Leap as the giant step from the two-word stage to the stage where people started talking grammatically. “In that step are added words lacking external referents and serving purely grammatical functions; elements of grammar such as word order, prefixed and suffixes, and word root variation” Diamond is more focused on modern language and grammar. He focuses more on animals of contemporary period and doesn’t talk much about archaeological evidence like Graslund.

Graslund’s examples are on the other hand, skulls, cranial, bipedal, and throat structure, so his focus is more on when and how early human evolved and developed speech.