What do you think?
Rate this book
The Domestication of Language: Cultural Evolution and the Uniqueness of the Human Animal
Language did not evolve only in the distant past. Our shared understanding of the meanings of words is ever-changing, and we make conscious, rational decisions about which words to use and what to mean by them every day. Applying Charles Darwin's theory of "unconscious artificial selection" to the evolution of linguistic conventions, Daniel Cloud suggests a new, evolutionary explanation for the rich, complex, and continually reinvented meanings of our words.The choice of which words to use and in which sense to use them is both a "selection event" and an intentional decision, making Darwin's account of artificial selection a particularly compelling model of the evolution of words. After drawing an analogy between the theory of domestication offered by Darwin and the evolution of human languages and cultures, Cloud applies his analytical framework to the question of what makes humans unique and how they became that way. He incorporates insights from David Lewis's Convention, Brian Skyrms's Signals, and Kim Sterelny's Evolved Apprentice, all while emphasizing the role of deliberate human choice in the crafting of language over time. His clever and intuitive model casts humans' cultural and linguistic evolution as an integrated, dynamic process, with results that reach into all corners of our private lives and public character.
- GenresLinguisticsNonfiction
290 pages, Kindle Edition
First published December 12, 2014
1 person is currently reading
70 people want to read
About the author
Daniel Cloud
7 books2 followersLecturer of philosophy at Columbia University, specializing in the philosophy of biology and the social sciences.
After graduating from Wesleyan University, he taught English at Qinghua University in Beijing. He then did a variety of jobs in Asia, and ended up working for W. I. Carr as an equity analyst in Hong Kong, China, and Indonesia.
He returned to the United States to study at Columbia University's School of International and Public Affairs, and then in 1993 helped start Firebird Fund Management, which launched one of the first successful Russia funds. In 1998 he returned to Columbia, this time to study philosophy and biology. He is currently a partner at Euphrates Asset Management, a company that manages a fund that invests in Iraq.
Cloud finished a Ph.D. in philosophy, with honors, in 2006, and subsequently spent some time at the Institute for Biolcomplexity and Informatics in Calgary. In 2008 he became a Junior Fellow at Princeton University, and in 2011 he was hired by the school's philosophy department. He worked for Princeton's University Center for Human Values and its Humanities Council.
After graduating from Wesleyan University, he taught English at Qinghua University in Beijing. He then did a variety of jobs in Asia, and ended up working for W. I. Carr as an equity analyst in Hong Kong, China, and Indonesia.
He returned to the United States to study at Columbia University's School of International and Public Affairs, and then in 1993 helped start Firebird Fund Management, which launched one of the first successful Russia funds. In 1998 he returned to Columbia, this time to study philosophy and biology. He is currently a partner at Euphrates Asset Management, a company that manages a fund that invests in Iraq.
Cloud finished a Ph.D. in philosophy, with honors, in 2006, and subsequently spent some time at the Institute for Biolcomplexity and Informatics in Calgary. In 2008 he became a Junior Fellow at Princeton University, and in 2011 he was hired by the school's philosophy department. He worked for Princeton's University Center for Human Values and its Humanities Council.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
August 20, 2015
It seems the theory of evolution is all the rage these days among philosophers. I am not referring to those many philosophers who feel compelled to defend Darwin’s theory against the rantings of religious fanatics. I am referring the apparent trend that has developed in the last few years that exploits Darwinian insights in order to clarify and perhaps even solve some philosophical problems. Daniel Cloud’s The Domestication of Language is a recent example. The 275-page book, divided into ten chapters and an index, is dedicated to making sense out of the deceptively complicated issue of where words come from.
Cloud puts the key question this way, “How did all the various things in the world get their names?” (1) Human culture has yielded a number of answers to this question. Think of the book of Genesis, for example. Perhaps in order to set the stage for the philosophical lineage developed in the book Cloud starts things off with Plato’s answer to the question. Plato considers whether language begins with some sort of agreement or convention among people, people of some authority perhaps. Plato’s Socrates suggests that “the words of our existing languages were created by people he calls nomothetes, lawgivers or legislators” (2). Jumping to the mid-twentieth century with the work of the influential W.V. Quine, who thought Plato’s answer “childish” (2), the work of The Domestication of Language begins in earnest. According to Cloud, Plato and Quine “are in fact pointing to a philosophical puzzle we still face in almost the same form” (6).
Cloud acknowledges that is was the contemporary philosopher Daniel Dennett who inspired his own take on the puzzle of language’s origins. He credits Dennett with considering Darwin’s notion of domestication as a possible piece of the puzzle. As Cloud explains, “…domestication refers to humans’ cultivation of animals, plants, and other organisms. In this sense, the critical feature of domestication is the human role in choosing which individuals will have offspring and which will not” (3). Furthermore, says Cloud, by “analogy, any mutually beneficial interaction that becomes obligatory for one or both parties can be called domestication in the broadest possible sense of the word.” (4). Thus, the book’s “intention…is to defend the hypothesis that words in general are domesticated, in Darwin’s specific sense of the word domesticated” (6). In other words, as Cloud puts it later in the book, “If culture can be thought of as domesticated, in Darwin’s sense of the word, if it is like a flock of sheep, then words…are the sheepdogs we use to manage it” (62).
Cloud then moves on to the work of David Lewis and Brian Skyrms, contemporary philosophers who also puzzle over the nature and origins of language, suggesting that their work (implicitly) suggests Darwinian domestication at the root of things. Interestingly, this takes Cloud into the worlds occupied by chimpanzees, bees, and birds.
This move is an example of how many philosophers and scientists fertilize each other’s’ fields with their own work often coming up with novel yet plausible new understandings of old problems. As Cloud says, “nearly everything I’ve said about birdsong may apply almost equally well to some aspects of the syntax and pronunciation of human
languages” (2).
Cloud’s argumentative sweep is broad, incorporating theories of social learning, analyzing the meaning of meaning, explaining the role of conversation and even humor in human culture. This multi-disciplinary work has a point of course. “The message of my story,” says Cloud, “is right on the surface: that we have more agency in deciding what
our language will be like than we might suppose and that we are all working on a shared project that benefits everyone all the time, even when our actions might seem futile or frivolous” (24). In the end, The Domestication of Language concludes that human language is not something pre-programmed into our DNA such that we are simply
“puppets dancing at the end of strings held by maladaptive memes” (249). Nor do we simply make it up as we go along either. “In the final analysis, we are not passive spectators, consumers, or victims of our culture. We humans—we’re gardeners, domesticators and creator, the ambitious rivals of Nature itself” (249).
Cloud is indeed grappling with an intriguing problem. I will leave it to the reader to trace the niceties of the argument structure that The Domestication of Language represents. I only scratched the surface here. The Domestication of Language is not an easy read. It is
clearly not aimed at a general reading audience. It is meant for other philosophers and academics with some experience with the developments in evolutionary theory and some familiarity with academic philosophy. In any case, the book is tightly argued. It builds
wonderfully on the work of others and offers realistic aspirations for further research agendas in various disciplines. Not a bad set of accomplishments at all.
Cloud puts the key question this way, “How did all the various things in the world get their names?” (1) Human culture has yielded a number of answers to this question. Think of the book of Genesis, for example. Perhaps in order to set the stage for the philosophical lineage developed in the book Cloud starts things off with Plato’s answer to the question. Plato considers whether language begins with some sort of agreement or convention among people, people of some authority perhaps. Plato’s Socrates suggests that “the words of our existing languages were created by people he calls nomothetes, lawgivers or legislators” (2). Jumping to the mid-twentieth century with the work of the influential W.V. Quine, who thought Plato’s answer “childish” (2), the work of The Domestication of Language begins in earnest. According to Cloud, Plato and Quine “are in fact pointing to a philosophical puzzle we still face in almost the same form” (6).
Cloud acknowledges that is was the contemporary philosopher Daniel Dennett who inspired his own take on the puzzle of language’s origins. He credits Dennett with considering Darwin’s notion of domestication as a possible piece of the puzzle. As Cloud explains, “…domestication refers to humans’ cultivation of animals, plants, and other organisms. In this sense, the critical feature of domestication is the human role in choosing which individuals will have offspring and which will not” (3). Furthermore, says Cloud, by “analogy, any mutually beneficial interaction that becomes obligatory for one or both parties can be called domestication in the broadest possible sense of the word.” (4). Thus, the book’s “intention…is to defend the hypothesis that words in general are domesticated, in Darwin’s specific sense of the word domesticated” (6). In other words, as Cloud puts it later in the book, “If culture can be thought of as domesticated, in Darwin’s sense of the word, if it is like a flock of sheep, then words…are the sheepdogs we use to manage it” (62).
Cloud then moves on to the work of David Lewis and Brian Skyrms, contemporary philosophers who also puzzle over the nature and origins of language, suggesting that their work (implicitly) suggests Darwinian domestication at the root of things. Interestingly, this takes Cloud into the worlds occupied by chimpanzees, bees, and birds.
This move is an example of how many philosophers and scientists fertilize each other’s’ fields with their own work often coming up with novel yet plausible new understandings of old problems. As Cloud says, “nearly everything I’ve said about birdsong may apply almost equally well to some aspects of the syntax and pronunciation of human
languages” (2).
Cloud’s argumentative sweep is broad, incorporating theories of social learning, analyzing the meaning of meaning, explaining the role of conversation and even humor in human culture. This multi-disciplinary work has a point of course. “The message of my story,” says Cloud, “is right on the surface: that we have more agency in deciding what
our language will be like than we might suppose and that we are all working on a shared project that benefits everyone all the time, even when our actions might seem futile or frivolous” (24). In the end, The Domestication of Language concludes that human language is not something pre-programmed into our DNA such that we are simply
“puppets dancing at the end of strings held by maladaptive memes” (249). Nor do we simply make it up as we go along either. “In the final analysis, we are not passive spectators, consumers, or victims of our culture. We humans—we’re gardeners, domesticators and creator, the ambitious rivals of Nature itself” (249).
Cloud is indeed grappling with an intriguing problem. I will leave it to the reader to trace the niceties of the argument structure that The Domestication of Language represents. I only scratched the surface here. The Domestication of Language is not an easy read. It is
clearly not aimed at a general reading audience. It is meant for other philosophers and academics with some experience with the developments in evolutionary theory and some familiarity with academic philosophy. In any case, the book is tightly argued. It builds
wonderfully on the work of others and offers realistic aspirations for further research agendas in various disciplines. Not a bad set of accomplishments at all.
Read
June 9, 2017There's a bunch of interesting ideas in here for supplementing the standard Lewisian view of conventions as an account of how lexical meaning gets fixed, and how it can change.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews