What do you think?
Rate this book
The Evolution of Language
Language, more than anything else, is what makes us human. It appears that no communication system of equivalent power exists elsewhere in the animal kingdom. Any normal human child will learn a language based on rather sparse data in the surrounding world, while even the brightest chimpanzee, exposed to the same environment, will not. Why not? How, and why, did language evolve in our species and not in others? Since Darwin's theory of evolution, questions about the origin of language have generated a rapidly-growing scientific literature, stretched across a number of disciplines, much of it directed at specialist audiences. The diversity of perspectives - from linguistics, anthropology, speech science, genetics, neuroscience and evolutionary biology - can be bewildering. Tecumseh Fitch cuts through this vast literature, bringing together its most important insights to explore one of the biggest unsolved puzzles of human history.
Source: Publisher
Source: Publisher
624 pages, Paperback
First published March 1, 2010
13 people are currently reading
297 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews
February 9, 2016
This book is for two types of people:
1) The linguist who is interested in understanding more about the biology/evolution of the human species AND in having a general understanding of the biological adaptations of other animals in regards to vocal productivity. This is not just another gloss (Broca's area causes a certain kind of aphasia) but is, instead, a hardcore look into the science of the brain and the body. Be prepared (as a linguist) to feel lost and bewildered...Though simultaneously to feel as though you've learned something.
2) The biologist who is interested in understanding a (slightly biased) look into linguistics. Fitch leans heavily upon his understanding of linguistics and frequently interjects his opinion, but he is fairly thorough albeit a bit too brief in places. He gives an overview of many theories associated with some of the more prominent linguists such as Liberman, Bickerton, Tomasello, Wray, Deacon, and Dunbar, though, again, expect to hear, "I don't think this makes sense because blah blah blah" frequently.
In either case, I highly recommend this book. It's a tough, slow 512 pages, but Fitch does a terrific job of putting all of this information in one place with enough signposts in the bibliography to get you started digging deeper. It straddles the line between the two fields well and will be beneficial to students on either side.
1) The linguist who is interested in understanding more about the biology/evolution of the human species AND in having a general understanding of the biological adaptations of other animals in regards to vocal productivity. This is not just another gloss (Broca's area causes a certain kind of aphasia) but is, instead, a hardcore look into the science of the brain and the body. Be prepared (as a linguist) to feel lost and bewildered...Though simultaneously to feel as though you've learned something.
2) The biologist who is interested in understanding a (slightly biased) look into linguistics. Fitch leans heavily upon his understanding of linguistics and frequently interjects his opinion, but he is fairly thorough albeit a bit too brief in places. He gives an overview of many theories associated with some of the more prominent linguists such as Liberman, Bickerton, Tomasello, Wray, Deacon, and Dunbar, though, again, expect to hear, "I don't think this makes sense because blah blah blah" frequently.
In either case, I highly recommend this book. It's a tough, slow 512 pages, but Fitch does a terrific job of putting all of this information in one place with enough signposts in the bibliography to get you started digging deeper. It straddles the line between the two fields well and will be beneficial to students on either side.
June 8, 2017
This fairly dense book discusses theories on the physical evolution of language in humans. This is looking at the biological evolution, not the cultural change that occurs in languages. It starts with essentially a roadmap through human evolution and then talks about the various theories for different ways language may have evolved along with the pros and cons of the various theories.
If you are looking for a simple, clear explanation of how language evolved then this book isn't for you. This is because no one theory has enough supporting evidence to be universally accepted yet. It provides a glimpse behind a field very much in flux as new ideas come and are tested and usually found wanting and so to a degree shows the scientific process in action.
It is interesting and though provoking and will definitely stretch the brain. The only downside is that the author, particularly when talking about linguistic concepts sometimes doesn't define the things he discusses and that can make following those sections a bit difficult but usually he does a good job of defining before discussing.
Overall, it was a very interesting read.
If you are looking for a simple, clear explanation of how language evolved then this book isn't for you. This is because no one theory has enough supporting evidence to be universally accepted yet. It provides a glimpse behind a field very much in flux as new ideas come and are tested and usually found wanting and so to a degree shows the scientific process in action.
It is interesting and though provoking and will definitely stretch the brain. The only downside is that the author, particularly when talking about linguistic concepts sometimes doesn't define the things he discusses and that can make following those sections a bit difficult but usually he does a good job of defining before discussing.
Overall, it was a very interesting read.
January 25, 2024
I think I found this book through the bibliography of A Myriad of Tongues by Caleb Everett. While that book was more directed at a popular audience, this book was much more academic.
Fitch brings together all the current hypotheses about the evolution of language in humans into one detailed book that traces all the evolutionary pathways for everything from the neurological roots of language to the physical evolution of our vocal tracts.
Since much of the book is a wider look at evolutionary biology, it was a lot of review for me from my undergrad biology major days. Since I was less familiar with specifically the homo genus and the evolution from our last common ancestor, the later chapters discussing those evolutionary steps were very interesting.
The final section of the book focuses in on the final hurdles to spoken language, and goes in depth with the three leading hypotheses as of publishing in 2010 - lexical protolanguage, gestural protolanguage, and musical protolanguage. lexical posits that our ancestors would begin with a lexicon of meaningful words before creating the syntax for complex language. Gestural argues that our ancestors started with gestural communication before adding vocal communication. And musical argued that our language was formed out of singing or mating ritualistic behavior.
Since much of this portion of the evolution focuses on the adaptation of soft tissues and neurology, it will be difficult to ever land on one definitive conclusion for why we have the capability for language, but I'm very interested in seeing what has come from another 14 years of research in this field!
Fitch brings together all the current hypotheses about the evolution of language in humans into one detailed book that traces all the evolutionary pathways for everything from the neurological roots of language to the physical evolution of our vocal tracts.
Since much of the book is a wider look at evolutionary biology, it was a lot of review for me from my undergrad biology major days. Since I was less familiar with specifically the homo genus and the evolution from our last common ancestor, the later chapters discussing those evolutionary steps were very interesting.
The final section of the book focuses in on the final hurdles to spoken language, and goes in depth with the three leading hypotheses as of publishing in 2010 - lexical protolanguage, gestural protolanguage, and musical protolanguage. lexical posits that our ancestors would begin with a lexicon of meaningful words before creating the syntax for complex language. Gestural argues that our ancestors started with gestural communication before adding vocal communication. And musical argued that our language was formed out of singing or mating ritualistic behavior.
Since much of this portion of the evolution focuses on the adaptation of soft tissues and neurology, it will be difficult to ever land on one definitive conclusion for why we have the capability for language, but I'm very interested in seeing what has come from another 14 years of research in this field!
September 6, 2017
A very informative read but definitely not intended for the casual reader. The Evolution of Language is more on the "textbook" end of the spectrum rather than a pop science book. That said, for someone (academically-inclined) looking for a good and broad overview of the field of language evolution, it's perfect. I also appreciated the fact that the author refrained from putting forward his own theories and didn't use the book to promote them. Instead, the way The Evolution of Language is written encourages you to form your own opinions about the topic.
February 25, 2026
Extremely well researched and documented. Beyond the lay reader.
I have read many of the authors Fitch cites, enough to appreciate that he has pulled together a remarkable synthesis of thinking in the field of language evolution. His message is that the field is vastly complex. Language doesn't fossilize. Neither do the soft organs that produce it. What researchers have to work with are hard fossils - bones - and what they can deduce from observing modern populations and languages.
The book does not deal with events since the dawn of civilization, the agricultural revolution. After a concise but very well done recapitulation of evolution from the emergence of life, 3.5 billion or so years ago, through the time of our Last Common Ancestor (LCA) with the chimpanzees, it builds on theories of how we as a species evolved, and especially, how we came to acquire language.
Some of the authors he draws on - Philip Lieberman and Stephen Pinker, to name two, have written books on language evolution for popular consumption that are more compelling reads. Fitch's gift is to summarize the major thesis of each of these, and opposing theories proposed by others, and leave the reader to understand that for a majority of the major issues there is no overwhelming consensus. What role did music play in language development? Did language evolve via gesture? From animal calls? Fitch outlines arguments on both sides.
There are some positions he favors, if ever so slightly. Great apes have a fertility problem: given the attention and nourishment that a baby takes, they go six years between children. Language may have helped Homo sapiens over that hump. Men (and other relatives) support a human mother in ways that allow her to bear every two years or so. Language is useful to coordinate social arrangements. Our use of tools and weapons may have afforded us enough protection that we could afford to be noisy. He repeatedly uses the German Mitteilingsbedurfniss (need to inform) to describe how we relate to one another. He writes on the social benefits of gossip.
His bibliography is incredibly broad: anthropology, sociology, evolutionary psychology, linguistics, anatomy, and of course, evolution. He gives the reader a great appreciation for the genius of Charles Darwin, citing many, many ways in which Darwin anticipated not only research, but conclusions that would not come for more than a century.
I have only two reservations about the book. First is political correctness. Fitch has no need even to address the relative intelligences of modern populations - it is peripheral to his theme. Nonetheless, although he surely knows better, he writes at some length on the subject and pretends that Stephen J. Gould's "Mismeasure of Man" and Gardner's "Multiple Intelligences" are the last word on intelligence research. Wrong. Arthur Jensen was the premier researcher of the last century, with Gottfredson, Lynn, Vanhanen and others. Problem is, the latter authors' work, though it represents a widespread consensus among psychometricians, does not pass PC muster and is therefore ignored as often as possible. I would hope that a scholar such as Fitch would be above that. Observe, for instance, how deftly Pinker dodged the issue in "The Blank Slate." An author doesn't have to tell the truth, but he doesn't have to break his back kowtowing to the poobahs and plenipotentiaries of political correctness by publishing things he probably knows not to be true.
Second reservation is simply that this book is too daunting for anybody outside the field. Fitch must have written it thinking of graduate students within the above-named disciplines. They will find it extremely valuable, both for the overview and the extensive bibliography. A five-star effort.
I have read many of the authors Fitch cites, enough to appreciate that he has pulled together a remarkable synthesis of thinking in the field of language evolution. His message is that the field is vastly complex. Language doesn't fossilize. Neither do the soft organs that produce it. What researchers have to work with are hard fossils - bones - and what they can deduce from observing modern populations and languages.
The book does not deal with events since the dawn of civilization, the agricultural revolution. After a concise but very well done recapitulation of evolution from the emergence of life, 3.5 billion or so years ago, through the time of our Last Common Ancestor (LCA) with the chimpanzees, it builds on theories of how we as a species evolved, and especially, how we came to acquire language.
Some of the authors he draws on - Philip Lieberman and Stephen Pinker, to name two, have written books on language evolution for popular consumption that are more compelling reads. Fitch's gift is to summarize the major thesis of each of these, and opposing theories proposed by others, and leave the reader to understand that for a majority of the major issues there is no overwhelming consensus. What role did music play in language development? Did language evolve via gesture? From animal calls? Fitch outlines arguments on both sides.
There are some positions he favors, if ever so slightly. Great apes have a fertility problem: given the attention and nourishment that a baby takes, they go six years between children. Language may have helped Homo sapiens over that hump. Men (and other relatives) support a human mother in ways that allow her to bear every two years or so. Language is useful to coordinate social arrangements. Our use of tools and weapons may have afforded us enough protection that we could afford to be noisy. He repeatedly uses the German Mitteilingsbedurfniss (need to inform) to describe how we relate to one another. He writes on the social benefits of gossip.
His bibliography is incredibly broad: anthropology, sociology, evolutionary psychology, linguistics, anatomy, and of course, evolution. He gives the reader a great appreciation for the genius of Charles Darwin, citing many, many ways in which Darwin anticipated not only research, but conclusions that would not come for more than a century.
I have only two reservations about the book. First is political correctness. Fitch has no need even to address the relative intelligences of modern populations - it is peripheral to his theme. Nonetheless, although he surely knows better, he writes at some length on the subject and pretends that Stephen J. Gould's "Mismeasure of Man" and Gardner's "Multiple Intelligences" are the last word on intelligence research. Wrong. Arthur Jensen was the premier researcher of the last century, with Gottfredson, Lynn, Vanhanen and others. Problem is, the latter authors' work, though it represents a widespread consensus among psychometricians, does not pass PC muster and is therefore ignored as often as possible. I would hope that a scholar such as Fitch would be above that. Observe, for instance, how deftly Pinker dodged the issue in "The Blank Slate." An author doesn't have to tell the truth, but he doesn't have to break his back kowtowing to the poobahs and plenipotentiaries of political correctness by publishing things he probably knows not to be true.
Second reservation is simply that this book is too daunting for anybody outside the field. Fitch must have written it thinking of graduate students within the above-named disciplines. They will find it extremely valuable, both for the overview and the extensive bibliography. A five-star effort.
November 16, 2023
Книга не оправдала надежд. Много по этому поводу в сносках написал научный редактор перевода (он, кстати, тоже хорош на свой манер, скажем так). Я поневоле вынужден во многом согласиться с г-ном Пановым, хотя иногда выглядит так, будто он решил устроить бокс по переписке на полях и заведомо выиграл, ибо кто ж ему будет отвечать на этих же самых полях? Умиляет эта перебранка в сносках. Но непонятно, что не так с танцем пчёл по мнению г-на Панова. Вроде явление до сих пор изучают и обсуждают. С чего он взял, что это вопрос давно решённый (очевидно в 2010-х или самое позднее наверно в 2013-м) и никому неинтересный, мне решительно непонятно. Оставим это на его совести, как и общий тон комментариев. Речь не совсем о нём (хотя и о нём тоже, как о научреде, который оставил в тексте свой след).
К собственно Фитчу претензия состоит в том, что он пишет очень много и, скажем прямо, не очень по делу. Какое отношение эволюция эукариот (вообще говоря, довольно поверхностно описанная) имеет к языку? Зачем читателю все эти подробности про выход билатерий на сушу? Гадать о глоттогенезе по челюстям древних рыб, серьёзно? В общем, много ненужного, да к тому же бестолково написанного. Сложно не удивиться прямолинейной наивности/поверхностности гипотез, обсуждаемых автором всерьёз. Ну, конечно, та же конвергнетная эволюция к месту и не к месту (чаще всё же не очень к месту).
По вопросам происхождения языка есть куда более толковая на мой взгляд книга ttps://www.goodreads.com/book/show/48720485 и пока она определённо лучшая из этой серии (глоттогенез) в моих записях.
Книгу Фитча по данной теме я бы определённо не рекомендовал к прочтению.
К собственно Фитчу претензия состоит в том, что он пишет очень много и, скажем прямо, не очень по делу. Какое отношение эволюция эукариот (вообще говоря, довольно поверхностно описанная) имеет к языку? Зачем читателю все эти подробности про выход билатерий на сушу? Гадать о глоттогенезе по челюстям древних рыб, серьёзно? В общем, много ненужного, да к тому же бестолково написанного. Сложно не удивиться прямолинейной наивности/поверхностности гипотез, обсуждаемых автором всерьёз. Ну, конечно, та же конвергнетная эволюция к месту и не к месту (чаще всё же не очень к месту).
По вопросам происхождения языка есть куда более толковая на мой взгляд книга ttps://www.goodreads.com/book/show/48720485 и пока она определённо лучшая из этой серии (глоттогенез) в моих записях.
Книгу Фитча по данной теме я бы определённо не рекомендовал к прочтению.
June 18, 2019
[3.75] Technically only read half, but it was the half required for my evolution of language class, so I'll consider it finished. Plus, half is still like 300 pages, so yeah, I'll say it still counts.
This book was assigned to function as the class textbook, but I'm not convinced it is a good TEXTBOOK. I think it's a decent book in general, but as a textbook I think it has some issues. It doesn't really have that textbook neutrality to it. Fitch clearly has an argument he's making about the evolution of language. He is undoubtedly an expert in the field, and I applaud his skillset both in the discipline and in his ability to compile it all in a single book. But I take issue with the fact that he often provides proof for his argument by citing his own studies. It just really irked me whenever I saw his own name in a parenthetical citation.
This book was assigned to function as the class textbook, but I'm not convinced it is a good TEXTBOOK. I think it's a decent book in general, but as a textbook I think it has some issues. It doesn't really have that textbook neutrality to it. Fitch clearly has an argument he's making about the evolution of language. He is undoubtedly an expert in the field, and I applaud his skillset both in the discipline and in his ability to compile it all in a single book. But I take issue with the fact that he often provides proof for his argument by citing his own studies. It just really irked me whenever I saw his own name in a parenthetical citation.
January 16, 2025
Absolutely fantastic book. IMO this is how popular/introductory texts should be written — quite accessible yet not watered down, dense (in the good sense), with bunch of references, and about as unbiased as humanly possible (although Fitch shows some of his preferences indeed).
I could only wish for an update covering what happened over the last 16 years or so.
I could only wish for an update covering what happened over the last 16 years or so.
June 4, 2019
In depth coverage of the majority of current theories with no real decision on what is right. Many thoughtful ideas on where future research is headed.
December 13, 2011
Pretty technical, but an interesting read.
Read
October 23, 2017ESTOY ESTUDIANDO UNA CARRERA QUE TIENE QUE VER CON EL LIBRO Y WOW ESTA INCREIBLE
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews