Practice question · Select all that apply
Which are legitimate reasons to be cautious about evidence for the origin of language?
Hints
- Three are specific evidential limits; one is a blanket dismissal.
- The genetic and archaeological work is real science, however indirect.
Show the answer
- A. Symbolic artefacts are a proxy for symbolic capacity, not a direct observation
- B. Speech leaves no direct fossil record
- D. The descended larynx is now known in other species, weakening that inference
Why
The fourth overshoots. Indirect evidence is still evidence, and the genetic and comparative work has narrowed the space of plausible accounts considerably. The honest statement is that the question is underdetermined, not that it is unanswerable.
Practise Origins, Evolution and Linguistic Relativity
The app has 3 more questions on this lesson, and keeps your place in the course. Languages I is free to start.
More questions on Origins, Evolution and Linguistic Relativity
- The Russian-blues advantage disappears when speakers perform a verbal task at the same time. Why does that…
- Sort each claim by whether it belongs to linguistic DETERMINISM or the weaker RELATIVITY.
- FOXP2 is best described as the gene for language.
- The human descended larynx increases choking hazards yet expands phonetic range. Why does this morphological…
- What is the maximum number of basic colour terms Berlin and Kay found in any language?
- Match each domain to the relativity finding associated with it.
- Arrange these positions on language origins from the most gradualist to the most saltationist.
- The claim that a language has dozens of words for snow, even if true, would not by itself show anything about…
- Complete the account of the two hypotheses.