MIT, Department of Linguistics and Philosophy, United States.
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2017 Oct;81(Pt B):295-300. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2017.01.053. Epub 2017 Feb 7.
Inquiry into the evolution of some biological system evidently can proceed only as far as its nature is understood. Lacking such understanding, its manifestations are likely to appear to be chaotic, highly variable, and lacking significant general properties; and, accordingly, study of its evolution cannot be seriously undertaken. These truisms hold of the study of the human faculty of language FL just as for other biological systems. As discussed below, FL appears to be a shared human capacity in essentials, with options of variation of a kind to which we return. After a long lapse, the problem of evolution of language arose in mid-twentieth century when the first efforts were made to construct accounts of FL as a biological object, internal to an individual, with particular internal languages - I-languages in current terminology - as manifestations of FL.
对某些生物系统的进化进行探究显然只能在了解其本质的情况下进行。如果缺乏这种理解,其表现可能显得混乱、高度可变且缺乏显著的普遍特性;因此,对其进化的研究就无法认真进行。这些道理同样适用于人类语言能力 FL 的研究,正如适用于其他生物系统一样。如下所述,FL 似乎在本质上是人类的一种共同能力,具有我们将要讨论的变化选择。在经过很长一段时间后,语言进化的问题在 20 世纪中期再次出现,当时人们首次努力构建将语言作为个体内部的生物对象的理论,将特定的内部语言——即当前术语中的 I 语言——作为 FL 的表现形式。