http://smbc-comics.com/index.php?id=4058
-
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 9:50 am
http://smbc-comics.com/index.php?id=4058
None of today's languages existed 10 000 years ago, so they shouldn't be able to communicate after the penultimate panel.
Re: http://smbc-comics.com/index.php?id=4058
The one before actually. The word "Stupid" wasn't in the English language 1000 years ago. It was, kind of, in french (as "stupide", with a silent E,) but it meant "stunned" (think "in a stupor"), rather than "of low intelligence".
P.S. also, he says he's setting "technology" back one year. It could be argued language is an art.
P.S. also, he says he's setting "technology" back one year. It could be argued language is an art.
- DonRetrasado
- los más retrasadadados
- Posts: 2845
- Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 6:27 am
- Location: ¡Canadia!
Re: http://smbc-comics.com/index.php?id=4058
Language is not a technology, but written text isDestructicus wrote:None of today's languages existed 10 000 years ago, so they shouldn't be able to communicate after the penultimate panel.
It's more that language can develop spontaneously, and that it appears that there is some sort of specialized human faculty in the brain for it. The same cannot be said for written text.Guest wrote:P.S. also, he says he's setting "technology" back one year. It could be argued language is an art.
EDIT: But this is still pretty pedantic and irrelevant to the comic
Astrogirl wrote:Lethal, nobody wants to know about your herpes.
Lethal Interjection wrote:That's good to know. I can avoid a few awkward phone calls now.
Re: http://smbc-comics.com/index.php?id=4058
So has anyone else noticed "behvior" in the first panel?
Re: http://smbc-comics.com/index.php?id=4058
There is a specialized brain part for it, but language (as opposed to semi-intelligible audio communication, like grunts or barking) does not develop spontaneously.DonRetrasado wrote:It's more that language can develop spontaneously, and that it appears that there is some sort of specialized human faculty in the brain for it.Destructicus wrote:None of today's languages existed 10 000 years ago, so they shouldn't be able to communicate after the penultimate panel.
...or so my linguistics PhD friend explained to me, I'm more of a math guy myself.
- DonRetrasado
- los más retrasadadados
- Posts: 2845
- Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 6:27 am
- Location: ¡Canadia!
Re: http://smbc-comics.com/index.php?id=4058
I also studied linguistics and I'm not sure what your friend is getting at, as there is an example of this very thing happening: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaraguan_Sign_Languagemath guy wrote:There is a specialized brain part for it, but language (as opposed to semi-intelligible audio communication, like grunts or barking) does not develop spontaneously.DonRetrasado wrote:It's more that language can develop spontaneously, and that it appears that there is some sort of specialized human faculty in the brain for it.Destructicus wrote:None of today's languages existed 10 000 years ago, so they shouldn't be able to communicate after the penultimate panel.
...or so my linguistics PhD friend explained to me, I'm more of a math guy myself.
The only counter-examples I can think of are children of extreme neglect or isolation who aren't exposed to any sort of language or children who grow up with severe language disorders, but that can hardly be considered a typical case with typical brain development. A healthy child in a community is going to develop language.
Another key difference is that in general children will learn a language just by enough exposure, whereas most children will require some instruction in reading and writing. (I am aware this is not a hard and fast rule)
Astrogirl wrote:Lethal, nobody wants to know about your herpes.
Lethal Interjection wrote:That's good to know. I can avoid a few awkward phone calls now.
Re: http://smbc-comics.com/index.php?id=4058
Indeed. I was being lenient and assumed this could actually be an English translation of some other language that remained sufficiently constant in the last 1000 years.Guest wrote:The one before actually. The word "Stupid" wasn't in the English language 1000 years ago. It was, kind of, in french (as "stupide", with a silent E,) but it meant "stunned" (think "in a stupor"), rather than "of low intelligence".
P.S. also, he says he's setting "technology" back one year. It could be argued language is an art.
Re: http://smbc-comics.com/index.php?id=4058
Heh, I had not!Sorryforbeingthatguy wrote:So has anyone else noticed "behvior" in the first panel?