Tuesday, May 22, 2012

“What would happen if there had been no language?” Had there been no such thing as language,

To appreciate the value of language, we must look for an answer to the question “What would happen if there had been no language?” Had there been no such thing as language, there would have been no states, cities, villages or even families. In a milieu deprived of all social institutions, no production would ever take place. Consequently, there would be no textile products, cars, glassware, pencils, notebooks, etc.

Our mere conception of the importance of language is made possible by linguistic expression. An article on the importance of language is the result of our use of it. Language is not an invention of human beings. Language requires as premise a will and an orientation. Given the fact that the importance of language finds its expression in language, would man be in a position to create a language when the very concept of it was absent? Language is a social phenomenon, and where there is no language, there is no society.

The development of language is certainly possible. But this is possible only when one has the rudiments of a language. A language can develop just like a plant that sprouts. The absence of a language would mean the absence of seeds, the consequence of which would be the absence of vegetation. Just consider (for a while) the coinage of a word to mean a particular concept. On the assumption that men were deprived of a “language,” the fancied word would be doomed to sink into oblivion. The invention of writing was a subordinate process. Where there is no concept of a language, accumulation and transmission of information would be impossible. Given the fact that the importance of language cannot be conceived without it, the socialization of occasionally uttered unintelligible words or sounds emitted cannot be made into a coherent common means of communication. Language is a means calling for consensus of a community. In a milieu deprived of social consciousness, the invention of a language based on consensus is unimaginable.

The newborn is the most helpless creature among the creatures of the earth. It is dependent on its parents for survival. In the absence of a common language there would be no communication, and, therefore, no family. The paternity of the child could not be established. Only the mother could be identified. Where knowledge does not exist, it is difficult to establish any connection between the sexual act and the birth, notwithstanding the period of nine months that elapses before the child is born. Even this connection is made possible by the use of language. The establishing of the family unit and the restriction of sexual relations to couples in humans require the use of language. In such a milieu, the child can only recognize its mother. It would not be easy for a mother to feed her child all by herself. Man cannot be compared with other living beings. Most of the living creatures begin to walk, to fly and seek food a very short time after they are born. The majority of the species of animals are programmed to protect themselves. The long lasting maintenance of the human baby - the weakest of all living beings - is secured thanks to the culture and the communication the language provides. The faculty of thinking through the use of words replaces the innate programming of other living beings.

Had men been deprived of speech from the beginning of their days, they could hardly have survived. The Quran’s statement that the first human being was taught to speak is very important in this respect. Man is born equipped with the mental capacity, with an ear ready to receive what he hears, and a mouth and tongue to express his intentions. Coincidences cannot account for the perfect and complex creation of our ear, mouth and tongue. To all these, however, has to be added the endowment by our Creator of the potential a priori faculty of speech. A more detailed study of this issue will be tackled in a further work.


No comments: