First known languages are highly complex

From EvoWiki

Contents 1 Claim 2 Source 3 Response 4 References 5 Fallacies contained in this claim 6 Related claims 7 Acknowledgments

Claim

The first known human languages were already very complex. Languages do not show an evolutionary progression we would expect if humans evolved gradually.

Source

• Sarfati, Jonathan & Matthews, Michael "Refuting Evolution 2", Chapter 12 'Argument: Evolution of mankind' [1]

Response

1. The evolution of a particular language and biological evolution are very different concepts, especially since languages are not biological organisms. Don't confuse them.
2. It is not well defined what the complexity of a language would be. Generally it is assumed that all languages are equally capable of expressing a given concept, idea or thought. Classifying one language as more or less complex than another one is most likely biased by the speaker's language.
3. This confuses the concepts of language and writing, assuming that writing shows a direct correlation to the language it represents. Even modern writing systems rarely correlate to the languages they represent.
4. There is no record of the first languages. The first writing does not appear until 5 - 6 thousand years ago, at least 140,000 years after the first anatomically modern humans, who would have been fully capable of producing language. We have no information on the first languages of humans, and thus no information whatsoever as to their degree of complexity. This claim assumes facts not in evidence.

References

1. Coulmas, F., 1989. The writing systems of the world. Blackwell, Oxford.

Fallacies contained in this claim

• Red Herring (Linguistic evolution has nothing to do with biological evolution.)

Related claims

• Why are languages getting less complex?
• Oldest structures, such as pyramids, are already very complex

Acknowledgments

• Swelke