ity introduced by possibilities of gossip,lying,tale-bearing,etc.) than the
primary causeof it.More specifically,it was suggested that a hypotheti-
cal and unmotivated increase in hominid group size led to the emergence
of language as a “grooming substitute”by which hominids could foster
social cohesion by means more economical of time than mutual delous-
ing (Dunbar 1996).
A widely respected popular introduction to modern evolutionary
studies (Ridley 1993) endorsed the bizarre proposal that language
evolved as a means by which,after the emergence of a sex-based
division of labor,husbands could keep track of whether their wives
remained faithful to them (the husband’s mother could inform her son
if his wife was cheating on him).Still more recent work proposed the
birth of language from symbolic rituals required to establish primitive
marriage,a factor allegedly inescapable in a species characterized by
both reciprocal altruism and male provisioning of offspring (Deacon
1997),or,returning to a once popular Marxist analysis,from the require-
ments of communal problem solving in primitive forms of labor (Beaken
1996).
Given our present state of knowledge,no means exist,beyond very
general considerations of plausibility,for testing any of these hypothe-
ses.Indeed,the authors typically elaborated their own proposals with no
discussion of,or even reference to,alternative proposals,a sure sign that,
in this area,we are still at the level of “just-so stories.”But a still more
serious drawback to these approaches is that they divert attention from
the other half of the evolutionary process.
For any of these alleged pressures to work,there must have been some
kind of genetic variability in the hominid line that pressure could encour-
age,and this variability must have been in some domain that,directly
or indirectly,was capable of affecting language.Clearly,certain types of
this kind of variability must have existed.Candidate types would have
included (but would not have been limited to) such things as variation
in the ability to store lexical items in long-term memory and to retrieve
them reliably.There can be no doubt that,once linguistic mode of com-
munication became established,natural selection would have worked on
such traits and given rise to autocatalytic effects.Improved vocal control
would simplify the task of the hearer,who,even without auditory
improvements,would be able to distinguish more sounds reliably and
thus identify words more reliably.The ability to make and distinguish a
greater range of speech sounds would make possible a wider variety of
sound combinations,which,given a larger and more efficient memory for
words,would give rise to a steadily increasing vocabulary.
Undoubtedly,these factors and processes would have combined to
yield a much richer means of communication among hominids,however,157 Biomusicology and Language Evolution Studies