[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 51 KB, 468x312, Kluge-estate-468x312.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4425840 No.4425840[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Hey /lit/, what would happen in the following situation:
>Two kids are raised on a remote estate without any spoken language.

Here's a very short write-up of my idea for it so far:
http://pastebin.com/3NAmTXJw

But I'm not really a linguist or anything so I can't say how plausible it is. Any ideas?

>> No.4425851

If they have the ability to speak, they will. It may be a made up language, but it will be a spoken language.

>> No.4425863

They'd only develop a small vocabulary made up of grunts and so forth

>> No.4425868
File: 97 KB, 339x500, tumblr_ls3rjk9B6n1qbiapxo1_400.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4425868

no idea bro u tell me

>> No.4425880

>>4425868
She didn't have anyone to talk to.

>> No.4425887

>>4425840
You know, Herodotus tells of a story where the egyptians and the phrygians were contesting which of their civilizations were older so they locked up two kids with no hint of humanity and apaprently the first "word" they said was the phrygian word for bread so they decided they won.

I know a king of England did something similar, locked up two kids with no contact other than food being brought to them so they would speak god's original language.

>> No.4425893

>>4425851
Probably wouldn't be a very precise language.
They'd rely on simple sounds. Perhaps it would evolve as they aged together.

Would be interesting to see how they would begin to communicate and how each of them would perceive the other's attempt at communication.
How would they get a point across? Not easily.

>> No.4425907

>>4425880
what about poto and cabengo

>> No.4425911

I believe King James I did that. Or a scottish king did. Google it

>> No.4425913

>>4425840

I had a similar idea for a story about a community of children raised on some arctic island as a social experiment, and they're given no culture, religion, etc. I gave up on it though because I couldn't think of any plausible way people could be raised in that environment.

But this seems interesting and a bit more plausible. So since they can't talk they can't read, and without being able to communicate with anybody, wouldn't they basically just be feral children?

>> No.4425930

>>4425907
OP read about these guys:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poto_and_Cabengo

Also watch Dogtooth.

>> No.4425946

>I'm not a linguist or anything

Jesus Christ then do some research before writing a story on something you know very little about

Sage

>> No.4425948

>>4425907
That's neat, I've never head about them. The Wikipedia article says they improvised off of little bits of German and English though, I wonder if the same is possible in the OP scenario

>> No.4425991

>>4425913
Well they're raised mostly by maids and shit, taught proper manners through nonverbal means, so they know etiquette.

As far as reading goes, I was thinking about having musical resources available for them, perhaps with tutoring and what-not, so that they would learn to read music and maybe take that idea and come up with a script for their language.

I'm also wondering what kind of influence learning music would have on the language. Maybe it'd be highly tonal?

>> No.4426065

>>4425948
yeah read some tarzan too op bro

>> No.4426143

Children who are never spoken to will never develop language. Even Helen Keller hadn't always been deaf and her progress was largely thanks to tapping into memories of early communication.

Think about it, language didn't arise out of nothing, it was preceded by calls, grunts, growls of various kinds and evolved from there.

Kids will need exposure to SOME form of communication in order to speak ANYthing. Look up feral children and the linguistic/developmental problems they have due to being isolated from, among other things, human communication.

If two children were raised this way, their communication would probably be based on simple sounds and gestures. No real syntax if they're never exposed to syntax. It wouldn't be a language--they'd need exposure to some systematic and regulated communications system to ever conceive of one on their own.

>> No.4426150

>>4426143
language is something that is innate in human beings. they're not going to end up speaking chinese or something but they'll figure out grunts and shit to signify certain things.

>> No.4426155

Wasn't there a part on the new york trilogy about a kid locked up in his room who never learned language? and his dad was a religious zealot or something trying to uncover the language of god?

>> No.4426170

>>4426150
I agree with this. Much like barks, howls and whines etc are instinctual with dogs and animals from birth, why should humans be any different? It may not be a fully constructed language, but it will be spoken.

>> No.4426177

>>4426170
It will basically be whines, growls, gestures; super-simple and infantile. Kids who aren't spoken to will not learn to speak. Human beings might have an innate CAPACITY for language but that doesn't mean it will ever be put to use without outside help.

>see also Genie
>see also developmental delays in speech caused by insufficient interaction with caregivers

Humans don't have instincts the way animals do. We can't even walk without being taught, for chrissakes.

>> No.4426189

Start here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_deprivation_experiments

Address this somehow: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_period_hypothesis

Check the references/further reading, obviously. I mean you wouldn't just casually scan a Wikipedia article looking for information to support your idea without reading the primary sources, right? Haha.

>> No.4426229

>>4426177
>humans don't have instincts
Example: A new born baby can swim underwater - they automatically hold their breath and begin kicking and paddling.
Women can give birth in bathtubs, to ease the transition for the baby.

>> No.4426250

>>4426229
>ease the transition for the baby
What you said is true, but you should know this is just bullshit. A baby doesn't know what's happening to it anyway, and the difference between being birthed into the air and being birthed into a bathtub only to be shortly yanked out into the air is not significant.

>> No.4426282

I remember reading a case in psych class about a girl who was barked at by her parents everytime she attempted speech. Not only did she fail to develop linguistic skills, but even with the assistance of God tier speech pathologists when she was a teenager., she was never able to develop her speech. I can't be bothered to look up the case, but it showed that there is a hard window for speech develop, after which you are essentially never going to learn.

>> No.4426294

>>4426282


im pretty sure a big part of the problem was the internalized devalidation associated with attempts to speak, not just a question of opportunity.

>> No.4426307

>>4425907
Sounds like the tribal language from New Vegas, probably inspired by this. It's also a variation of German.

>> No.4426341

>>4426282
Makes sense. Stuttering and other speech impediments - not related to physical deformities - develop in similar circumstances.

>> No.4426392

>>4425840
the American government did this in an experiment.

>> No.4426822

You know, there is a language created by a school of deaf children with no other language.
It has been documented as actual creation of a language.
Your two kids would likely do something similar.

>> No.4426852

they would develop their own language retard kill your self

>> No.4426886

>>4426822
It would probably take multiple generations to generate a complex grammar, though.