On Depiction and Language

Commentaries are made on an earlier article by Iain Davidson & William Noble (see LLBA 23/3, 8905683). Harold Dibble (U of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia) discusses the issue of language development in prehistoric man & suggests that there is no definite evidence for language use, or even regular use of symbols, by Neanderthals. R. L. Holloway, Jr. (Columbia U, New York) suggests that Davidson's & Noble's hypothesis cannot be tested & that there is no evidence for any significant biological changes in the human brain at the time of the Upper Paleolithic. Alexander Marshack (Harvard U, Cambridge, Mass) suggests that Davidson & Noble have misinterpreted the ethnocentric accounts of Franco-Cantabrian culture, which they cite in their study, & that their gestural-mimetic model does not fit with existing archaeological evidence. Andree Rosenfeld (Australian National U, Canberra) examines Davidson's & Nobel's conclusions regarding the relationship between the development of linguistic & artistic skills & suggests that the archaeological record may not yield evidence of a gradual development of technical skills. Garry W. Trompf (U of Sydney, Australia) points out problems with the model, including Davidson's & Noble's failure to adequately describe the biological debate regarding the origins of language & depiction & their failure to consider data from several sources that contradict their model. Noble's & Davidson's (U of New England, Armidale, Australia) Reply centers on the archaeological components of their argument & refutes the previous criticisms. 81 References. B. Annesser Murray