They could also be simply idle doodling or decorations.
Yes, the specialist researchers didn't think of that.
The researchers were not invested in thinking of that.
Humans 40k yrs ago developed a system of conventional signs
41–50 of 74 posts
Re: Humans 40k yrs ago developed a system of conventional signs
#42The X's on the animal forms (Fig. 1B) ... isn't that likely to be "hit here" type markings, for hunting reference? Shoulder, side, stomach... surprised this wasn't really touched on in the paper, since it seems really likely. Though, the paper doesn't seem to care so much about the actual meanings, seemingly just narrowing down the number of possible interpretations /shrug
Interesting comment, I remember something similar about how researchers thought hairstyles depicted in paintings or statues were unrealistic but it wasn't until a hairstylist pointed out that you can sew the hair together: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/this-woman-is-a-ha... I've also heard similar stories about people working with leather recognizing some set of artifacts as being more useful for work rat…
Ever tried carving a regular pattern, such as XXXXXXX, in a piece of wood? The blade keeps getting stuck on the wrong course, the angle deviates from vertical, you have to retry strokes and they don't land in the same place the second time. If the work piece is small your accuracy goes down. In this case they're carving bone, which may be easier, but the tool is a tiny piece of flint held between fingers.
So then instead of XXXXXXX the researchers record X/\XXV/X. Let's run that through some mystifying statistical software and tell the world about its information content! Or "complexity", which might not be information.
Come to think of it, an example of misunderstood artifacts from this period, the Aurignacian, is the "perforated baton", formerly proposed to be held at meetings for the right to speak, now found out to be a spear shaft straightener.
Re: Humans 40k yrs ago developed a system of conventional signs
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
I remain skeptical. Pictures in clouds.
What are you skeptical about? 40k years ago humans were just as we the humans of today, but they also faced harsher environments to survive in. Technology has enabled us to compound advanced intergenerationally but I don't really believe we're actually that special when compared to our forebears...
Pictures in clouds, face on mars, pareidolia, I Want To Believe. That's what's to be skeptical about.
Re: Humans 40k yrs ago developed a system of conventional signs
#44Re: Humans 40k yrs ago developed a system of conventional signs
#45I remember in my literary theory class, one of the theorists made the (deliberately) absurd claim that writing preceded speech. Reading this, and I wonder if he was correct (as an aside, I tend to wander into the weeds in language articles on Wikipedia as I find myself increasingly curious about language evolution and I always wonder whether the different language families are “merely” a result of linguistic drift over millennia or whether human speech appeared independently in multiple points of origin).
Re: Humans 40k yrs ago developed a system of conventional signs
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
What are you skeptical about? 40k years ago humans were just as we the humans of today, but they also faced harsher environments to survive in. Technology has enabled us to compound advanced intergenerationally but I don't really believe we're actually that special when compared to our forebears...
Pictures in clouds, face on mars, pareidolia, I Want To Believe. That's what's to be skeptical about.
[dead]
Re: Humans 40k yrs ago developed a system of conventional signs
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
The researchers were not invested in thinking of that.
But they explicitly discuss it!
I wouldn't mind a quote, because the paper was incredibly hard to read, full of hedging, and never seemed to get to the point.
OK, there's this section:
> The Question of Decoration.
> Recent studies have measured the regularity of notches on bones to determine whether they are more or less visually striking as a decoration. Increasing the regularity of distances between notches—up to the differences just about perceivable by humans—is argued to enhance the decorative value. Such technological and experimental analyses are useful to thoroughly understand the production processes behind a given mobile artifact. On the other hand, categories such as “decoration” and “numerical system,” or “decoration” and “writing system” are not mutually exclusive. Rather, sign systems can be used as decoration without losing their information value. This is exemplified in historic times by calligraphy, inscriptions on pottery and temples, tattoos of graphemes on human bodies, and many other artistic expressions. “Information density” in an information-theoretic sense is a fundamental property of a sign sequence, irrespective of whether there is a human present to interpret it—or merely find it aesthetically pleasing.
So what are they saying: yes it looks like decoration, but maybe that's because it's calligraphy, and it's less than completely random. That means it's proto-writing because there's a scientific theory we can use to cloud the question of what it is exactly that we're claiming.
The BBC article on this quotes a researcher saying "The Stone Age sign sequences are an early alternative to writing." Fucking hell, "alternative to writing". We're not going out on a limb and saying its writing, but we want to heavily imply that without risking being wrong.
Re: Humans 40k yrs ago developed a system of conventional signs
#48The X's on the animal forms (Fig. 1B) ... isn't that likely to be "hit here" type markings, for hunting reference? Shoulder, side, stomach... surprised this wasn't really touched on in the paper, since it seems really likely. Though, the paper doesn't seem to care so much about the actual meanings, seemingly just narrowing down the number of possible interpretations /shrug
Some of the marks on it, particularly the head marks, are right over areas of the thickest bones. It's not impossible, but always worth being self-critical of "obvious" meanings with things like this. Things that are straightforward even to us as non-expert megafaunal hunters would probably be completely obvious to actual experts (if it's not wrong), and people usually don't want to record the obvious stuff.
It's also possible the meaning is inverted. Kill the animal by throwing a spear anywhere other than these places
Re: Humans 40k yrs ago developed a system of conventional signs
#49I remember in my literary theory class, one of the theorists made the (deliberately) absurd claim that writing preceded speech. Reading this, and I wonder if he was correct (as an aside, I tend to wander into the weeds in language articles on Wikipedia as I find myself increasingly curious about language evolution and I always wonder whether the different language families are “merely” a result of linguistic drift ov…
Your instinctive reaction matches with scientific consensus.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_writing
> Each historical invention of writing emerged from systems of proto-writing that used ideographic and mnemonic symbols but were not capable of fully recording spoken language. True writing, where the content of linguistic utterances can be accurately reconstructed by later readers, is a later development. As proto-writing is not capable of fully reflecting the grammar and lexicon used in languages, it is often only capable of encoding broad or imprecise information.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_speech
> vocal languages must have begun diversifying at least 100,000 years ago
Re: Humans 40k yrs ago developed a system of conventional signs
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
But they explicitly discuss it!
I wouldn't mind a quote, because the paper was incredibly hard to read, full of hedging, and never seemed to get to the point. OK, there's this section: > The Question of Decoration. > Recent studies have measured the regularity of notches on bones to determine whether they are more or less visually striking as a decoration. Increasing the regularity of distances between notches—up to the differences just about perce…
Yah, I'm not impressed by the obtuse language, either.