Which came first, increased intelligence or speech?

Question

http://www.evolutionpages.com/FOXP2_language.htm

Answer 1

If we evolved from ape like ancestors well firstly you could imagine ape-like ancestors having the ability to make noises and sounds that they could understand amongst each other like sounds for danger sounds for warnings to each other and sounds of welcome.  So if our ancestors had sounds for communication we would always have had sounds for communication too and it would be the brain that worked out how to communicate certain "ideas" to others around us (apes or humans) so I think as we evolved there was genetic intelligence there as well as early language and then different diet would increase the brain's capabilities and as the brain contemplated more ideas and more ways to use tools etc. then more complex languague would be developing in conjunction with increased intelligence.

Answer 2

intellgence first, i think you;d need to be be talk. Unless  drawings count as speech?!

Answer 3

"Speech" of a sort (grunts, yelps, screams and the like) have been language for several million years.

Language probably developed along with our neo-cortex and was, therefore, a more recent development, about 30 to 50,000 years ago.

Did Neanderthal have language? Probably a sort of grunt,  hand and arm gesture type of communication. Right now, until I read more, I favor rudimentary language developing with Homo Sapien Sapien (last 40,000 yrs).

Answer 4

From an evolutionary standpoint, I believe that once our ancestors evolved to cool the body using sweat rather than panting they began to develop basic speech. True intelligence came later as our ancestors began to develop diets of fish. From a philisophical standpoint, Confucious say, "Those with the least intelligence, often do the most talking."

Answer 5

Why do you need speech to show intelligence? I have known people who could not talk but could write things of beauty. Intelligence takes many forms. I think intelligence first.

Answer 6

Facial expressions and body language have been around for so long that they are innate.  Speech came after the ability to communicate.  While speech has increased intelligence, I don't think it caused it.  I think it was caused by hand to eye coordination.

Answer 7

I think we must differentiate between "Speech" and "language".

Speech is, after all, just some form of audible vocalization:

an animal or bird squawking a warning to the herd or flock is "speaking" although not in  a very advanced and sophsticated way.

"Speech",that is the ability to"speak" out loud,  comes first, then language, which is what I think you mean by "speech".

It is"language" -- the use of speech in a sophisticated and complex way to articulate abstract thoughts and concepts --that requires a level of intelligence.

Language, I believe, grew out of the grunts and mutterings of prehistoric humans attempting to pass on information without the use of writing. Visualization --the thrust of a spear at the vital part of the prey,followed by vocalization, emphasizing the "technique" or important point, was what eventually led to language, as the grunts became words specifially tied to actions which then evolved into abstract thinking.

So "speech" is inherent in all species equipped with  some form of vocal cords or voice box. Language, however, requires a higher form of intelligence to make that "speech" -- intelligible.  

.

Answer 8

It is nice to know that not everyone (i.e Ed) interested in anthropology is stuck in the current orthodoxy.  I read Tattersal's book "Becoming Human" I think.  He thinks that speech began when symbolic artifacts began appearing in the fossil record around 50,000 years ago.  I liked much of what Tattersal theorized but I thought he was completely bonkers regarding that.  With his theory, humans must have been extremely smart and then suddenly began speaking.  I suspect that language began much earlier probably with H. erectus or even earlier.  The hyoid bone in Neanderthals seems to indicate speech went back at least as far as Heidelbergensis.  Modern speech is way beyond simple speech.  We have thousands of words.  Many can speak different languages.  Perhaps H. erectus could only speak with a hundred words or sounds (or gestures?).   In fact even chimps and gorillas can learn certain symbollic language but it is somewhat controversial.  Or ancestors, those common with Chimps, gorillas, and Orangs, were all extremely intelligent, presumably.  I suspect that is why that line did so well.  So in a sense, speech began in an already very intelligent animal.

Answer 9

Imma say Intellegence, because a baby must get smarter in order to speak verbally.

Answer 10

Intelligent speech came before women yak yak yaking.

Answer 11

I suspect it was speech!  The ability to string thoughts together & paint a mental picture of situations, past & present would have led to an exchange of information.  Therefore, those best able to make use of this information would have had a genetic advantage & therefore intelligencee would have been selected.  Without speech, & the ability to understand it, stories of hunts & migration obstacles, water and game locations and any number of instances where information was necessary would not have been transfered to younger tribe members.

While demonstrating an action is useful in the transfer of information, it is very lacking when compared to speech.

Added:

While some degree of intelligence is indeed needed to develop speech & language (the Chimp appears to have enough intelligence to accomplish that.)  The problem is lack of equipment to vocalize & organize grammar. Once these abilities were intact, they drove intelligence & more rapid brain development.

Answer 12

I think the two are intricately linked. More complex thought requires a greater ability to communicate, whether by using gestures or by making noises. It seems in order to conceive an idea you have to be able to express it. This is very interesting:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/america...

Answer 13

It would seem likely that both occured simultaneously as they both rely on each other.

It requires intelligence to be able to form meaningful sentences and grammar.  At the same time, the point of speech is essentially to communicate ideas (whether these are just emotions or more complex thoughts), so if human kind did not have high intelligence, there would be no point in speech, as we would have nothing to communicate.