Did Baby Talk Give Rise to Language?
If you've ever cooed at a baby, you have participated in a very special experience. Indeed, it's an all but unique one: Whereas humans constantly chatter to their infants, other apes hardly ever do so, a new study reveals.
'It's a new feature that has evolved and massively expanded in our species,' said Johanna Schick, a linguist at the University of Zurich and an author of the study. And that expansion, Dr. Schick and her colleagues argue, may have been crucial to the evolution of language.
Other mammals can bark, meow, roar and hoot. But no other species can use a set of sounds to produce words, nor build sentences with those words to convey an infinite variety of meaning. To trace the origin of our gift of language, researchers often study apes, our closest living relatives.
These studies hint that some of the ingredients of language had already evolved in the ancestors we share with living apes, which lived millions of years ago. Chimpanzees can make dozens of distinct calls, for example, which they can join into pairs to communicate new things. Building meaning from smaller units is what lets us create sentences from words.
Humans and apes are similar in another way: Their babies need time to learn how to make sounds like adults. Scientists have done much more research into how human infants develop language than into how wild baby apes learn to make calls. One striking feature of humans is the way that adults speak to young children. Baby talk — known to scientists as infant-directed speech — often features repeated words, an exaggerated stress on syllables and a high, singsong tone.
This distinctive pattern is very effective at grabbing the attention of young children — even when they're too young to understand the meaning of the words that adults are saying. It's possible that children pay attention to infant-directed speech because it helps them learn some of the basic features of language.
Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
WIRED
3 hours ago
- WIRED
A European Startup's Spacecraft Made It to Orbit. Now It's Lost at Sea
Eric Berger, Ars Technica Jun 25, 2025 4:25 PM The Exploration Company lost contact with its 'Mission Possible' vehicle a few minutes before touchdown in the ocean. Photographer: The Exploration Company A European company that seeks to develop orbital spacecraft for cargo, and eventually humans, took a step forward this week with a test flight that saw its "Mission Possible" vehicle power up and fly successfully in orbit before making a controlled reentry into Earth's atmosphere. However, after encountering an "issue," the Exploration Company lost contact with its spacecraft a few minutes before touchdown in the ocean. In an update on LinkedIn Tuesday morning, the company characterized the test flight as a partial success—and a partial failure. "The capsule was launched successfully, powered the payloads nominally in-orbit, stabilized itself after separation with the launcher, re-entered and re-established communication after black out," the company said in a statement. "We are still investigating the root causes and will share more information soon. We apologize to all our clients who entrusted us with their payloads." Maybe It Was the Parachutes Reestablishing communications with the spacecraft after the blackout period suggests that the vehicle got through the most thermally challenging part of reentry into Earth's atmosphere and perhaps validated the spacecraft's handling and ability to withstand maximum heating. Following this, according to the company's timeline for Mission Possible, the capsule's parachutes were due to deploy at a velocity between Mach 0.8 and Mach 0.6. The parachutes were selected for their "proven flight heritage," the company said, and were procured from US-based Airborne Systems, which provides parachutes used by SpaceX's Dragon, Boeing's Starliner, and other spacecraft. Given when the spacecraft was lost, it seems most likely that there was a problem with the deployment of the drogue or main parachutes. Mission Possible was a 2.5-meter diameter demonstration vehicle that was among the larger payloads launched Monday afternoon on SpaceX's Transporter 14 mission from Vandenberg Space Force Base in California. The mission sought to test four primary areas of spaceflight: structural performance in orbital flight, surviving reentry, autonomous navigation, and recovery in real-world conditions. It only clearly failed in this final task, recovering the vehicle within three days to return on-board payloads to customers. Meeting an Aggressive Timeline It is refreshing to have such clear and concise communication from a space company, especially the acknowledgment that a flight was a partial failure, within hours of launch. And it is not a surprise that there were technical challenges on a vehicle that was put together fairly rapidly and at a low cost. In an interview with Ars last November, the founder of The Exploration Company, Hélène Huby, said Mission Possible was developed at a cost of about $20 million in 2.5 years, in addition to $10 million for the rideshare launch on the Falcon 9 rocket. At the time, she said Mission Possible was on track to launch this summer, and the company met this timeline. Given the potential issues with the parachute system or other problems near touchdown, it is possible that The Exploration Company may fly another subscale demonstration mission before moving into development of its full-size Nyx cargo spacecraft. "This partial success reflects both ambition and the inherent risks of innovation," the company said Tuesday morning. "Leveraging the technical milestones achieved yesterday and the lessons we will extract from our ongoing investigation, we will then prepare to re-fly as soon as possible." Working Toward Nyx To date, the company has raised more than $230 million and plans to use much of that for the development of Nyx, which could fly as early as 2028 and focus on cargo delivery missions to low-Earth orbit. By demonstrating this capability, Huby said her company would like to secure funding from the European Space Agency to develop a crew-rated version of the spacecraft and a vehicle to return cargo from the Moon. This is not an unreasonable plan. SpaceX required significant funding from NASA, nearly $3 billion, to develop its Crew Dragon vehicle after demonstrating an initial cargo version. Huby said The Exploration Company would require a similar amount of funding from European nations. It is not possible to raise that money from private capital markets right now by promising a great return a decade from now. By one metric, Monday's flight was a significant success. Compared to the United States and China, the commercial space industry in Europe has lagged behind, beset by a less favorable environment for startups and opposition by large, traditional space companies that have dominated Europe's orbital activities for decades. The Exploration Company reached space with a fairly large vehicle and flew it back through Earth's atmosphere less than four years after its founding. This is a credible start for the company. This story originally appeared on Ars Technica.
New York Times
5 hours ago
- New York Times
Did Baby Talk Give Rise to Language?
If you've ever cooed at a baby, you have participated in a very special experience. Indeed, it's an all but unique one: Whereas humans constantly chatter to their infants, other apes hardly ever do so, a new study reveals. 'It's a new feature that has evolved and massively expanded in our species,' said Johanna Schick, a linguist at the University of Zurich and an author of the study. And that expansion, Dr. Schick and her colleagues argue, may have been crucial to the evolution of language. Other mammals can bark, meow, roar and hoot. But no other species can use a set of sounds to produce words, nor build sentences with those words to convey an infinite variety of meaning. To trace the origin of our gift of language, researchers often study apes, our closest living relatives. These studies hint that some of the ingredients of language had already evolved in the ancestors we share with living apes, which lived millions of years ago. Chimpanzees can make dozens of distinct calls, for example, which they can join into pairs to communicate new things. Building meaning from smaller units is what lets us create sentences from words. Humans and apes are similar in another way: Their babies need time to learn how to make sounds like adults. Scientists have done much more research into how human infants develop language than into how wild baby apes learn to make calls. One striking feature of humans is the way that adults speak to young children. Baby talk — known to scientists as infant-directed speech — often features repeated words, an exaggerated stress on syllables and a high, singsong tone. This distinctive pattern is very effective at grabbing the attention of young children — even when they're too young to understand the meaning of the words that adults are saying. It's possible that children pay attention to infant-directed speech because it helps them learn some of the basic features of language. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Medscape
6 hours ago
- Medscape
NICE Backs Leadless Pacemakers for Some Heart Patients
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has provisionally recommended leadless cardiac pacemaker implantation for patients with bradyarrhythmias who require single-chamber pacing. In draft guidance, NICE said there was insufficient evidence to support their use for dual-chamber pacing outside of research settings. Benefits Over Traditional Pacemakers The recommendation is based on an evidence review involving over one million patients across multiple studies. These included a randomised controlled trial, four systematic reviews with meta-analyses, five registry studies, four prospective studies, and two retrospective studies. Leadless pacemakers were found to be effective at detecting abnormal heart rhythms, restoring normal pacing, and improving quality of life. Unlike conventional transvenous pacemakers (TVPs), they do not require a chest incision, reducing the risk of infection and other complications, the regulator noted. 'The evidence demonstrates that leadless pacemakers can effectively regulate heart rhythm while reducing the risk of complications associated with traditional pacemakers, particularly infections and lead-related issues,' said Dr Anastasia Chalkidou, HealthTech programme director at NICE. How Leadless Pacemakers Work Bradyarrhythmias, which affect around 1 in 1000 people are typically treated with TVPs. These devices consist of a subcutaneous pacemaker box and leads that connect to the heart. For single-chamber leadless pacemakers, the proximal end is attached to a deflectable delivery catheter system. It is usually inserted percutaneously through the femoral or jugular vein using an introducer sheath. It is then moved into the right atrium, through the tricuspid valve, and into the right ventricle. Dual-chamber systems, which are still under evaluation, involve placing two devices — one in the right atrium and another in the right ventricle — during a single procedure. NICE highlighted that TVPs are known to carry risks, including lead failure and generator-related complications. Leadless pacemaker implantation may be preferable for patients with a history of device infection, endocarditis, immunosuppression, limited vascular access, or high infection risk. Call for Further Research While the draft guidance supports leadless pacemakers for single-chamber pacing, NICE said that more evidence is needed before endorsing their wider use. This includes research on patient selection — such as age, comorbidities, and the underlying cause of bradyarrhythmia — as well as data on implantation sites and clinical outcomes. Long-term durability of leadless devices also remains an area for investigation. 'The incidence of bradyarrhythmias increases with age, making this guidance particularly relevant to our ageing population,' said Professor Tom Clutton-Brock, chair of NICE's interventional procedures advisory committee. The draft guidance is open for public consultation until 23 July 2025. The advisory committee will meet again on 11 September 2025 to review feedback and finalise recommendations.
