Of Tools and Tongues

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

The emergence of complex tools may have coincided with the development of grammatical language, a new study in this week¿s Science proposes. Both skills have one thing in common: the need for complex problem solving and planning. As such, they may have influenced the evolution of the frontal lobe of the human brain, argues University of Illinois professor Stanley H. Ambrose, the paper¿s author.

The first-known stone tools were made about 2.5 million years ago, supposedly by Homo habilis. They were initially created through reductive technologies: a person continuously flaked away pieces of a rock until it turned into, say, a hand ax. Such techniques only require fairly crude and repetitive movements whose sequence is more or less irrelevant. The same goes for primate vocalization, which consists mostly of repetitive sounds.

Composite tools such as stone-tipped spears, however, require different talents, including fine motor skills and more forethought, to fit the different components of a tool together. So too, fine motor skills were needed to vocalize more complex sounds. (Just think of how you struggle to pronounce some sounds in a foreign language.) At the same time, sequence became relevant as language evolved from mere grunts to grammatically complex sentences.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Ambrose believes that all these developments were interconnected and led to a sudden burst in human development. "With the appearance of composite tools, near-modern brain size, anatomy and perhaps of grammatical language 300,000 years ago, the pace quickened exponentially," he says. "We became long-range planners and grammatical speakers. Composite tools made us what we are today."

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe