[neuroling] Re: Genetics of Language
- From: Joseph Hilferty <hilferty@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: neuroling@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 09 Nov 2002 12:19:24 +0100
Tatiana Chernigovskaya wrote:
>Alas, alas -but FOX2 is present in cats, dogs,etc.
>
>
Good point. I was going to say the same thing. However, Enard et al. say
the following:
We sequenced the complementary DNAs that encode the FOXP2
protein in the chimpanzee, gorilla, orang-utan, rhesus macaque
and mouse, and compared them with the human cDNA. We also
investigated intraspecific variation of the human FOXP2 gene.
Here we show that human FOXP2 contains changes in aminoacid
coding and a pattern of nucleotide polymorphism, which
strongly suggest that this gene has been the target of selection
during recent human evolution. (p. 869 of Enard, Wolfgang, Molly
Przeworski, Simon E. Fisher, Cecilia S. L. Lai, Victor Wiebe,
Takashi Kitano, Anthony P. Monaco & Svante Pääbo. 2002.
Molecular evolution of FOXP2, a gene involved in speech
and language. Nature 418: 869--872.)
In a manuscript called "The Gene out of the Bottle":
http://lingua.fil.ub.es/~hilferty/GeneDec.pdf
Òscar Vilarroya and I argue that, at best, one might say that
SPCH1 (= FOXP2) is the gene for *English* morphosyntax,
since just as with aphasia, SLI profiles are contingent upon
language type. In the case of FOXP2, we simply don't know
for sure what the linguistic phenotype would be if the affected
family were (e.g.) Italian. My guess is that an Italian KE
family would have problems with articles and clitics, which
seem to be vulnerable in Italian children with SLI.
Having said this, let me hasten to add the "gene for X" locution
and its variants are really misleading. Òscar and I explain why
in the manuscript. (BTW, the manuscript is a little outdated,
since it was submitted to a well-known journal TWO YEARS AGO
and we are still waiting for a decision. In any event, the main
points we make are still valid.)
Joe Hilferty
Other related posts:
