Murray Gell-Mann: Do all languages have a common ancestor?

Translator: Louise Frilund Reviewer: Solveig Vendelbo

Well, I'm involved in other things, besides physics.

Jeg involverer mig i andre ting end fysik.

In fact, mostly now in other things.

Lige nu mere i andre ting, faktisk.

One thing is distant relationships among human languages.

Én ting er fjerne forbindelser mellem menneskesprog.

And the professional, historical linguists in the U.S.

Og de professionelle, historiske lingvister i USA

and in Western Europe mostly try to stay away

og i Vesteuropa prøver som regel at holde sig væk

from any long-distance relationships, big groupings,

fra fjerne forbindelser; store grupperinger,

groupings that go back a long time,

grupperinger som går lang tid tilbage,

longer than the familiar families.

længere end de velkendte familier.

They don't like that. They think it's crank. I don't think it's crank.

Det kan de ikke lide; de synes det er søgt. Jeg synes ikke det er søgt.

And there are some brilliant linguists, mostly Russians,

Og der findes nogle dygtige lingvister, mest russere,

who are working on that, at Santa Fe Institute and in Moscow,

som arbejder med dette på Santa Fe Intistuttet og i Moskva,

and I would love to see where that leads.

og jeg glæder mig til at se, hvad det fører til.

Does it really lead to a single ancestor

Fører det virkelig til én enkelt forfar,

some 20, 25,000 years ago?

der eksisterede for 20-25.000 år siden?

And what if we go back beyond that single ancestor,

Og hvad hvis vi går endnu længere tilbage end den ene forfar,

when there was presumably a competition among many languages?

hvor der sandsynligvis har været konkurrence mellem mange sprog?

How far back does that go? How far back does modern language go?

Hvor lang tid skal vi så tilbage? Hvor langt går moderne sprog tilbage?

How many tens of thousands of years does it go back?

Hvor mange titusinder af år går sproget tilbage?

Chris Anderson: Do you have a hunch or a hope for what the answer to that is?

Chris Anderson: Har du en anelse eller forhåbning for, hvad svaret er?

Murray Gell-Mann: Well, I would guess that modern language must be older

Murray Gell-Mann: Tja, jeg vil tro at moderne sprog må være ældre

than the cave paintings and cave engravings and cave sculptures

end huletegninger, huleindgraveringer og huleskulpturer

and dance steps in the soft clay in the caves in Western Europe,

og sporene af dansetrin i den bløde ler i hulerne i Vesteuropa

in the Aurignacian Period some 35,000 years ago, or earlier.

fra Aurignacienperioden for cirka 35.000 år siden, eller endnu før.

I can't believe they did all those things and didn't also have a modern language.

Jeg kan ikke tro, at de gjorde alle disse ting uden også at have et moderne sprog.

So, I would guess that the actual origin goes back at least that far and maybe further.

Så jeg gætter på, at den faktiske oprindelse går mindst så langt tilbage, måske længere.

But that doesn't mean that all, or many, or most

Men det betyder ikke at alle, eller mange af, eller de fleste

of today's attested languages couldn't descend perhaps

af nutidens talte sprog ikke kan nedstamme

from one that's much younger than that, like say 20,000 years,

fra en forfar meget yngre end det, eksempelvis 20.000 år,

or something of that kind. It's what we call a bottleneck.

eller noget i den stil. Det er dét, vi kalder en flaskehals.

CA: Well, Philip Anderson may have been right.

Chris Anderson: Philip Anderson har nok haft ret.

You may just know more about everything than anyone.

Du ved nok mere om alt end nogen andre.

So, it's been an honor. Thank you Murray Gell-Mann.

Så det har været en ære. Tak skal du have, Murray Gell-Mann.

(Applause)

(Klapsalve)