How Neanderthal language differed from modern human – they probably didn’t use metaphors (2024)

The Neanderthals (hom*o neanderthalensis) fascinate researchers and the general public alike. They remain central to debates about the nature of the genus hom*o (the broad biological classification that humans and their relatives fall into). Neanderthals are also vital for understanding the uniqueness or otherwise of our species, hom*o sapiens.

We shared an ancestor with the Neanderthals around 600,000 years ago. They evolved in Europe while we did so in Africa, before dispersing multiple times into Eurasia. The Neanderthals became extinct around 40,000 years ago. We populated the world and continue to flourish. Whether that different outcome is a consequence of differences in language and thought has been long debated.

But the evidence points to key differences in the brains of our species and those of Neanderthals that allowed modern humans (H. sapiens) to come up with abstract and complex ideas through metaphor – the ability to compare two unrelated things. For this to happen, our species had to diverge from the Neanderthals in our brain architecture.

Some experts interpret the skeletal and archaeological evidence as indicating profound differences. Others believe there were none. And some take the middle ground.

Disagreement is not surprising when trying to infer such intangibles from material remains such as bones and artefacts. The evidence is piecemeal and ambiguous, providing us with a complex puzzle for how, when and why language evolved. Fortunately, recent discoveries in archaeology and other disciplines have added several new pieces to this language puzzle, enabling a viable picture of the Neanderthal mind to emerge.

How Neanderthal language differed from modern human – they probably didn’t use metaphors (1)

New anatomical evidence indicates the Neanderthals had vocal tracts and auditory pathways not significantly different to our own, indicating that, from an anatomical perspective, they were as capable as us at communicating through speech. The discovery of Neanderthal genes in our own species indicates multiple episodes of interbreeding, which implies effective inter-species communication and social relationships.

The discovery of Neanderthal wooden spears, and the use of resins for making tools from separate components, have also enhanced our views of their technical skills. Pendants made from bird talons and the likely use of feathers as body adornments are claimed as examples of symbolism, along with geometric engravings on stone and bone.

Cave painters?

The most striking claim is that Neanderthals made art, painting red pigment on cave walls in Spain. But several of these cave art claims remain problematic. The evidence for Neanderthal cave art is compromised by unresolved methodological issues and is unlikely to be correct, in my view.

Rapidly accumulating evidence for the pre-40,000-year presence of modern humans in Europe challenges the idea that Neanderthals made these geometric designs, or at least that they did so prior to the influence of the symbol-using modern humans. However well-crafted, a wooden spear is little more than a pointed stick, and evidence of technological progress is absent throughout the entirety of Neanderthal existence.

While the archaeological evidence remains contested, that from neuroscience and genetics provides a compelling case for linguistic and cognitive differences between H. neanderthalensis and H. sapiens.

How Neanderthal language differed from modern human – they probably didn’t use metaphors (2)

A 3D digital reconstruction of the Neanderthal brain, created by deforming that of H. sapiens and fitting it into a cast of the brain (endocast) from a Neanderthal, indicates significant differences in structure. The Neanderthals had a relatively large occipital lobe, devoting more brain matter to visual processing and making less available for other tasks such as language.

They also had a relatively small and differently shaped cerebellum. This sub-cortical structure, which is packed with neurons, contributes to many tasks including language processing, speaking and fluency. The uniquely spherical shape of the modern human brain evolved after the first hom*o sapiens had appeared at 300,000 years ago.

Some of the genetic mutations associated with that development are associated with neuronal development and how neurons are connected in the brain. The authors of a comprehensive study of all mutations known to be unique to H. sapiens (as of 2019) concluded that “modifications of a complex network in cognition or learning took place in modern human evolution”.

Iconic words

While such evidence has been accumulating, our understanding of language has also changed. Three developments are of particular significance. First is the 2016 discovery via brain scanning that we store words, or rather the concepts we associate with words, throughout both brain hemispheres and in clusters, or semantic groups, of similar concepts in the brain. This is significant because, as we’ll see, the way these clusters of ideas are connected – or not – was probably different between H. sapiens and Neanderthals.

Second is the recognition that iconic sounds – those that provide a sensory impression of the thing they represent – had provided the evolutionary bridge between ape-like calls of our common ancestor of 6 million years ago and the first words spoken by hom*o – though we’re not sure which species that was.

Iconic words remain pervasive in languages today, capturing aspects of the sound, size, movement and texture of the concept the word represents. This contrasts with words that are only arbitrarily related to the thing they refer to. For example, a canine can equally be called a dog, chien or hund – none of which provide a sensory impression of the animal.

Third, computer simulation models of language transmission between generations have shown that syntax – consistent rules for how words are ordered to generate meaning – can spontaneously emerge. This shift of emphasis from genetic encoding of syntax to spontaneous emergence suggests that both H.sapiens and Neanderthal language contained these rules.

How Neanderthal language differed from modern human – they probably didn’t use metaphors (3)

The key difference

While it may be possible to join the puzzle pieces in several different ways, my long wrestle with the multi-disciplinary evidence has found only one solution. This begins with iconic words being spoken by the ancient human species hom*o erectus around 1.6 million years ago.

As these types of words were transmitted from generation to generation, arbitrary words and rules of syntax emerged, providing the early Neanderthals and H. sapiens with equivalent linguistic and cognitive capacities.

But these diverged as both species continued to evolve. The H. sapiens brain developed its spherical form with neural networks connecting what had been isolated semantic clusters of words. These remained isolated in the Neanderthal brain. So, while H. sapiens and Neanderthals had equivalent capacity for iconic words and syntax, they appear to have differed with respect to storing ideas in semantic clusters in the brain.

By linking up different clusters in the brain that are responsible for storing groups of concepts, our species gained the capacity to think and communicate using metaphor. This allowed modern humans to draw a line between widely different concepts and ideas.

This was arguably the most important of our cognitive tools, enabling us to come up with complex and abstract concepts. While iconic words and syntax were shared between H. sapiens and Neanderthals, metaphor transformed the language, thought and culture of our species, creating a deep divide with the Neanderthals. They went extinct, while we populated the world and continue to flourish.

How Neanderthal language differed from modern human – they probably didn’t use metaphors (2024)

FAQs

What is the main difference between Neanderthals and modern humans? ›

Measurement of our braincase and pelvic shape can reliably separate a modern human from a Neanderthal - their fossils exhibit a longer, lower skull and a wider pelvis. Even the three tiny bones of our middle ear, vital in hearing, can be readily distinguished from those of Neanderthals with careful measurement.

How did the face of Neanderthals differ from modern humans? ›

Neanderthals had a long, low skull (compared to the more globular skull of modern humans) with a characteristic prominent brow ridge above their eyes. Their face was also distinctive. The central part of the face protruded forward and was dominated by a very big, wide nose.

How does the Neanderthal man differ from the modern man in appearance? ›

Solution. Neanderthal man differ from the modem human in having semierect posture, flat cranium, sloping forehead, thin large orbits, heavy brow ridges, protruding jaws and no chin.

How is Neanderthal different from ancient human? ›

Neanderthals looked similar to humans but had more prominent brows, protruding faces, and rib cages that were shorter, deeper, and wider. In addition, their eye sockets were much larger, though it is unclear if their vision differed from ours.

How did Neanderthals differ from modern man Quizlet? ›

What are some physical differences between modern humans and neanderthals? more pronounced brow ridges, larger jaw, wear on teeth (indicates use as tools), occipital bun, shorter, stockier, broader ribcage, projected face, large nose, COLD-WEATHER ADAPTED.

Did Neanderthals have spoken language? ›

“The results are solid and clearly show the Neanderthals had the capacity to perceive and produce human speech. This is one of the very few current, ongoing research lines relying on fossil evidence to study the evolution of language, a notoriously tricky subject in anthropology.”

What is one way in which Neanderthal faces were different from those of modern humans? ›

Remnants indicated these ancestors were shorter and more robust and muscular than today's average human. Perhaps most noticeably, Neanderthals had a much larger nose and longer face, with the mid-part of the face jutting dramatically forward.

What are the differences in brains of modern humans and Neanderthals? ›

The study found that early H. sapiens probably had a larger cerebellum than Neanderthals—a part of the brain that, in modern humans, is important for both motor skills and higher cognition, including language processing, learning and reasoning, and social abilities.

Were Adam and Eve Neanderthals? ›

Adam and Eve were not Neanderthals. Although evolutionary biology contradicts the story of Genesis, this answer will assume the two were compatible. Neanderthals were prominent in modern-day Europe; they were smaller populations across parts of West Asia.

What is the uncommon feature between modern man and Neanderthal man? ›

Receding jaws.

How was Neanderthal different from hom*osapien culture? ›

Neanderthal culture lacks the depth of symbolic and progressive thought displayed by modern humans and this may have made competing difficult. Neanderthal culture remained relatively static whereas the contemporary hom*o sapiens were steadily evolving a complex culture.

What is one way Neanderthal limbs were different from those of modern humans? ›

Neanderthals were a cold-adapted people. As with their facial features, Neanderthals' body proportions were variable. However, in general, they possessed relatively short lower limb extremities, compared with their upper arms and legs, and a broad chest. Their arms and legs must have been massive and heavily muscled.

How did the face of Neanderthals differ from humans? ›

Neandertals had a distinct facial appearance: heavy brows, big noses and a protruding upper jaw. And scientists have long wondered why that configuration. The foreheads, it appears, they inherited from their ancestors. But the jutting midface—that was an evolutionary innovation all their own.

What are Neanderthal traits in modern humans? ›

Neanderthal variants have been hypothesized to influence many phenotypes in AMHs, including lipid metabolism, immunity, depression, digestion, and hair/skin, on the basis of the enrichment of Neanderthal variants in regions of the genome relevant to these traits (3, 5, 6, 9).

How strong were Neanderthals compared to humans? ›

Anatomical evidence suggests they were much stronger than modern humans while they were 12-14cm shorter on average than post World War II Europeans, but as tall or slightly taller than Europeans of 20 KYA: based on 45 long bones from at most 14 males and 7 females, height estimates using different methods yielded ...

In what significant way were humans and Neanderthals different? ›

Early modern humans were taller and less stocky than Neanderthals, perhaps more suited to endurance running than short bursts of speed. The hom*o sapiens man's body proportions were similar to those of men who live in hot conditions today. In comparison, the Neanderthal's body was suited to cold environments.

Which of these is a key behavioral difference between neandertals and anatomically modern humans? ›

Lastly, modern humans had more neural activity and were more creative and able to communicate, whereas neanderthals did not have their own language or creativity which could have hindered them from surviving and competing with hom*o sapiens.

What are the anatomical differences between humans and Neanderthals? ›

Remnants indicated these ancestors were shorter and more robust and muscular than today's average human. Perhaps most noticeably, Neanderthals had a much larger nose and longer face, with the mid-part of the face jutting dramatically forward.

Top Articles
Latest Posts
Article information

Author: Velia Krajcik

Last Updated:

Views: 6170

Rating: 4.3 / 5 (54 voted)

Reviews: 93% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Velia Krajcik

Birthday: 1996-07-27

Address: 520 Balistreri Mount, South Armand, OR 60528

Phone: +466880739437

Job: Future Retail Associate

Hobby: Polo, Scouting, Worldbuilding, Cosplaying, Photography, Rowing, Nordic skating

Introduction: My name is Velia Krajcik, I am a handsome, clean, lucky, gleaming, magnificent, proud, glorious person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.