Talk:Mythical origins of language

Organisation

I'd like to see an article on this topic, I have a lot of sources, but unfortunately seem to be incapable of organising it into any coherent article. I'd be very grateful of any suggestions. - FrancisTyers 00:31, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

The categories for regions are all mixed-up, should put them into alphabetical order at least. At present, it's an amateurish muddle. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.231.144.251 (talk) 02:56, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

African myths

A Dictionary of African Mythology 10.  Woot Takes Language from the Fly, the Tortoise, and the Dog  
A Dictionary of African Mythology; 2000; Harold Scheub
Woot Takes Language from the Fly, the Tortoise, and the Dog (Kuba/DRCongo) Woot (Woto) was a mythic hero. The god, Mboom, had nine ...

A Dictionary of African Mythology 8.  Unumbotte and the Origin of Languages  
A Dictionary of African Mythology; 2000; Harold Scheub
Unumbotte and the Origin of Languages (Bassari/Togo) Unumbotte was the creator. Unumbotte made a 
human being, naming him man. He ...

`Unumbotte made a human being. Its name was Man. Unumbotte next made an antelope, named Antelope. Unumbotte made a snake, named Snake. At the time these three were made there were no trees but one, a palm. Nor had the earth been pounded smooth. All three were sitting on the rough ground, and Unumbotte said to them: "The earth has not yet been pounded. You must pound the ground smooth where you are sitting." Unumbotte gave them seeds of all kinds, and said: "Go plant these." Then Unumbotte went away.

Unumbotte came back. He saw that the three had not yet pounded the earth. They had, however, planted the seeds. One of the seeds had sprouted and grown. It was a tree. It had grown tall and was bearing fruit, red fruit. Every seven days Unumbotte would return and pluck one of the red fruits. One day Snake said: "We too should eat these fruits. Why must we go hungry?" Antelope said: "But we do not know anything about this fruit." Then Man and his wife took some of the fruit and ate it. Unumbotte came down from the sky and asked: "Who ate the fruit?" They answered: "We did." Unumbotte asked: Who told you that you could eat that fruit?" They replied: "Snake did." Unumbotte asked: "Why did you listen to Snake?" They said: "We were hungry." Unumbotte questioned Antelope: "Are you hungry, too?" Antelope said: "Yes I get hungry. I like to eat grass." Since then, Antelope has lived in the wild, eating grass.

Unumbotte then gave sorghum to Man, also yams and millet. And the people gathered in eating groups that would always eat from the same bowl, never the bowls of the other groups. It was from this that differences in language arose. And ever since then, the people have ruled the land.

http://66.249.93.104/search?q=cache:889o2MTCD7gJ:www.daniellesgarden.org/dw-myth.htm+unumbotte&hl=en&gl=uk&ct=clnk&cd=1

From [1]

Rig veda?

This manifested speech varies in men, for their individual and racial characteristics and the conditions, such as country and climate in which they live, differ. There is a tradition that, there was once a universal speech before the building of the Tower of Babel, signifying the confusion of tongues. As previously stated, a friend has drawn my attention to a passage in Rigveda which he interprets in a similar sense. For, it says, that the Three Fathers and the Three Mothers, like the Elohim, made (in the interest of creation) all-comprehending speech into that which was not so.

From [2]

Possibly:

[3]

Popul vuh

Balam-Quitzé, Balam-Acab, Mahucutah, and Iqui-Balam said, "Let us await the break of day." So said those great wise men, the enlightened men, the priests and sacrificers. This they said. Our first mothers and fathers did not yet have wood nor stones to keep; but their hearts were tired of waiting for the sun. Already all the tribes and the Yaqui people, the priests and sacrificers, were very many. "Let us go, let us go to search and see if our [tribal] symbols are in safety; if we can find what we must burn before them. For being as we are, there is no one who watches for us," said Balam-Quitzé, Balam-Acab, Mahucutah, and Iqui-Balam. And having heard of a city, they went there. Now then, the name of the place where Balam-Quitzé, Balam-Acab, Mahucutah, and Iqui-Balam and those of Tamub and llocab went was Tulán-Zuiva, Vucub-Pec, Vucub-Ziván. This was the name of the city where they went to receive their gods. So, then, all arrived at Tulán. It was impossible to count the men who arrived; there were very many and they walked in an orderly way. Then was the appearance of their gods; first those of Balam-Quitzé, Balam-Acab, Mahucutah, and Iqui-Balam, who were filled with joy: "At last we have found that for which we searched!" they said. And the first that appeared was Tohil, as this god was called, and Balam-Quitzé put him on his back, in his chest. Instantly the god called Avilix appeared, and Balam-Acab carried him. The god called Hacavitz was carried by Mahucutah; and Iqui-Balam carried the one called Nicahtacah. And together with the people of the Quiché, they also received those of Tamub. And in the same way Tohil was the name of the god of the Tamub who received the grandfather and father of the Lords of Tamub, whom we know today. In the third place were those of Ilocab. Tohil was also the name of the god who was received by the grandfathers and the fathers of the lords, whom we also know today. In this way, the three Quiché [families] were given their names and they did not separate, because they had a god of the same name, Tohil of the Quiché, Tohil of the Tamub and [Tohil] of the Ilocab; one only was the name of the god, and therefore the three Quiché [families] did not separate. Great indeed was the virtue of the three, Tohil, Avilix, and Hacavitz. Then all the people arrived, those from Rabinal, the Cakchiquel, those from Tziquinahá, and the people who now are called the Yaqui. And there it was that the speech of the tribes changed; their tongues became different. They could no longer understand each other clearly after arriving at Tulán. There also they separated, there were some who had to go to the East, but many came here. And their clothing was only the skins of animals; they had no good clothes to put on, the skins of animals were their only dress. They were poor, they possessed nothing, but they had the nature of extraordinary men. When they arrived at Tulán-Zuiva, Vucub-Pec, Vucub-Ziván, the old traditions say that they had traveled far in order to arrive there.

From [4]

Myths of the Kukis

The Kukis of Manipur, another hill race of Assam, account for the diversity of languages in their tribes by saying, that once on a time the three grandsons of a certain chief were all playing together in the house, when their father bade them catch a rat. But while they were busy hunting the animal, they were suddenly smitten with a confusion of tongues and could not understand each other, so the rat escaped. The eldest of the three sons now spoke the Lamyang language ; the second spoke the Thado language ; and as for the third, some say that he spoke the Waiphie language, but others think it was the Manipur tongue which he spoke. At all events the three lads became the ancestors of three distinct tribes.

From [5], but not able to be verified yet.

- FrancisTyers 20:53, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Myths of the Zemi or Kacha/Kachcha Nagas

A different explanation of the diversities of language is given by the Kachcha Nagas, a hill tribe of Assam. According to them, at the creation all men were of one race, but they were destined soon afterwards to be broken up into different nations. The king of the men then on earth had a daughter named Sitoylê. She was wondrous fleet of foot, and loved to roam the jungle the livelong day, far from home, thereby causing much anxiety to her parents, who feared lest she should be devoured by wild beasts. One day her father conceived a plan for keeping her at home. He sent for a basket of linseed, and upsetting it on the ground he ordered his daughter to put the seeds back, one by one, into the basket, counting them as she did so. Then thinking that the task he had set her would occupy the maiden the whole day, he withdrew. But by sunset his daughter had counted all the seeds and put them back in the basket, and no sooner had she done so than away she hurried to the jungle. So when her parents returned, they could find no trace of their missing daughter.

After searching for days and days, however, they at last came across a monster python lying gorged in the shade of the trees. All the men being assembled, they attacked the huge reptile with spear and sword. But even as they struck at the snake, their appearance changed, and they found themselves speaking various dialects. The men of the same speech now drew apart from the rest and formed a separate band, and the various bands thus created became the ancestors of the different nations now existing on earth. But what became of the princess, whether she was restored to her sorrowing parents, or whether she had been swallowed by the python, the story does not relate.

From [6], but not able to be verified yet.

- FrancisTyers 20:53, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

• "Naga and Other Frontier Tribes of North-East India (continued)", by Gertrude M. Godden

The Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 1898 — has interesting information, but little on the mythology aside from a brief description of a couple of creation myths.

• "Naga and Other Frontier Tribes of North-East India", by Gertrude M. Godden

The Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 1897 — again, interesting information, some stuff about language, but no language myth. - FrancisTyers 17:42, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Avenues for further research

In Australia, one of the indigenous tribes tells the story of ancestral people eating an old person. The tribes that ate the flesh spoke a 'clear' language, but those who ate the internal organs spoke an 'unclear' one. The Kabyle in Africa recount that people started speaking different languages following an argument between people. A tribe in Assam tells that languages became confused when three children once chased a rat. A tribe in the Amazon holds that the god divided peoples, creating disunity (and mutually unintelligible languages) so that they would obey him. Among Native American languages, the Maidu (California) say that people originally had one language but they began to speak in various ways at a funeral ceremony. The Iroquois believe that the separation of languages resulted from a family quarrel that resulted in the killing of a child.

But the idea that the observed diversity of languages is a curse is not as widespread as we might assume. Many stories around the world simply account for diversity as a natural fact: In ancient India, the sacred hymn known as the Rig Veda at one point has Vac ('speech') saying that the gods have broken him up and that he possesses many forms. A people in the Indo-China peninsula speaks of sixty races of people, each with its own language, creeping from a squash. The Quiché‚ (Guatemala) tell how people lived together speaking one language, until each group chose a god of its own and went off speaking its own language. The Navajo in the American Southwest have an elaborate creation myth involving, at one point, 'Changing Woman' and the emergence of peoples into the visible world. When they spoke, they were speaking her language. But she also created the neighboring Pueblos, Mexicans and others who began speaking different languages, dispatching them in various directions. In Islam, the Koran teaches that Adam did not invent names of everything, but was taught them by Allah. The diversity we see is a natural event, a sign of Allah's power. All peoples are able to understand the revelation of the Koran in whatever language it is expressed.

[7]

- FrancisTyers 13:12, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

On the Aboriginal Inhabitants of the Andaman Islands

Mythology

1. In other sections mention has been made of Pwluga-, the Creator of all, and it has also been stated that no reason is given for the formation of the earth's surface, except that it was according to His will, and the same hypothesis is held to account for the varying seasons. 2. Until recent years it was supposed that the Andamanese were without traditions, and had no idea of their own origin, but since we have been enabled to become better acquainted with them it has been ascertained that such is not the case. While I have been extremely careful as to the source whence I obtained my information, I would at the same time mention that much that is found under these last headings has been obtained from the older and more intelligent members of distant communities, and is probably little, if at all known to many of the rising generation in our immediate vicinity. 3. Certain mythic legends are related to the young by ôkopavad-'s parents and others, which refer to the supposed adventures or history of remote ancestors, and, though the recital not unfrequently invokes mirth, they are none the less accepted as veracious. The personages figuring in these tales are believed to be real and historical, but, beyond the fact of a very general acceptance and agreement of the traditions respecting them, no satisfactory traces are to be found of their existence except in the lively imaginations of their descendents. 4. There are a few discrepancies in their accounts of the creation and origin of the human species, but in the main features all are agreed. The following tradition appears to be the most generally received, and, as far as possible it is given in the words in which it was first taken down:- 5. In the beginning after the world had been made, Pwluga- created a man whose name was tômo-; he was black, like the present inhabitants, but much taller and bearded. Pwluga- showed him the various fruit-trees in the jungle, which then existed only at wòtàem'i- (the "Garden of Eden"), and, in doing so told him not to partake of certain of them during the rains: he then taught him how to obtain and use fire; this he did by first stacking in alternate layers two varieties of wood known as chôr- and ber-, and then bidding chana bodo- (Mother Sun) to come and sit on or near the pile until she had ignited it, after which she returned to her place in the sky. tômo- was then taught how to cook pigs, which were easily caught, as they had in those days neither ears nor noses. 6. Another version related that Pwluga- came with a spirit or angel called lachi punga âblola to instruct tômo-, who, at his direction, prepared a pyre and then struck it, on which the fire was kindled, and punga âblola proceeded to teach him how to cook food. 7. About the origin of the first woman, whose name was chana eleuadi, there is a diversity of belief: according to some Puluga- created her after he had taught tômo- how to sustain life; others say that tômo saw her swimming near his home and called to her, whereupon she landed and lived with him; while a third story represents her as coming pregnant to Kyd Island, where she gave birth to several male and female children, who subsequently became progenitors of the present race. 8. These legends ascribe the name tômola to all the descendants of their first parents until the period of the Deluge. tômo- had two sons and two daughters by chana eleuadi; the names of the former were burola and bôrola, and of the latter ruela and chôrmila. 9. As time went on, the pigs multiplied to such an extent that they became a nuisance, so, with woman's ready wit, chana eleuadi drilled holes in their heads and snouts, thereby giving them powers of hearing and smelling, and enabling them to avoid danger and procure food for themselves. Puluga- then covered the whole land with jungle, into which the pigs wandered in various directions. But this change was found to have its disadvantages, as it became next to impossible to catch the now wily sus. Puluga-, hwoever, again came to the rescue, and taught tômo- how to construct bows and arrows, and to hunt, after which he taught him to manufacture canoes and harpoons, and to fish. On a subsequent visit he instructed chana eleuadi in the art of basket and net-making, and in the use of red-ochre (kòuob-) and white clay (tâla-og-) and this by degrees he imparted to their first parents a knowledge of the various arts which have ever since been practised among them. 10. tômo and eleuadi were also told that, though they were to work in the wet months, they must not do so after sundown, because by doing so they would worry the butu-, which are under Puluga-'s special protection. Any noise, such as working (kopke) with an adze, would cause the butu-'s heads to ache, and that would be a serious matter. During the cold and dry seasons work may be carried on day and night, as the butu- is then seldom seen and cannot be disturbed. 11. As soon as the first couple were united Puluga- gave them the bojig-yâb- dialect, which is the language spoken to this day, according to their belief, by the tribe inhabiting the south and south-eastern portion of middle Andaman, in which district wòtàemi- is situated. It is therefore, regarded as the mother tongue, from which the dialects of the various other tribes have sprung. 12. The canoes used in those days are said to have had no outriggers, and were made by scooping out the trunk of the Pandanus, which is believed to have been much larger than it is now-a-days, and well adapted for the purpose. 13. The formation of creeks is attributed to a fortunate accident: it happened that one day tômo- harpooned a large fish called kôro-ngidi-chàu-, which had a projecting snout where-with it lashed the shore in its frantic efforts to escape; so violent were the blows that the land was broken each time they fell, a result of which proved of great benefit and service to the redoubtable harpooner and his descendants. 14. tômo- lived to a great age, but even before his death his offspring became so numerous that their home could no longer accomodate them. At Puluga-'s bidding they were furnished with all necessary weapons, implements, and fire, and then scattered in pairs all over the country. When this exodus occured Puluga- provided each party with a distinct dialect.

From Man, E. H. (1883) "On the Aboriginal Inhabitants of the Andaman Islands. (Part II.)" in The Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, Vol. 12, pp. 117-175.

more info

Duck story

Hi. I inserted the "Duck" story. I first made a mistake and thought it was a Kutenai tale, but it was actually Salishan, Okanagan I think. I am just learning Wikipedia, and so need to figure out citations. It is from "Folk Tales of the Sahaptin and Salishan Tribes", and an online copy of the tale can be found at http://collections.ic.gc.ca/Teit/copy%20of%20book%20a/a.056done.html#Origin%20of%20the%20different%20languages

Blindsay 01:53, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

No problem, thanks for your help :) I added the citation. - FrancisTyers · 02:03, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Genetics

The genetic nonsense needs to be taken out. It's certainly a bizarre lead in.Kauffner 13:56, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

It isn't nonsense (did you read the paper?) If you can suggest a better lead, please do so here :) - Francis Tyers · 14:08, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

i have removed it and cleaned up a bunch of poorly written stuff. do not revert without discussing. it is actually nonsense. there is no single gene responsible for language and it is a poor lead in. if their must be a scientific reference don't mentioin individual genes. the article could also do with a name change "mythical" implies these are all untrue. "traditional" or "other than scientific" might work better. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.110.36.29 (talk) 19:21, 29 December 2006 (UTC).

Thanks for the feedback. I've removed the genetics bit per your suggestion. I would quite agree that there is no gene "for language". The article did not say anything of the sort. If you read the paper, that is however what it says, they speculate that the "birth of language" could have come from a mutation in FOXP2.

I agree that it is speculation, and not entirely relevant (although interesting) as it is another belief about language origins. On the other hand, the article name is perfect as it is. None of the myths included are true or have any scientific basis. If you have some references for the truth (or even falsifiability) of any of these, please post them here. - Francis Tyers · 21:33, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

stop reinserting poorly written text. this is the lead in you reinserted

There have however been many explanations of the origin of language prior to any scientific theories.

however? however relative to what?

Thanks for spotting that - ft.

Still today there exist in many cultures, etiological myths and other stories pertaining to the origin of language, the development of language and the reasons behind the diversity in languages today.

"still today"? huh? many is also a stretch.

I think this sounds ok, what would you suggest replaces it? - ft.

These myths have at the same time, similarities, recurring themes, and differences, having been passed down through oral tradition.

we don't need a comma after "at the same time" and we don't need "at the same time". this is also almost meaningless. they have similarities and differences. every pair of stories have similarities and differences.

You're right about the "at the same time". Removed. - ft.

Some myths go further than just storytelling and are religious, with some even having a literal interpretation even today

who considers a myth "storytelling"? if its just a story, don't call it a myth. "even having....even today" sounds bad. "literal interpretation" of these "reglius myths" just means people still believe there religion.

Some of the myths are classed as "stories", some as "myths". A myth is a kind of story. But in this context, by storytelling, I mean something that is not "genuinely believed" by anyone (except perhaps the very young -- or very young at heart), like a fairytale. A myth is something that might be believed by people, it is less whimsical. The "some myths have a literal interpretation even today" should stay. - ft.

Thanks for your suggestions! - Francis Tyers · 23:15, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

GA passed

I have passed your request for this article to be part of Wikipedia's Good Articles. This article is in-depth in how people believe language began. It's broad as many beliefs are mentioned, and easy to read. One writing problem was encountered, and I was able to fix it immediately.

A few suggestions to improve the article to A-status:

• As per WP:LEAD, you should summarize the entire article in the lead.
• It may appear that the article favors the Abrahamic religions' version of how languages began. I recommend listing it in chronological order, oldest belief to newest.

That's about all I can see for the moment. Good luck furthering this article. --LBMixPro ^{<Speak|on|it!>} 19:49, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, when I started out I really had no idea how to organise the article. Another user came forward and set it up this way, so I left it for the meantime. I will look into re-ordering it, but it might be difficult as some of the myths are difficult to date. - Francis Tyers · 23:41, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Herodotus

The tale in Herodotus, Histories of Psamtik's search for the "original" language, surely belongs here: the experiment shows myth developing into proto-science. --Wetman 22:22, 29 December 2006 (UTC).

Certainly, I will see about looking that up. If you have it to hand I would appreciate it if you could add it. Don't feel obliged though... - Francis Tyers · 23:16, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Another ref

• Frits Staal "Oriental Ideas on the Origin of Language" . Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 99, No. 1 (Jan. - Mar., 1979), pp. 1-14 doi:10.2307/598944
• Jarold Ramsey "The Bible in Western Indian Mythology". The Journal of American Folklore, Vol. 90, No. 358 (Oct. - Dec., 1977), pp. 442-454
• Francis Lee Utley "The Bible of the Folk" California Folklore Quarterly, Vol. 4, No. 1 (Jan., 1945), pp. 1-17
• Stephen D. Peet "American Religions and the Teaching of the Bible". The Old Testament Student, Vol. 7, No. 10 (Jun., 1888), pp. 320-322
• Clarese A. James "Folklore and Fairy Tales". Folklore, Vol. 56, No. 4 (Dec., 1945), pp. 336-341

- Francis Tyers · 14:28, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Mythical origins of language/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

I will be doing the GA Reassessment on this article as part of the GA Sweeps project. H1nkles (talk) 16:17, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

I have some concerns about this article primarily related to the references. Ref [1] is Genesis 11 from the Bible. Per WP:PSTS primary sources are not encouraged as references. Religious scripture is considered a primary source. The formatting of the reference is also lacking per WP:CITE, there needs to be a publisher, accessdate, and author (if one exists). Refs 1,2,5,7,9,10,13,14, and 17 are lacking at least a publisher and accessdate. Ref [7] is a dead link and needs to be fixed.

Regarding the Genesis reference, it references the story of Genesis, it does not say anything about its validity as a theory on the origins of language. Primary sources may not be encouraged, but in this case as referencing the text of the story I think it is ok. - Francis Tyers · 09:15, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

The other references I'll try and take care of. - Francis Tyers · 09:15, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Done. Some of the references I'm not happy about in terms of reliability. But seeing as they are serving to reference stories and not theories, I'm ok with leaving them for now. This stuff is quite difficult to research, and although the people who wrote the pages linked have developed some crazy theories, I can't see them just making up stories. I've marked them with "find a better reference". - Francis Tyers · 09:57, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

The lead is not developed properly either. Per WP:LEAD the lead is to be a summary of the entire article. I do not see mention of the various continent/cultural mythologies in the lead, which is the heart of the article.

I've added a sentence "This article gives an overview of these myths from various cultures around the world." - Francis Tyers · 09:57, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I think the article is close though I can't keep it as is. Please address these issues in the next week and I will be happy to keep it. I will hold it for now pending work. H1nkles (talk) 16:46, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the review, the article has improved as a result, particularly in the reference section. - Francis Tyers · 09:57, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Well done the article checks out and I'm thankful that you put the work into it. I understand that the referencing and research is difficult on a subject such as this. The article is certainly GA. H1nkles (talk) 04:33, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks :) - Francis Tyers · 18:11, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

GA criteria: Broadness, sourcing, writing

I feel that this article does not reach the broadness GA criteria. 1000's of scholarly sources on this topic and individual mythologies exist, and this article only gives a short lest of examples, with very little discussion of the overall topic. The general comments in the lead also do jnot summarise cited information in the main text, and some paragraphs are completely uncited. The article is also mostly just lists, making it not a disjointed read. I will start a GAR soon, but imo, this article would need a major expansion to retain GA status, as the standards have risen greatly since it was first listed. YobMod 14:08, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Mythical origins of language/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

Reassessment started.

• I feel that this article does not reach the broadness GA criteria. 1000's of scholarly sources on this topic and individual mythologies exist, and this article only gives a short list of examples, with very little discussion of the overall topic or even discussion of the individual examples.
• The general comments in the lead also do not summarise cited information in the main text, and some paragraphs are completely uncited.
• The article is also mostly just lists, making it not a disjointed read. There are also problems of single sentence paragraphs and grammar (eg, the second sentence is ungrammatical). T

This article would need a major expansion to retain GA status, as the standards have risen greatly since it was first listed, so i am delisting. YobMod 14:08, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

References

The quality of references used in this article are just pathetic. "A Hindu myth", followed by a text dump of some unreferenced page somebody has googled. This has very little to do with what Wikipedia is trying to achieve. Also, what is this:

PLEASE DO NOT CONVERT REFERENCES WITHOUT DISCUSSING ON TALK PAGE. SEE http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5885 

(cut from html comment in article) Millions of articles use cite.php without any bother, just what makes this article so special that it cannot possibly use it? Especially seeing that most content isn't properly referenced anyway? --dab (𒁳) 10:34, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Brahma punishes tree

What is the origin of this story? I am afraid that there is much fake "Hindu mythology" which was reported on hearsay during the colonial period. See "Elephant on a Turtle". As long as there is no decent reference for this, it may or may not be such a case. Here we seem to have evidence that it was reported in 1891. The distribution of google hits suggests that the tale was just copied from there as "a Hindu myth" without anyone bothering to check. I do not find it in Indological sources. I just find it used as an example thrown in as an aside by authors who do not have any interest in the story itself other than to show that "these myths pop up the world over". In other words, this is unsubstantiated as it stands and should be removed pending the presentation of a decent reference. --dab (𒁳) 10:48, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Does Ogma belong in this article?

http://www.druidry.org/library/gods-goddesses/ogma-god-speech-language --115.64.47.34 (talk) 02:44, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mythical origins of language. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060906225931/http://w2.byuh.edu/academics/domckay/Speeches/Mckay/W_Allison.htm to http://w2.byuh.edu/academics/domckay/Speeches/Mckay/W_Allison.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060620033014/http://gerryforster.netfirms.com/MarsFlash/A_Lexicon_2.doc to http://gerryforster.netfirms.com/MarsFlash/A_Lexicon_2.doc

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:07, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

"Myths of language" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Myths of language. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:17, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Philarios and Philarion

This page was created by FrancisTyers in 2006 with the story of Zeus having taught language to humans before Hermes confusing them and confusing Zeus's direct rule, which culminates in the enthronement of Phoroneus. The source wasn't any good, but the story checks out (see p. 222 of the first edition of Carl Kerenyi's Gods of the Greeks). In 2012, Unitedcolonies added "Philarios and Philarion", supposedly gods of ingenuity, as having taught language to humans. It was one of only two edits this accounts ever did to the main domain. In 2017, John C. Maher released his book Multilingualism: a very short introduction, which in p. 20 cites Philarios and Philarion, although without any references. In the same year, an IP editor warned that no mythological dictionary or encyclopedia confirmed the information. In 2018, another IP editor added Maher's book as a source.

This is clearly fake, and the reference is circular. The only other reference to Philarios and Philarion I can find in a credible source is in p. 181 of an article by Patrícia Vieira. The only other published reference is p. 173 of a 2015 book by Nancy du Tertre on ufology, also not quoting sources and also obviously taken from Wikipedia.

That all being said, I am removing these supposed deities from the page. Leefeni^{aures audiendi audiat} 16:17, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

mythical invention of hanzi

I realise the structure of this article needs rethinking, but another bit of grist for the future mill: Cangjie#Legend_of_character_creation Arlo James Barnes 05:34, 7 February 2021 (UTC)