In order to understand the chapter title “Inventing Reading”, Stanislas Dehaene explains the evolution of writing in chapter 4 of his powerful book Reading in the brain: the new science of how we read (2010). The 7 points are just my way of organizing his “Inventing Reading” title. To clarify, Dehaene does not lay out the invention of reading in his book in this exact order, rather these are what I consider to be fascinating points that he makes in chapter 4.
Inventing Reading – Point 1
A reminder from earlier chapters (and blogs) is that writing represents both sound and meaning. In transparent languages, such as Italian or Spanish, one letter represents one sound and there is not much complexity in learning to pronounce words out loud from those languages. Meaning takes on a quicker role.
In opaque languages, such as English or French, the same letter or combination of letters can have two or more different sounds. The language is more complex, but not impossible, to learn to read in opaque languages. Even with opaque languages, there is a finite number of sound – letter correspondences to learn.
A second reminder from earlier chapters is that the brain’s letterbox sends print down one of two processing routes: the phonological (sound) route or the semantic (meaning) route. If the letter or word is new to the reader, the letterbox might send the letter or word down both routes simultaneously until the route becomes automatic.
A third reminder from earlier chapters is that once our brain’s letterbox attaches “b” to the sound /b/, then it can eventually handle variations of the letter b: B, b, b, b, B, B, etc… The size, location, or lighting of letters (or characters) does not stop the brain from being able to read.
Inventing Reading – Point 2
Our brain architecture constrains the way we read and this is evident in how writing systems evolved over thousands of years and into the alphabets as we know them today.
Writing is an invention from a few thousand years ago yet our brain’s design limited the way in which writing could evolve over this time frame (and also inventing reading at the same time). There are many cross-cultural similarities within writing systems from around the world which can be traced back to the limitations of the human brain.
Dehaene puts forth that one limitation of our brain is our innate preference towards proto-letters (see my chapter 3 blogs: Part 1 and Part 2) where everyone learns to read in a certain manner regardless of the writing system (logographic vs alphabetic) or its directionality.
“…our cortex did not specifically evolve for writing. Rather, writing evolved to fit the cortex.” (Dehaene, 2010, p. 171)
Inventing Reading – Point 3
There are universal features of ALL writing systems around the world. Many believe that each individual writing system developed from the culture’s unique traits and structures. Dehaene, however, believes that because of neuronal recycling – a theory from chapter 3 of his book – our creativity to invent writing is controlled and limited by the brain’s architecture.
As Dehaene stated in chapter 2 of his book, “The two reading routes described earlier exist in all cultures and reside in similar areas of the brain. The only difference consists in the way that each language makes use of the routes.” (Dehaene, 2010, p. 118)
So while some languages are logographic, some are alphabetic, some are transparent, and some are opaque, Dehaene offers that all writing systems and their letter shapes are NOT arbitrary. “Our primate brain only accepts a limited set of written shapes” and there is “little room for cultural relativism.” (Dehaene, 2010, p. 179) Therefore, the world’s writing systems evolved around the similar genetic makeup of the human brain.
Inventing Reading – Point 4
What are some of the similarities that span all languages across the globe?
- All are formatted with the same high contrast of black on white writing which helps the retina’s fovea focus on the maximum amount of information possible when reading.
- Each language has a small list or stock of basic shapes which combine to form sounds, syllables, and/or whole words. Even within the thousands of Chinese and Japanese characters, there are basic shapes made from just a few strokes.
- All writing systems across the world represent sound and meaning. How the brain’s letterbox sends information to the sound area or the meaning area depends on the language.
- Our human brain is born with the ability to account for variability in the size, locations, and lighting of print. However, rotate the print by more than 40% and our brain slows down to process what it is trying to see. This 40% orientation limit is common to all writing systems.
Inventing Reading – Point 5
Another similarity across the world’s writing systems is that most are composed of 3 stroke characters (+/- 1 stroke). A stroke is defined as a curve or line that is traced without lifting or stopping the pencil. For example:
- 23 of the 26 of the capital letters in English have between 1-3 strokes.
- Words, roots, prefixes, suffixes, and grammar endings are almost always 2, 3, or 4 letters long.
- In Chinese, “most characters consist in a combination of two, three, or four semantic and phonetic subunits.” (Dehaene, 2010, p. 177)
- The International Phonetic Alphabet and its 170 signs seem fancy and arbitrary yet are very basic and stay within a +/- 3 stroke similarity.
Objects found in nature often follow the stroke path of a T or an L. More rare is a random X unless you see twigs on the ground or two branches crossing each other. Is it coincidence or not that “the first scribes appear to have been aware, from the beginning, that the shapes they choose … have settled on characters whose shapes resemble those found in the environment – and are thus easily represented by our brains.” (Dehaene, 2010, p. 178)
This idea that shapes from nature have a correlation with our writing systems supports Dehaene’s neuronal recycling theory from chapter 3. He continues to lay the case for inventing reading.
Inventing Reading – Point 6
How did humans discover that speech sounds could be transformed into written symbols? Initially, art from the Chauvet caves (33,000 B.C.E.) and Lascaux (17,000 B.C.E.) consisted of contours and junction points. An exact representation of the animal was not required in these ancient cave drawings. Dots also appeared as though an (abstract) accounting system or calendar system was evolving.
Around 800 B.C.E. in present-day Iraq, small clay objects such as cones, spheres, or ½ spheres were found and thought to represent counting.
From cave art, writing evolved to pictograms which represent a realistic object such as man, woman, bird, or plant. From pictograms, writing evolved to ideograms – how to represent an abstract idea with a symbol. Writing with symbols to represent nouns became very cumbersome and inefficient. Also, pictograms had too many interpretations of an object. For example, did a drawing of a bowl touching the side of a face represent “abundance” or “starvation”?
Besides, it was too difficult to memorize 50,000+ symbols where each word was a symbol.
How to represent abstract ideas such as “equals” or “and” or “peace” became difficult. The need for speed and efficiency led to the first cuneiform characters which represented both sounds (phonetics) and meaning (a realistic object or an abstract idea).
Later alphabets preferred simplicity and speed when writing and writing systems developed further. German Johannes Gutenberg invented the printing press around 1440 and the world was never the same. The idea of standardized spelling and correct writing was not important until this invention. The spread of published works and ideas amongst leaders and scientists across Europe and the world led to many important moments during the cultural, scientific, and political upheavals during Renaissance.
Inventing Reading – Point 7
The first traces of the alphabetic principle are traced back to 1700 B.C.E. in the Sinai peninsula where the signs referred only to speech sounds. These new language signs belonged to the Semitic languages of Arabic, Amharic, and Hebrew which emphasize consonants and likely influenced the invention of later alphabets.
Our current writing system combines meaning and sounds at the same time so that we can distinguish “pea” from “pee” and “horse” from “hoarse”.
The Phoenicians introduced the “mothers of reading”: vowels. This system of consonants and vowels continued to develop over many centuries until the writing system became in accord with the brain’s letterbox.
Inventing Reading – Final Thoughts
Points 6 and 7 are a highly simplistic view of the evolution of writing and does not give weight to the ancient civilizations and their contributions much less where and how vowels appeared on the scene. Dehaene’s chapter 4 titled “Inventing Reading” spent many pages explaining more of these contributions but frankly, it was difficult to do justice to his eloquent explanations.
Inventing reading or inventing writing? Both. Suffice it to say that Dehaene lays a case of “inventing reading” to connect the brain’s letterbox and his neuronal recycling theory to the evolution of writing. I believe he succeeds.
There is no follow-up to the “Inventing Reading” chapter of Dehaene’s book. Rather, I will go directly on to summarize chapters 5, 6, 7, 8, and the conclusion. Check out my YouTube Channel: L’Essentiel French Resources and watch the video versions of blogs or consider starting back at the beginning of my blogs and his book:
- #1 Introduction: 3 Important Wow Moments
- #2 Chapter 1 (Part 1): Amazing Ideas
- #3 Chapter 1 (Part 2): 4 Big Considerations
- #4 Chapter 2 (Part 1): the Brain’s Amazing Letterbox
- #5 Chapter 2 (Part 2): 10 More Memorable Moments
- #6 Chapter 3 (Part 1): Neuronal Recycling
- #7 Chapter 3 (Part 2): Extra Moments from Chapter 3
My name is Lisa with L’Essentiel French Resources – join me again soon! This book is FUN!
Resources:
– Dehaene, S. (2021). How we learn: Why brains learn better than any machine…for now. Penguin Books..
– Dehaene, S. (2010). Reading in the brain: The new science of how we read. Penguin Books. (I receive a commission if you purchase either Dehaene book from Amazon.)
