Complex First? On the Evolutionary and Developmental Priority of Semantically Thick Words

When one conjoins relatively well supported views on language acquisition and typology with frequently held views on the neural realization of meaning and some general principles of evolution and development, one seems to arrive at what I shall call the Complex-First Paradox. At its core is the question why concepts of substances, typically expressed by concrete nouns, seem to lexicalize ontogenetically and phylogenetically so early, even though they are apparently semantically far more complex than concepts that lexicalize later. The paradox consists of five propositions each of which seems plausible in its own right and is supported by empirical or theoretical reasons. The set of propositions – as is the nature of paradoxes – is apparently inconsistent, though, and thus points to an explanatory deficit in linguistic theory: