New Theories on Language Shed Light on the Nature of Music

Languages
According to Terrence Deacon, the development of language in humans was both the result of and the catalyst for advanced human evolution- and thus mankind as we know it. No doubt understanding the origins of language means understanding the origins of mankind. However, a form of communication predating the homo sapian species exists: Music. Philosophers of music have often compared the structure of music to the structure of language, in fact, Eduard Hanslick, a 19th century music critic, suggested that music was simply language without semantics (Kivy). Hanslick was partially correct, music is a language with unique semantics. To understand the unique semantic content of music, we must first understand what language is and how it works in people, and consider music in the context of our discoveries about language. 

Many useful definitions of language exist; however, Noam Chomsky’s definition of language is suitable for this study as it nicely separates words, grammar and semantics.

Chomsky, in his breakthrough study on syntactical structures defines language as a set (finite or infinite) of sentences, each finite in length and constructed out of a finite set of elements. This definition of language is appropriate for all the spoken language of the world as, while the sets of phonemes (letters in the alphabet) are finite- infinitely many sentences result from the set of phonemes (Chomsky). Further, a sentence is a grammatical (grammatical meaning acceptable to a native speaker) combination of the phonemes of a language set. This definition of sentences suggests that some combinations of phonemes are sentences while others are not, and the distinction between a sentence and non-sentence is adherence to a grammar. Combinations of phonemes need not be meaningful or semantically intelligible to be grammatically acceptable and thus sentences.
Ex 1.
(a)Silent doors speak angrily.
(b)Angrily speak doors silent.