Recently, I came across a rather interesting article which I think may
be of potential interest to the MMD readers.  Although I cannot say
that the content directly applies to automatic music in any particular
sense, I think that some of it's aspects can be universally accepted on
the basis of musical appreciation, which I sincerely hope is somewhat
intriguing.

In it, the article states that there is currently no scientific
evidence which supports a reason for people that enjoy or appreciate
music on such a profound level, although it dose offer some purely
universal speculation.  It states that our older ancestry (before the
invention of any musical instrument) could not have in any way acquired
an appreciation for mere sound in vibratory motion without a purely
phonological reason.

But there must be some deep, primal reason why music seems to be at the
very heart of most people.  It is a known fact that people World-Wide
have an equally innate ability to enjoy (or at least appreciate) music.
But how did this come to be?

The article pointed in the direction of linguistics and the logical
principals of language, which eventually became associated with sound
on a phonological level (or so the hypothesis goes).  How else can
we account for two-year old pianists which can hammer out a Beethoven
piano sonata with the full force and passion of an adult?  Or more
universally, a two-year old which can form brand new utterances --
grammatically correct sentences which neither have been taught them
or is an imitation previously uttered by someone else?

The answer here lies within a process known as "innate universal
competence" -- or the primal need to share what one feels or wants on
a purely universal level, which is a genetically endowed competence.
It is human endowment, therefore it proclaims the unique power of the
human spirit.  But could there just possibly be a monogenetic
connection, way back then, between linguistics and music?

Well, the purpose here is not to actually answer that highly
metaphysical question (as it was in the article), but to understand it.
It would be rather pretentious to assume (as well as limiting) to limit
musical appreciation to merely a form of linguistics.  But I think it
is somewhat reasonable to assume that sound did have something to do
with it.

If we take a look at certain phonemes, that is, minimal speech units
which arise naturally from the physiological structures of our mouths,
throats, and noses, it is not too surprising that particular sounds are
accepted on a purely universal level.  If we make a simple analogies
between language and music, and equate certain aspects of speech to
music, it may then be easier to perhaps understand the posed
phonological question -- and determine if there is indeed a monogenetic
connection, (which is what musicologists have been trying to do for
years).

But how could we go about such a task?  Well, one way at least is by
seeking substantive universals.  For instance, in the realm of
phonology, if we analyze language from the most fundamental point of
view -- that of sound itself -- we find that there are some striking
similarities between music and speech.

The differences are indeed more obvious, but they are also more
superficial, whereas the similarities are more 'profound,' and at
least as striking as the differences.  Perhaps this is why opera is
often considered the most effective form of human expression, as well
as musical.

But why have I digressed into mere theory less than scientific
speculation?  Because I hope I have been able to point out an
interesting idea that somewhere way back before the invention of the
lute, there must lurk a monogenetic connection between language and
music.  Although research seems to indicate that it is true, it is
not justifiable -- perhaps explaining why even musicologists are still
uncertain as to the origins of music (needless to say musical
appreciation).

Of course, I'm skipping enormous numbers of other substantive
universals which are analyzed by musicologists (such as descriptive
features, syntax and semantics, for example) to reveal the origins of
music.  But I think that it is somewhat evident that these substantive
universals played a key role in the developmental stages of music.

However, rather than confining the answer to "universal endowment,"
I would like the points offered here to be merely a suggestion so as
to subject the reader to personal consent.  But one thing I believe in
which there is no doubt, is our common linguistic origins and innate
abilities which differentiate us from all other species.  We have an
amazingly large quantity of extraordinary attributes in which we retain
a great measure of pride.  And indeed, music is one of them.

Nathan Bello