Consider an island upon which several dozen people are stranded. Each person speaks a unique and characteristically different language. No one understands each other in a linguistic sense. Given enough time together one would assume that a means of effective communication between the group would develop and all participants would come to agree upon a way of speaking or communicating.

What do you suppose would happen in this situation? One theory is that their respective languages would be co-adopted and integrated to form a new language completely separate from the originals but having similarities to all of them. Much like how English is an amalgamation of Germanic languages, latin languages and Archaic Anglo-Saxon Native dialects with multiple contributions.

But another theory would suggest that the most easily transmissible (ie the easiest language to learn - perhaps that with the fewest rules or complexity) would come to dominate.

However what may be more important is the language that demonstrates the greatest utility to their situation. Suppose that maybe one individual has a sort of body language - using gestures and signs to show intention. In a survival situation on the island maybe body language and non verbal cues would over power the typical spoken languages of modern cultures as many believe body language is universal in many ways to all people as we all have similar anatomy and facial expressions.

But perhaps only one language is necessary regardless of complexity, ease of use, utility etc and that the simplest and most effective solution could be just choosing one person to teach the rest their language to the best of their ability. It is unlikely however that this would be possible as at best the group could only interpret his language as well as everyone else’s interpretation of his language.

The problem is outlined in the following situation. A woman is chosen to teach her language “Speakanese” to the rest of the group. She points at a stone on the ground and says “Pudlin” ... to some they correctly associate “pudlin” with their version of “stone” in their own language.

However others will believe she is referring maybe to the earth/ground. Or to the colour of the rock or the texture or the density. So now we have several variations of the word “pudlin” ascribed to “stone”, “hard” “grey” “earth” and maybe “small” “low” “round” “heavy”.

This is an issue in accurate communication. A resolution may come in the form of affirmations. Maybe someone picks up another grey object and asks “pudlin?” To which the woman shakes her head and says no and frowns. Then another picks up a stone and says “pudlin!” And she smiles and nods. In this way the meaning of “pudlin can be made accurate. It means “stone” not “grey”.

This could work however it’s an incredibly slow endeavour. With a small group I think that eventually they would form a language similar to “speakenese” but not identical as the woman would likely have to compromise when the group fails to understand meaning.

The size of the population is likely to also have a huge impact. The more people involved the more likely a fractured system of languages would evolved each dialectically different to each other.
Thoughts?