Bichakjian's explanation for this occurrence sits in brain development. According to him, head-last constructions use resources of the right hemisphere rather than the resources of the left hemisphere of the brain. The right hemisphere is involved with spatial references where as the left hemisphere is involved with analytical and linear activities, specifically temporal references. This begs the question; if language is a specialization of finely tuned right hand control, which is a left brain function, how can a head-last language be the product of right brain resources? Language is a function of the left brain as it is a linear production that involves temporal sequencing but in the case of head-last constructions, left brain resources are possibly directly stimulated from proprioceptions of the right brain. Hence, the syntactic objects of a head-last language are structured in a spatial manner. That is, the construction of sentences in head-last languages have to be apprehended as a whole before the specific syntactic strategy that is occasioned in an exchange, is inferred. In effect a head-last construction sets up a spatial relation between vocables.
It is not clear how the migration from right to left hemisphere has occurred. It is also not entirely clear what are the benefits of such a shift. It may be related to an increasing exploitation of left situated synaptic structure related to the fine-tuning of ballistic motions, as Calvin suggests . It may be that the capacity to fine-tune a movement is extended to the fine-tuning and an increasing by expert use of language.
There are sufficient reasons to think that, as a physical phenomenon, language will be subject to environmental pressures through which it may become more efficient. As such, language must comply with the most elemental features of Nature. This is why, in the following chapters, we will describe how the language of Physics can be co-opted for the purpose of a theory of language.