This article discusses the form of communication that Gibbon monkeys use amongst their species. The argument that appears to be present throughout this article is that Gibbons are not only able to communicate with each other, but also that their communication system shares certain features with the human language system. Although I agree that this species’ communication system shares particular design features with the human language, the definition of language attests that this type of communication is not considered a language.
The first of the five core design features discussed throughout this paper is semanticity. Semanticity is defined as specific sound signals that are directly tied to certain meanings (Bauer, 2006, pp. 49-57). Gibbons emit their vocalizations, or calls, or certain reasons including responding and or warning of predators and as part of their daily mating routine. The most important aspect to note here is that while they may be subtle, there are differences between these two types of Gibbons songs. This indicates that these animals have a clear understanding of the different meanings behind the sounds that they are producing.
The Gibbon monkey also demonstrates the arbitrariness design feature of human language. Arbitrariness is defined as having no intrinsic or logical connection between a sound signal and its meaning (Bauer, 2006, pp. 49-57). This is further demonstrated by the fact that different communication systems, human or not, attribute very different names to the same object. While the exact sounds of these monkey’s calls are not known from this article, it is however determined that their songs and or calls have no natural connection to the object that is being symbolized.
Another core ...
... middle of paper ...
...s to create meaningful words, because the Gibbons are combining various sounds to create multifaceted structures that are meaningful to them. However, there is no way to know whether or not those sounds (‘wa’,’hoo’,’waoo’, etc.) are meaningless units and cannot stand alone to represent meaningful terms. This critical factor determines that this species does not demonstrate duality of patterning in their communication system.
Reference List
Bauer, L., Holmes, J., & Warren, P. (2006). Bee Talk and Monkey Chatter . Language matters (pp. 49-57). Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
Public Library of Science. (2006, December 26). “Singing For Survival: Gibbons Scare Off Predators With 'Song'.” ScienceDaily. Retrieved February 3, 2014 from www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/12/061221074623.htm
Chimpanzees make tools and use them to procure foods and for social exhibitions; they have refined hunting tactics requiring collaboration, influence and rank; they are status cognizant, calculating and capable of trickery; they can learn to use symbols and understand facets of human language including some interpersonal composition, concepts of number and numerical sequence and they are proficient in spontaneous preparation for a future state or event.
While there are noticeable by differences in social conduct between these two primates, I argue that they are extra of similar behaviors than most books have suggested. This book portrays several reasons that modern views of bonobo and chimpanzee cultures may not harmonize well with ground data. Bonobos are derived since their behavior has been defined lately than that of chimpanzees, and the likelihood that explanations of bonobo-chimpanzee differences are echoes of human male-female alterations.
“…animals, plants and even “inert” entities such as stones and rivers are perceived as being articulate and at times intelligible subjects, able to communicate and interact with humans for good or ill. In addition to human language, there is also the language of birds, the wind, earthworms, wolves and waterfalls – a world of autonomous speakers whose intents (especially for hunter-gatherer peoples) one ignores at one’s peril” (Manes 15).
How can it be that something so uniquely human and commonplace in our everyday existence as language, could transcend the limits of our immediate understanding? We all know how to speak and comprehend at least one language, but defining what we actually know about that language an infinitely more demanding process. How can a child without previous knowledge of the construction and concepts of language be born into the world with an innate ability to apprehend any dialect? Mark Baker, in his book The Atoms of Language, seeks to address these unsettling questions, proposing as a solution, a set of underlying linguistic ingredients, which interact to generate the wide variety of languages we see today.
The prehistoric times stand evidence to the power of language as a tool for communication and growth. Language has proven to be an effective medium and factor surrounding the evolution of man. Language has played a big role in the development of individuals and societies. What is spoken and/or written, help in the initiation of imagination, expression of feelings, and conveyance of thoughts and ideas. “The pen is mightier than the sword” (Bulwer-Lytton 1839).
4. Due to lack of facial Muscles they cannot make facial changes that other primates use to communicate.
Snowdon, C. T., Brown, C. H., & Petersen, M. R. (1982). Primate communication. Cambridge [Cambridgeshire: Cambridge University Press].
9. Research on the language capabilities of apes clearly demonstrates that they have the capacity to:
Language is commonly held to be the province of humans, but other inhabitants of earth possess their own forms of communication. Birds, dolphins, and whales are some of those that have a language. Primates also use vocal communication with each other. Their utterances have varied uses and volumes, with each primate’s voice being distinct just as human voices are. These unique calls have given researchers insight into the social workings of primate groups. The very fact that primates have a language offers insight into the evolution of language and calls into question what the term human truly means.
Johanson, Donald C., and Blake Edgar. From Lucy to Language. New York: Simon and Schuster, 2006. Print.
Reaching into Thought: The Minds of the Great Apes, ed. A. E. Russon, K. A. Bard & S. T. Parker, pp. 257–77. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
This article, titled Common Ground, written by Barbara Smuts, points out the main differences between humans and apes, such as our upright stance, large brains, and capacity for spoken language and abstract reasoning. However, the main point of this article is to emphasize the many similarities that apes share with us. Smuts goes into great detail about how human social and emotional tendencies are very reflective in the family of apes.
Continuing with the thread of human development, we see the creature's acquisition of language. The creature most craves this sort of knowledge:...
Killer whales communicate by a series of clicks and whistles called vocalization. Each pod, or family, has their own unique language. This gives whales the ability to identify their own pods. Orcas have a brain that is about five ti...
Moreover, when we have the discussion of a "snake", all the people around the globe, except in Arctic and Antarctica regions, have almost the same approach that a "snake" crawls, not flies or swims. In addition, language can be arbitrary in terms of grammar and structure, but it is not arbitrary in its representation of human experience of tangible objects.