Do Animals Posses Bt Images Like Humans

Do Animals Posses Bt Images Like Humans

Circuitous beast communication

Beast languages are forms of non-homo brute advice that show similarities to human language. Animals communicate by using a diversity of signs such as sounds or movements. Such signing may exist considered complex enough to be chosen a form of linguistic communication if the inventory of signs is large, the signs are relatively arbitrary, and the animals seem to produce them with a degree of volition (as opposed to relatively automated conditioned behaviors or unconditioned instincts, normally including facial expressions). In experimental tests, animal advice may too be evidenced through the use of lexigrams (as used by chimpanzees and bonobos).

Many researchers argue that beast communication lacks a key aspect of human being linguistic communication, that is, the creation of new patterns of signs under varied circumstances. (In contrast, for case, humans routinely produce entirely new combinations of words.) Some researchers, including the linguist Charles Hockett, argue that man language and animal communication differ so much that the underlying principles are unrelated. ^[ane] Appropriately, linguist Thomas A. Sebeok has proposed to not utilize the term "linguistic communication" for animal sign systems. ^[2] Marc Hauser, Noam Chomsky, and W. Tecumseh Fitch assert an evolutionary continuum exists between the communication methods of animal and human linguistic communication. ^[iii]

Aspects of homo language [ edit ]

The following properties of human language have been argued to separate it from animal communication: ^[4]

• Arbitrariness : at that place is usually no rational relationship betwixt a sound or sign and its pregnant. ^[5] For example, there is cypher intrinsically house-similar about the word "house".
• Discreteness: linguistic communication is composed of small, repeatable parts (discrete units) that are used in combination to create meaning.
• Displacement: languages can be used to communicate ideas about things that are not in the immediate vicinity either spatially or temporally. ^[v]
• Duality of patterning: the smallest meaningful units (words, morphemes) consist of sequences of units without meaning. ^[five] This is likewise referred to every bit double articulation.
• Productivity: users can sympathise and create an indefinitely large number of utterances. ^[v]
• Semanticity : specific signals accept specific meanings. ^[5]

Inquiry with apes, similar that of Francine Patterson with Koko ^[6] (gorilla) or Allen and Beatrix Gardner with Washoe ^{[7] [8]} (chimpanzee), suggested that apes are capable of using linguistic communication that meets some of these requirements such every bit arbitrariness, discreteness, and productivity. ^[ix]

In the wild, chimpanzees have been seen "talking" to each other when alert about approaching danger. For example, if ane chimpanzee sees a snake, he makes a low, rumbling noise, signaling for all the other chimps to climb into nearby copse. In this case, the chimpanzees' communication does not indicate displacement, as information technology is entirely contained to an observable outcome.

Arbitrariness has been noted in meerkat calls; bee dances demonstrate elements of spatial displacement; and cultural manual has peradventure occurred between the celebrated bonobos Kanzi and Panbanisha. ^[10]

Human language may not exist completely "arbitrary." Research has shown that about all humans naturally demonstrate express crossmodal perception (east.one thousand.synesthesia) and multisensory integration, every bit illustrated by the Kiki and Booba study. ^{[11] [12]} Other recent inquiry has tried to explain how the structure of man language emerged, comparing 2 unlike aspects of hierarchical structure present in animal communication and proposing that human language arose out of these two separate systems. ^[13]

Claims that animals have language skills akin to humans notwithstanding, are extremely controversial. Equally Steven Pinker illustrates in his book The Language Instinct, claims that chimpanzees tin can acquire language are exaggerated and rest on very express or specious data. ^[xiv]

The American linguist Charles Hockett theorized that there are sixteen features of human being linguistic communication that distinguished human communication from that of animals. He called these the design features of language. The features mentioned below take so far been found in all spoken human languages and at least one is missing from all other creature communication systems.

• Song-auditory channel: sounds emitted from the mouth and perceived by the auditory system. ^[v] This applies to many animal communication systems, but there are many exceptions. Ex. An alternative to song-auditory communication is visual communication. An example is cobras extending the ribs behind their heads to send the message of intimidation or of feeling threatened. ^[15] In humans, sign languages provide many examples of fully formed languages that utilise a visual aqueduct.
• Broadcast transmission and directional reception: ^[5] this requires that the recipient tin tell the direction that the signal comes from and thus the originator of the signal.
• Rapid fading (transitory nature): Signal lasts a short time. ^[5] This is true of all systems involving sound. It does not take into account audio recording applied science and is also not true for written language. It tends non to apply to animal signals involving chemicals and smells which often fade slowly. For example, a skunk'due south smell, produced in its glands, lingers to deter a predator from attacking. ^[16]
• Interchangeability: All utterances that are understood can be produced. ^[5] This is dissimilar from some communication systems where, for example, males produce ane set of behaviours and females another and they are unable to interchange these letters so that males utilise the female person signal and vice versa. For example, Heliothine moths take differentiated communication: females are able to send a chemic to indicate preparedness to mate, while males cannot send the chemical. ^[17]
• Total feedback: The sender of a message is enlightened of the bulletin beingness sent. ^[v]
• Specialization: The signal produced is intended for communication and is not due to some other behavior. ^[5] For example, dog panting is a natural reaction to beingness overheated, but is not produced to specifically relay a particular bulletin.
• Semanticity: There is some fixed relationship between a signal and a meaning. ^[v]

Primate: studied examples [ edit ]

Humans are able to distinguish existent words from fake words based on the phonological society of the word itself. In a 2013 study, baboons have been shown to have this skill, as well. The discovery has led researchers to believe that reading is non every bit avant-garde a skill as previously believed, but instead based on the ability to recognize and distinguish letters from one another. The experimental setup consisted of vi immature adult baboons, and results were measured by assuasive the animals to employ a impact screen and selecting whether or not the displayed give-and-take was indeed a real word, or a nonword such every bit "dran" or "telk." The study lasted for 6 weeks, with approximately fifty,000 tests completed in that fourth dimension. The experimenters explain the use of bigrams, which are combinations of two (usually different) letters. They tell us that the bigrams used in nonwords are rare, while the bigrams used in real words are more common. Farther studies volition attempt to teach baboons how to employ an artificial alphabet. ^[18]

In a 2016 study, a squad of biologists from several universities concluded that macaques possess vocal tracts physically capable of speech, "merely lack a speech-fix brain to command it". ^{[19] [20]}

Non-primates: studied examples [ edit ]

Among the nigh studied examples of creature languages are:

Birds [ edit ]

• Bird songs: Songbirds can be very articulate. Grayness parrots are famous for their power to mimic human language, and at to the lowest degree ane specimen, Alex, appeared able to answer a number of simple questions about objects he was presented with. Parrots, hummingbirds and songbirds – brandish vocal learning patterns.

Insects [ edit ]

• Bee dance: Used to communicate direction and distance of food source in many species of bees.

Mammals [ edit ]

• African wood elephants: Cornell University's Elephant Listening Projection ^[21] began in 1999 when Katy Payne began studying the calls of African forest elephants in Dzanga National Park in the Central African Commonwealth. Andrea Turkalo has connected Payne'southward work in Dzanga National Park observing elephant advice. ^[22] For nearly 20 years, Turkalo has spent the bulk of her fourth dimension using a spectrogram to record the noises that the elephants make. Afterwards all-encompassing ascertainment and research, she has been able to recognize elephants past their voices. Researchers promise to interpret these voices into an elephant dictionary, simply that will likely not occur for many years. Because elephant calls are frequently made at very depression frequencies, this spectrogram is able to detect lower frequencies that human ears are unable to hear, allowing Turkalo to become a better idea of what she perceives the elephants to exist maxim. Cornell'southward enquiry on African forest elephants has challenged the idea that humans are considerably better at using language and that animals only have a small-scale repertoire of information that they tin can convey to others. As Turkalo explained on 60 Minutes' "The Secret Language of Elephants," "Many of their calls are in some ways similar to human speech." ^[23]
• Mustached bats: Since these animals spend well-nigh of their lives in the night, they rely heavily on their auditory organization to communicate. This audio-visual communication includes echolocation or using calls to locate each other in the darkness. Studies take shown that mustached bats utilize a wide variety of calls to communicate with ane another. These calls include 33 different sounds, or "syllables," that the bats and so either use alone or combine in various ways to form "composite" syllables. ^[24]
• Prairie dogs: Dr. Con Slobodchikoff studied prairie canis familiaris communication and discovered:
  • unlike alert calls for different species of predators;
  • different escape behaviors for unlike species of predators;
  • transmission of semantic information, in that playbacks of alarm calls in the absence of predators atomic number 82 to escape behaviors that are advisable to the type of predator which elicited the warning calls;
  • alert calls containing descriptive data near the general size, color, and speed of travel of the predator. ^[25]

Aquatic mammals [ edit ]

• Bottlenose dolphins: Dolphins can hear one another up to 6 miles apart underwater. ^[26] In one National Geographic commodity, the success of a female parent dolphin communicating with her baby using a telephone was outlined. Researchers noted that information technology appeared that both dolphins knew who they were speaking with and what they were speaking most. Not but do dolphins communicate via nonverbal cues, just they too seem to chatter and respond to other dolphin's vocalizations. ^[27]

Spectrogram of humpback whale vocalizations. Detail is shown for the showtime 24 seconds of the 37 2nd recording humpback whale "vocal". The ethereal whale "songs" and echolocation "clicks" are visible every bit horizontal striations and vertical sweeps respectively.

• Whales: Two groups of whales, the humpback whale and a subspecies of blue whale constitute in the Indian Ocean, are known to produce repetitious sounds at varying frequencies known every bit whale song. Male person humpback whales perform these vocalizations only during the mating season, and and so it is surmised the purpose of songs is to aid sexual selection. Humpbacks also make a sound called a feeding call, five to ten seconds in length of near constant frequency. Humpbacks mostly feed cooperatively past gathering in groups, swimming underneath shoals of fish and all lunging up vertically through the fish and out of the water together. Prior to these lunges, whales make their feeding call. The exact purpose of the call is not known, just inquiry suggests that fish react to it. When the sound was played dorsum to them, a group of herring responded to the sound by moving away from the call, even though no whale was nowadays.
• Sea lions: Get-go in 1971 and continuing until present day, Dr. Ronald J. Schusterman and his research assembly have studied sea lions' cognitive ability. They accept discovered that sea lions are able to recognize relationships between stimuli based on similar functions or connections fabricated with their peers, rather than only the stimuli'south common features. This is chosen "equivalence nomenclature". This ability to recognize equivalence may exist a precursor to language. ^[28] Research is currently being conducted at the Pinniped Knowledge & Sensory Systems Laboratory to determine how sea lions course these equivalence relationships. Sea lions take also been proven to exist able to understand uncomplicated syntax and commands when taught an artificial sign language similar to the i used with primates. ^[29] The ocean lions studied were able to learn and use a number of syntactic relations between the signs they were taught, such as how the signs should exist arranged in relation to each other. However, the ocean lions rarely used the signs semantically or logically. ^[30] In the wild it's thought that bounding main lions use the reasoning skills associated with equivalence classification in order to make of import decisions that can affect their charge per unit of survival (e.1000. recognizing friends and family unit or avoiding enemies and predators). ^[28] Ocean lions use the following to brandish their language:
  • Sea lions employ their bodies in diverse postural positions to display communication. ^[31]
  • Sea lion'southward vocal cords limit their ability to convey sounds to a range of barks, chirps, clicks, moans, growls and squeaks.
  • In that location has still to be an experiment which proves for certain that sea lions use echolocation as a means of advice. ^[32]

The effects of learning on auditory signaling in these animals is of special interest. Several investigators have pointed out that some marine mammals appear to have an extraordinary chapters to change both the contextual and structural features of their vocalizations as a issue of experience. Janik and Slater (2000) have stated that learning can modify the emission of vocalizations in i of two means: (i) by influencing the context in which a particular bespeak is used and/or (2) past altering the acoustic structure of the call itself. ^[33] Male California body of water lions can acquire to inhibit their barking in the presence of whatever male ascendant to them, simply vocalize usually when ascendant males are absent-minded. ^[34] Contempo work on greyness seals evidence unlike call types can be selectively conditioned and placed nether biased control of different cues ^[35] (Schusterman, in printing) and the use of food reinforcement can also modify song emissions. "Hoover", a captive male person harbor seal demonstrated a convincing case of vocal mimicry. All the same similar observations take non been reported since. Notwithstanding shows under the right circumstances pinnipeds may utilise auditory experience, in addition to environmental consequences such as nutrient reinforcement and social feedback to modify their song emissions.

In a 1992 study, Robert Gisiner and Ronald J. Schusterman conducted experiments in which they attempted to teach Rocky, a female California sea lion, syntax. ^[30] Rocky was taught signed words, and so she was asked to perform various tasks dependent on give-and-take club later on viewing a signed instruction. Information technology was found that Rocky was able to determine relations between signs and words, and course a basic grade of syntax. ^[30] A 1993 study by Ronald J Schusterman and David Kastak found that the California sea lion was capable of understanding abstruse concepts such as symmetry, sameness and transitivity. This provides a strong bankroll to the theory that equivalence relations can class without language.

The distinctive sound of bounding main lions is produced both above and below h2o. To mark territory, sea lions "bark", with non-alpha males making more noise than alphas. Although females also bark, they do so less oft and about frequently in connexion with birthing pups or caring for their young. Females produce a highly directional tearful vocalization, the pup attraction phone call, which helps mother and pup locate one another. As noted in Fauna Behavior, their amphibious lifestyle has fabricated them need audio-visual advice for social organization while on land.

Body of water lions can hear frequencies as depression as 100 Hz and as high as 40,000 Hz and vocalize between the ranges of 100 to 10,000 Hz. ^[36]

Mollusks [ edit ]

• Caribbean reef squid have been shown to communicate using a variety of color, shape, and texture changes. Squid are capable of rapid changes in skin colour and pattern through nervous control of chromatophores. ^[37] In improver to camouflage and actualization larger in the face of a threat, squids use color, patterns, and flashing to communicate with 1 some other in various courtship rituals. Caribbean reef squid can send one message via color patterns to a squid on their right, while they ship another message to a squid on their left. ^{[38] [39]}

Comparison of the terms "animal language" and "animal communication" [ edit ]

It is worth distinguishing "animal language" from "animate being advice", although there is some comparative interchange in certain cases (e.g. Cheney & Seyfarth'southward vervet monkey phone call studies). ^[forty] Thus "animal language" typically does not include bee dancing, bird song, whale vocal, dolphin signature whistles, prairie dogs, nor the communicative systems institute in well-nigh social mammals.^{[ citation needed ]} The features of linguistic communication as listed above are a dated conception by Hockett in 1960. Through this conception Hockett made one of the earliest attempts to break down features of human linguistic communication for the purpose of applying Darwinian gradualism. Although an influence on early animal linguistic communication efforts (meet below), is today not considered the key compages at the core of "animal linguistic communication" research.^{[ commendation needed ]}

"Clever Hans", an Orlov Trotter horse that was claimed to have been able to perform arithmetics and other intellectual tasks.

Animal Language results are controversial for several reasons. (For a related controversy, run into too Clever Hans.) In the 1970s, John C. Lilly was attempting to "break the code": to fully communicate ideas and concepts with wild populations of dolphins so that we could "speak" to them, and share our cultures, histories, and more. This effort failed. Early chimpanzee work was with chimpanzee infants raised every bit if they were human; a test of the nature vs. nurture hypothesis.^{[ citation needed ]} Chimpanzees have a laryngeal structure very different from that of humans, and it has been suggested that chimpanzees are not capable of voluntary control of their breathing, although better studies are needed to accurately confirm this. This combination is thought to make it very difficult for the chimpanzees to reproduce the vocal intonations required for human linguistic communication. Researchers eventually moved towards a gestural (sign linguistic communication) modality, as well as "keyboard" devices laden with buttons adorned with symbols (known every bit "lexigrams") that the animals could printing to produce artificial linguistic communication. Other chimpanzees learned by observing human subjects performing the task.^{[ commendation needed ]} This latter grouping of researchers studying chimpanzee communication through symbol recognition (keyboard) as well equally through the utilize of sign linguistic communication (gestural), are on the forefront of chatty breakthroughs in the study of animal language, and they are familiar with their subjects on a first name basis: Sarah, Lana, Kanzi, Koko, Sherman, Austin and Chantek.^{[ citation needed ]}

Perhaps the best known critic of "Animal Language" is Herbert Terrace. Terrace's 1979 criticism using his own inquiry with the chimpanzee Nim Chimpsky ^{[41] [42]} was scathing and basically spelled the stop of animal language research in that era, almost of which emphasized the production of language by animals. In short, he accused researchers of over-interpreting their results, especially equally it is rarely parsimonious to ascribe true intentional "language production" when other simpler explanations for the behaviors (gestural hand signs) could be put forth. Too, his animals failed to prove generalization of the concept of reference between the modalities of comprehension and production; this generalization is 1 of many fundamental ones that are trivial for human linguistic communication use. The simpler explanation according to Terrace was that the animals had learned a sophisticated series of context-based behavioral strategies to obtain either main (food) or social reinforcement, behaviors that could be over-interpreted as linguistic communication use.

In 1984 during this anti-Animal Linguistic communication backlash, Louis Herman published an account of artificial language in the bottlenosed dolphin in the journal Noesis. ^[43] A major difference betwixt Herman's work and previous research was his emphasis on a method of studying language comprehension only (rather than linguistic communication comprehension and production past the animal(s)), which enabled rigorous controls and statistical tests, largely because he was limiting his researchers to evaluating the animals' physical behaviors (in response to sentences) with blinded observers, rather than attempting to interpret possible linguistic communication utterances or productions. The dolphins' names here were Akeakamai and Phoenix. ^[43] Irene Pepperberg used the vocal modality for language product and comprehension in a grayness parrot named Alex in the verbal style, ^{[44] [45] [46] [47]} and Sue Barbarous-Rumbaugh continues to study bonobos ^{[48] [49]} such as Kanzi and Panbanisha. R. Schusterman duplicated many of the dolphin results in his California sea lions ("Rocky"), and came from a more than behaviorist tradition than Herman's cognitive arroyo. Schusterman's emphasis is on the importance on a learning structure known every bit "equivalence classes." ^{[50] [51]}

Yet, overall, there has not been any meaningful dialog between the linguistics and animal language spheres, despite capturing the public's imagination in the popular press. Also, the growing field of language evolution is some other source of futurity interchange betwixt these disciplines. Most primate researchers tend to show a bias toward a shared pre-linguistic ability between humans and chimpanzees, dating dorsum to a common ancestor, while dolphin and parrot researchers stress the general cognitive principles underlying these abilities. More than recent related controversies regarding fauna abilities include the closely linked areas of Theory of mind, False (e.g. Nehaniv & Dautenhahn, 2002), ^[52] Animal Civilization (e.g. Rendell & Whitehead, 2001), ^[53] and Language Evolution (eastward.g. Christiansen & Kirby, 2003). ^[54]

There has been a contempo emergence in animal language research which has contested the idea that brute advice is less sophisticated than human communication. Denise Herzing has done research on dolphins in the Bahama islands whereby she created a two-way conversation via a submerged keyboard. ^[55] The keyboard allows divers to communicate with wild dolphins. By using sounds and symbols on each key the dolphins could either press the key with their olfactory organ or mimic the whistling sound emitted in order to enquire humans for a specific prop. This ongoing experiment has shown that in non-linguistic creatures bright and rapid thinking does occur despite our previous conceptions of brute communication. Further enquiry washed with Kanzi using lexigrams has strengthened the idea that animate being communication is much more complex than we once thought. ^[56]

See likewise [ edit ]

• Animal cognition
• Animal advice
• Animal consciousness
• Beast civilization
• Animal training
• Bioacoustics
• Biosemiotics
• Bang-up ape language
• Human being–animal communication
• Linguistics
• Operant conditioning
• Origin of language
• Origin of speech
• Sign linguistic communication
• Talking animate being
• Talking Birds
• Theory of mind
• Yerkish
• Zoosemiotics

Researchers [ edit ]

• Deborah Fouts
• Roger Fouts
• Erich Jarvis
• Mary Lee Jensvold
• David Premack
• Michael Tomasello
• Frans de Waal
• Con Slobodchikoff

Animals [ edit ]

• Batyr (Asian elephant)
• Greater spot-nosed monkey
• N'kisi (grey parrot)
• Koko (gorilla)
• Parrots, hummingbirds, domestic mink, songbirds

References [ edit ]

1. ^ Hockett, Charles F. (1960). "Logical considerations in the study of animal communication". In Lanyon, W.E.; Tavolga, W.N. (eds.). Animals sounds and beast communication. American Institute of Biological Sciences. pp. 392–430.
2. ^ Martinelli, Dario (2010). "Introduction to Zoosemiotics". A Critical Companion to Zoosemiotics. Biosemiotics. Vol. v. pp. one–64. doi:x.1007/978-90-481-9249-6_1. ISBN 978-ninety-481-9248-ix .
3. ^ Hauser, Marc D.; Chomsky, Noam; Fitch, W. Tecumseh (22 November 2002). "The Faculty of Language: What Is It, Who Has Information technology, and How Did It Evolve?" (PDF). Science. American Association for the Advancement of Science. pp. 1569–1579. Archived from the original (PDF) on 28 Dec 2013. Retrieved 28 March 2014. We fence that an agreement of the faculty of language requires substantial interdisciplinary cooperation. Nosotros propose how electric current developments in linguistics can be profitably wedded to work in evolutionary biology, anthropology, psychology, and neuroscience. We submit that a distinction should be made between the faculty of linguistic communication in the wide sense (FLB)and in the narrow sense (FLN). FLB includes a sensory-motor system, a conceptual-intentional system, and the computational mechanisms for recursion, providing the capacity to generate an infinite range of expressions from a finite ready of elements. We hypothesize that FLN only includes recursion and is the simply uniquely human being component of the faculty of language. Nosotros further argue that FLN may accept evolved for reasons other than language, hence comparative studies might await for show of such computations outside of the domain of communication (for case, number, navigation, and social relations).
4. ^ Denham, Kristin; Lobeck, Anne (2010). Linguistics for Everyone: An Introduction (Instructor's ed.). Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. pp. 4–5. ISBN 9781428205833 .
5. ^ ^{a b c d e f g h i j one thousand l} Fitch, WT. (Feb 2011). "Unity and diversity in human language". Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 366 (1563): 376–88. doi:10.1098/rstb.2010.0223. PMC 3013471 . PMID21199842.
6. ^ Patterson, Francine; Linden, Eugene (1981). The education of Kok. New York: Holt. ISBN 978-0-03-046101-ix . OCLC7283799.
7. ^ Gardner, R. A.; Gardner, B. T. (1969). "Teaching Sign Language to a Chimpanzee". Scientific discipline. 165 (3894): 664–672. Bibcode:1969Sci...165..664G. CiteSeerX 10.ane.1.384.4164 . doi:ten.1126/science.165.3894.664. ISSN0036-8075. PMID5793972.
8. ^ Gardner, B.T.; Gardner, R.A. (1975). "Evidence for judgement constituents in the early utterances of child and chimpanzee". Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 104 (3): 244–267. doi:x.1037/0096-3445.104.3.244.
9. ^ Fernández, Eva M.; Cairns, Helen Smith (2011). Fundamentals of psycholinguistic. Chichester, West Sussex [England] ; Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. ISBN 978-one-4051-9147-0 . OCLC667883441.
10. ^ Raffaele, P (Nov 2006). "Speaking Bonobo". Smithsonian . Retrieved 2008-03-18 .
11. ^ Maurer, D.; Pathman, T.; Mondloch, CJ. (May 2006). "The shape of boubas: sound-shape correspondences in toddlers and adults". Dev Sci. 9 (3): 316–22. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2006.00495.ten. PMID16669803.
12. ^ Kubovy, M.; Yu, M. (Apr 2012). "Multistability, cantankerous-modal binding and the additivity of conjoined grouping principles". Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 367 (1591): 954–64. doi:10.1098/rstb.2011.0365. PMC 3282311 . PMID22371617.
13. ^ Miyagawa, Shigeru (2013). "The emergence of hierarchical structure in human language". Frontiers in Psychology. 4: 71. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00071. PMC 3577014 . PMID23431042.
14. ^ Pinker, Steven (2000). The linguistic communication instinct : how the listen creates language. New York: Perennial Classics. ISBN 9780060958336 . OCLC45992871.
15. ^ Cobra Master (2003-12-12). "Introduction". Cobras.org. Retrieved 2013-05-19 .
16. ^ "Skunks, Skunk Pictures, Skunk Facts – National Geographic". Animals.nationalgeographic.com. 2013-05-15. Retrieved 2013-05-19 .
17. ^ Almaas, Torj.; Christensen, Thomasa.; Mustaparta, Hanna (1991-09-01). "Chemic communication in heliothine moths". Journal of Comparative Physiology A. 169 (3). doi:x.1007/BF00206989. S2CID20567271.
18. ^ Haghighat, Leila (2012). "Baboons Can Learn to Recognize Words". Nature News. doi:x.1038/nature.2012.10432. S2CID178872255 . Retrieved 15 April 2013.
19. ^ Fitch, W. T.; de Boer, B.; Mathur, N.; Ghazanfar, A. A. (December 2016). "Monkey song tracts are speech-prepare". Science Advances . 2 (12): e1600723. Bibcode:2016SciA....2E0723F. doi:10.1126/sciadv.1600723. PMC 5148209 . PMID27957536.
20. ^ "Why can't monkeys talk? Their beefcake is 'oral communication-ready' but their brains aren't wired for it: neuroscientist". National Post . Retrieved x December 2016.
21. ^ "The Elephant Listening Project". Cornell University. Retrieved 28 December 2013.
22. ^ "The Elephant Listening Projection". Cornell Academy Lab. Retrieved 2013-02-24 .
23. ^ "The Secret Language of Elephants". CBS News lx Minutes. Retrieved 2013-02-24 .
24. ^ Kanwal, J.S.; Matsumura, S.; Ohlemiller, K.; Suga, Northward. (1994). "Analysis of acoustic elements and syntax in advice sounds emitted by mustached bats". Periodical of the Acoustical Society of America. 94 (3): 1229–1254. Bibcode:1994ASAJ...96.1229K. doi:x.1121/1.410273. PMID7962992.
25. ^ "Con Slobodchikoff". nau.edu . Retrieved x December 2016.
26. ^ "Dolphins' Secret Language". Young People's Trust for the Environs. 29 February 2012. Archived from the original on 27 August 2012.
27. ^ "The Secret Language of Dolphins". National Geographic Kids. Retrieved 2013-03-31 .
28. ^ ^{a b} "NOVA scienceNOW: Smart Marine Mammals – Smart Sea Lions". teachersdomain.org . Retrieved ten Dec 2016.
29. ^ http://www.pinnipedlab.org/ Archived 2012-01-18 at the Wayback Motorcar The Pinniped Knowledge & Sensory Systems Laboratory
30. ^ ^{a b c} Gisiner, Robert; Schusterman, Ronald J. (1992). "Sequence, syntax, and semantics: Responses of a language-trained bounding main lion (Zalophus californianus) to novel sign combinations" (PDF). Journal of Comparative Psychology. 106 (1): 78–91. doi:10.1037/0735-7036.106.one.78. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2022-11-19. Retrieved 2013-12-28 .
31. ^ "CALIFORNIA SEA King of beasts – Communication". Seaworld.org. Retrieved 2013-05-nineteen .
32. ^ "Sea Lion Info – Dolphin Inquiry Center". dolphins.org . Retrieved 10 December 2016.
33. ^ Janik, VM.; Slater, PJ. (Jul 2000). "The dissimilar roles of social learning in vocal advice". Anim Behav. 60 (ane): 1–eleven. doi:ten.1006/anbe.2000.1410. PMID10924198. S2CID1839031.
34. ^ Schusterman, RJ.; Dawson, RG. (Apr 1968). "Barking, dominance, and territoriality in male sea lions". Science. 160 (3826): 434–half dozen. Bibcode:1968Sci...160..434S. doi:10.1126/science.160.3826.434. PMID5689412. S2CID28586877.
35. ^ Shapiro, AD.; Slater, PJ.; Janik, VM. (Dec 2004). "Call usage learning in grey seals (Halichoerus grypus)". J Comp Psychol. 118 (4): 447–54. doi:10.1037/0735-7036.118.4.447. PMID15584781.
36. ^ "Oceanography". Onr.navy.mil. Archived from the original on 2013-12-02. Retrieved 2013-05-nineteen .
37. ^ Cloney, RA; Florey, E (1968). "Ultrastructure of cephalopod chromatophore organs". Zeitschrift für Zellforschung und Mikroskopische Anatomie. 89 (ii): 250–80. doi:10.1007/BF00347297. PMID5700268. S2CID26566732.
38. ^ "Sepioteuthis sepioidea; Caribbean Reef squid". The Cephalopod Page. Retrieved 2013-05-19 .
39. ^ Byrne, R.A., U. Griebel, J.B. Wood & J.A. Mather 2003. "Squids say it with peel: a graphic model for skin displays in Caribbean Reef Squid" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2007-07-04. (3.86 MB) Berliner Geowissenschaftliche Abhandlungen 3: 29–35.
40. ^ Seyfarth, R. M.; Cheney, D.L. (1990). "The cess by vervet monkeys of their ain and other species' alarm calls". Fauna Behaviour. 40 (4): 754–764. doi:10.1016/S0003-3472(05)80704-3. S2CID33689834.
41. ^ Terrace, Herbert S. (1979). Nim . New York: Knopf : distributed past Random Firm. ISBN 978-0-394-40250-5 . OCLC5102119.
42. ^ Terrace, H.Due south.; Petitto, Fifty.A.; Sanders, R.J.; Bever, T.Thousand. (1979). "Tin an ape create a sentence?". Science. 206 (4421): 891–902. Bibcode:1979Sci...206..891T. doi:x.1126/science.504995. PMID504995. S2CID7517074.
43. ^ ^{a b} Herman, L. M.; Richards, D. Yard.; Wolz, J. P. (1984). "Comprehension of sentences by bottlenosed dolphins". Knowledge. xvi (ii): 129–219. doi:ten.1016/0010-0277(84)90003-9. PMID6540652. S2CID43237011.
44. ^ Pepperberg, Irene M. (1999). The Alex studies : cognitive and chatty abilities of grey parrot. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0-674-00051-3 . OCLC807730081.
45. ^ Pepperberg, IM. (Oct 2010). "Vocal learning in Greyness parrots: A cursory review of perception, production, and cross-species comparisons". Brain Lang. 115 (one): 81–91. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2009.11.002. PMID20229805. S2CID1744169.
46. ^ Pepperberg, IM.; Carey, S. (Nov 2012). "Grey parrot number conquering: the inference of fundamental value from ordinal position on the numeral list". Cognition. 125 (2): 219–32. doi:x.1016/j.cognition.2012.07.003. PMC 3434310 . PMID22878117.
47. ^ Pepperberg, IM. (Feb 2013). "Abstract concepts: information from a Grey parrot". Behav Processes. 93: 82–90. doi:x.1016/j.beproc.2012.09.016. PMID23089384. S2CID33278680.
48. ^ Savage-Rumbaugh, E. S. (1990). "Language Acquisition in a Nonhuman Species: Implications for the innateness debate". Developmental Psychobiology . 23 (7): 599–620. doi:10.1002/dev.420230706. PMID2286294.
49. ^ Savage-Rumbaugh, Due east. Due south.; Fields, W. M. (2000). "Linguistic, cultural and cognitive capacities of bonobos (Pan paniscus)". Culture and Psychology. half-dozen (2): 131–154. doi:x.1177/1354067X0062003. S2CID145714904.
50. ^ Schusterman, RJ.; Kastak, D. (May 1998). "Functional equivalence in a California body of water lion: relevance to animal social and communicative interactions". Anim Behav. 55 (5): 1087–95. doi:10.1006/anbe.1997.0654. PMID9632496. S2CID25316126.
51. ^ Kastak, CR.; Schusterman, RJ.; Kastak, D. (Sep 2001). "Equivalence classification by California body of water lions using form-specific reinforcers". J Exp Anal Behav. 76 (2): 131–58. doi:10.1901/jeab.2001.76-131. PMC 1284831 . PMID11599636.
52. ^ Nehaniv, Chrystopher; Dautenhahn, Kerstin (2002). Imitation in animals and artifacts. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. ISBN 9780262271219 . OCLC51938434.
53. ^ * Rendell, L.; Whitehead, H. (2001). "Culture in whales and dolphins". Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 24 (2): 309–382. doi:ten.1017/S0140525X0100396X. PMID11530544. S2CID24052064.
54. ^ Christiansen, Morten H.; Kirby, Simon (2003). Language evolution. Oxford ; New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-nineteen-924484-three . OCLC51235137.
55. ^ Herzing, Denise 50.; Delfour, Fabienne; Pack, Adam A. (2012). "Responses of human-habituated wild Atlantic Spotted Dolphins to play behaviours using a two-way human/dolphin interface" (PDF). International Periodical of Comparative Psychology. 25: 137–165.
56. ^ Savage-Rumbaugh, S.; Rumbaugh, D.; Fields, West. "Empirical kanzi: The ape language controversy revisited. (2009)". Skeptic. xv (i): 25–33. Archived from the original on 2013-05-18.

Further reading [ edit ]

• Bickerton, D. (2005). Language development: a brief guide for linguists. link
• Deacon, T. W. (1997) The Symbolic Species: The Co-evolution of Language and the Human Brain. Allen Lane: The Penguin Press, ISBN0-393-03838-vi
• Fitch, Due west.T.; Hauser, M.D. (2004). "Computational constraints on syntactic processing in a nonhuman primate" (PDF). Science. 303 (5656): 377–380. Bibcode:2004Sci...303..377F. doi:10.1126/science.1089401. PMID14726592. S2CID18306145.
• Fouts, R. S. (1973). "Conquering and testing of gestural signs in four young chimpanzees". Scientific discipline. 180 (4089): 978–80. Bibcode:1973Sci...180..978F. doi:10.1126/science.180.4089.978. PMID17735931. S2CID38389519.
• Gardner R. Allen and Gardner Beatrice T. (1980) Comparative psychology and language acquisition. In Thomas A. Sebok and Jean-Umiker-Sebok (eds.): Speaking of Apes: A Disquisitional Anthology of Two-Way Communication with Man. New York: Plenum Press, pp. 287–329.
• Gomez, R.L; Gerken, 50. (2000). "Infant bogus linguistic communication learning and language acquisition". Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 4 (5): 178–186. doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01467-four. PMID10782103. S2CID15933380.
• Goodall, J. (1964). "Tool Using and Aimed Throwing in a Community of Free-Living Chimpanzees". Nature. 201 (4926): 1264–1266. Bibcode:1964Natur.201.1264G. doi:ten.1038/2011264a0. PMID14151401. S2CID7967438.
• Hauser, M.D.; Chomsky, N.; Fitch, W.T. (2002). "The faculty of language: what is it, who has it, and how did it evolve?". Science. 298 (5598): 1569–1579. doi:10.1126/science.298.5598.1569. PMID12446899.
• Hayes, C. (1951). The Ape in Our House. New York: Harper & Row.
• Herman, L. M.; Forestell, P. H. (1985). "Reporting presence or absence of named objects past a language-trained dolphin". Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews. ix (iv): 667–691. doi:10.1016/0149-7634(85)90013-2. PMID4080284. S2CID6959236.
• Herman, L. M. Kuczaj; Holder, K. D.; Holder, Mark D. (1993). "Responses to dissonant gestural sequences by a language-trained dolphin: Show for processing of semantic relations and syntactic information". Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 122 (2): 184–194. doi:ten.1037/0096-3445.122.2.184. PMID8315399.
• Hockett, C. (1960). "The origin of speech". Scientific American. 203 (3): 88–96. Bibcode:1960SciAm.203c..88H. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0960-88. PMID14402211.
• Holder, M. D., Herman, 50. M. & Kuczaj, Southward. 3 (1993). A bottlenosed dolphin's responses to dissonant gestural sequences expressed inside an bogus gestural language. In H. R. Roitblat, L. M. Herman & P.E. Nachtigall (Eds): Language and Communication: Comparative Perspectives, 299–308. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Hurford J.R., Studdert-Kennedy, One thousand., & Knight, C. (Eds.) (1998) Approaches to the evolution of language: Social and cerebral bases. Cambridge: Cambridge Academy Press.
• Huxley, Julian & Ludwig Koch (photographs by Ylla) 1938. Creature language. Text past Julian Huxley, long-playing record of animal language by Ludwig Koch. London, Country Life. Reprinted and republished past Grosset & Dunlap, New York 1964. Record in the 1964 reissue is by Columbia Special Products, 33 1/3 rpm, pocket-sized format, ZVT 88894. Side 1 contains Sounds at the Zoo (presumably Zoological Society of London) and African sounds; side ii African sounds connected.
• Kako, Due east. (1999). "Elements of syntax in the systems of three linguistic communication-trained animals". Creature Learning & Beliefs. 27: 1–fourteen. doi: 10.3758/BF03199424 .
• Kanwal, J.Southward.; Matsumura, S.; Ohlemiller, 1000.; Suga, N. (1994). "Analysis of acoustic elements and syntax in advice sounds emitted by mustached bats". Periodical of the Acoustical Society of America. 94 (three): 1229–1254. Bibcode:1994ASAJ...96.1229K. doi:x.1121/1.410273. PMID7962992.
• Kellogg, West.North., & Kellogg, L.A. (1933). The ape and the child. New York: Whittlesey House (McGraw-Hill).
• Knight, C., Studdert-Kennedy, M., Hurford, J.R. (Eds.) (2000). The evolutionary emergence of linguistic communication: Social function and the origins of linguistic form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Kohts. Northward. (1935). Infant ape and human child. Museum Darwinianum, Moscow.
• Ladygina-Kohts, Northward.N, & de Waal, F.B.Chiliad. (2002). Infant Chimpanzee and Human Child: A Classic 1935 Comparative Study of Ape Emotions and Intelligence (Tr: B. Vekker). New York: Oxford University Press.
• Lenneberg, Due east.H. (1971). "Of language, cognition, apes, and brains". Journal of Psycholinguistic Research. one (1): 1–29. doi:10.1007/BF01066934. PMID24197536. S2CID986088.
• Miles, H.L. (1990) "The cognitive foundations for reference in a signing orangutan" in S.T. Parker and K.R. Gibson (eds.) "Language" and intelligence in monkeys and apes: Comparative Developmental Perspectives. Cambridge Univ. Press.
• Pinker, S. (1984). Language Learnability and Language Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Reprinted in 1996 with additional commentary.
• Pinker, Due south.; Bloom, P. (1990). "Natural language and natural option". Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 13 (4): 707–784. CiteSeerX ten.1.1.116.4044 . doi:10.1017/S0140525X00081061.
• Plooij, F.10. (1978). "Some basic traits of language in wild chimpanzees?" in A. Lock (ed.) Activity, Gesture and Symbol. New York: Academic Press.
• Premack, D. (1971). "Language in a chimpanzee?". Science. 172 (3985): 808–822. Bibcode:1971Sci...172..808P. doi:10.1126/science.172.3985.808. PMID5572906.
• Roitblat, H.R., Herman, L.Grand. & Nachtigall, P.E. (Eds.)(1993). Language and Advice: Comparative Perspectives, 299–308. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Rumbaugh Duane M. (1980) Linguistic communication behavior of apes. In Thomas A. Sebok and Jean-Umiker-Sebok(eds.): Speaking of Apes: A Critical Album of Two- Fashion Communication with Man. New York: Plenum Press, pp. 231–259.
• Roughshod-Rumbaugh, E.South.; McDonald, One thousand.; Sevcik, R.A.; Hopkins, W.D.; Rupert, E (1986). "Spontaneous symbol acquisition and communicative use by pygmy chimpanzees (Pan paniscus)". Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 115 (3): 211–235. CiteSeerX 10.1.i.140.2493 . doi:10.1037/0096-3445.115.3.211. PMID2428917.
• Sayigh, L.S., Tyack, P.50., Wells, R.Southward. & Scott, M.D. (1990). Signature whistles of free-ranging bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus): stability and mother-offspring comparisons. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 247–260.
• Schusterman, R. J.; Gisiner, R. (1988). "Bogus linguistic communication comprehension in dolphins and sea lions: The essential cognitive skills". The Psychological Record. 34: three–23. doi:10.1007/BF03394849. S2CID148803055.
• Schusterman, R.J.; Gisiner, R. (1989). "Delight parse the judgement: animate being cognition in the Procrustean bed of linguistics". Psychological Record. 39: 3–18. doi:10.1007/BF03395051. S2CID151609199.
• Schusterman, R. J.; Kastak, D. (1993). "A California Bounding main-Panthera leo (Zalaphos californianus) is capable of forming equivalence relations". The Psychological Tape. 43 (iv): 823–839. doi:10.1007/BF03395915. S2CID147715775.
• Schusterman, R. J.; Krieger, K. (1984). "California sea lions are capable of semantic comprehension". The Psychological Record. 38 (3): 311–348. doi:10.1007/BF03395027. S2CID148081685.
• Skinner, B.F. (1957). Verbal behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
• Wilkie, R.; McKinnon, A. (2013). "George Herbert Mead on Humans and Other Animals: Social Relations subsequently Human-Fauna Studies". Sociological Research Online. 18 (4): xix. doi:ten.5153/sro.3191. S2CID146644748.
• Wittmann, Henri (1991). "Nomenclature linguistique des langues signées non vocalement" (PDF). Revue Québécoise de Linguistique Théorique et Appliquée. 10 (1): 215–88.

External links [ edit ]

• Give-and-take: Starling Study: Recursion (Linguist Listing)
• International Bioacoustics Council research on animal language.
• The Brute Communication Projection. More information on animal advice.
• Excellent compendium of links to the websites of all of the major beast linguistic communication studies
• Listen to Nature includes article "The Language of Birds"
• Jarvis Lab homepage Evolution of Brain Structure for Song Learning
• de:Linguogenetik

Do Animals Posses Bt Images Like Humans

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_language