Semantics

[peter grimes]

What we're talking about here is whether their systems of communication are complex enough to be considered a language. Until we have evidence that dolphins "talk" to each other about other things than hunting and mating, and that their communication system is capable of generating new "words" and "sentences" as they go (i.e. a sign that their communication system is a product of a sentient, highly developed mind and not largely instinctive behaviour), we can't use the word "language" for it.

This is exactly the sort of discussion I didn't want to get drawn into

What I see here is you setting the bar for TrueLanguage at a certain point. Why are you setting the bar in that specific spot? 50 years ago when behaviorism was the dominant paradigm the bar would have been lower - much lower. But then it has to move, as we have evidence from several non-human animals that the information being conveyed in vocalizations is robust, novel, and combinatorial. From what I've read, the one thing these non-human animal systems lack is recursion.

But I don't really see why it matters all that much. I mean, OK - you don't want to allow that Dolphins use language. But that doesn't mean that they aren't communicating in ways that we never even knew was possible just 30 years ago. Advances in sensing and computational analysis have allowed us to see (literally) their sonar vocalizations as well as hear their clicks and squeaks.

Go ahead an don't call it a language, but they're still communicating novel information and very likely have names for eachother and objects.

EDIT:
Someone mentioned that non-human animals only have a limited set of instictual sounds for 'Predator!' or 'Run!'. The PrarieDog thing I linked to earlier counters this statement. They have a grammar, they have adjectives, they have nouns. Give it a listen - it's fascinating.

 

[Samson]

Of what?

Of dolphins and whales having at least a comparably complex communication system to ours.

Using names is hardly an evidence of 'language'.

Isn't it? I think it shows a level of communication far above the "danger", "food", "want sex?" level that would be described as "simple, intuitively used messages". I guess we need a definition of language.

Nobody is denying that there are species of animals with pretty advanced intelligence. What we're talking about here is whether their systems of communication are complex enough to be considered a language. Until we have evidence that dolphins "talk" to each other about other things than hunting and mating, and that their communication system is capable of generating new "words" and "sentences" as they go (i.e. a sign that their communication system is a product of a sentient, highly developed mind instead of limited instinctive behaviour), we can't use the word "language" for it.

And this goes some way. I think the use of names are quite clearly not "limited instinctive behaviour" (unless our language is instinctive, which could be argued). I have already described how we can measure complexity in a communication system we do not understand and they come out above us. To judge the subject matter ("talk" to each other about other things than hunting and mating) and the flexibility of construction (generating new "words" and "sentences" as they go) we would have to understand it. I do not see these as necessary, and understanding is certainly not practically possible any time soon.

I guess my point is that they have a communication system that is comparable if not more complex than ours. They have social relationships that are comparable in complexity to ours. They learn and adapt there communication from what they have heard (cf. humpback whale song). They spend a lot of their time doing other things than hunting and mating even if we have no evidence they talk about them. I cannot say that they are not missing something that we consider fundamental to language, but I think it is quite clear that whatever that is cannot be that important to them.

Anyway, what sort of liberals are they?

 

[Borachio]

Anyway, what sort of liberals are they?

Very drole!

What Cetaceans lack, it would seem, is a tool making culture. This may, or may not, be significant as far as language is concerned.

 

[Winner]

Of dolphins and whales having at least a comparably complex communication system to ours.

An extraordinary claim that would require truly extraordinary evidence.

Isn't it? I think it shows a level of communication far above the "danger", "food", "want sex?" level that would be described as "simple, intuitively used messages". I guess we need a definition of language.

Not necessarily - it may simply be an evolved featured of a largely instinctive communication system that serves a simple purpose (such as identification of the individual members of the... what is the 'pack' of dolphins called in English? Makes a lot of sense in a water environment where visual identification isn't always easy to obtain).

And this goes some way. I think the use of names are quite clearly not "limited instinctive behaviour" (unless our language is instinctive, which could be argued).

Our ability to master language is instinctive. What we do with it is not (well, mostly it isn't.)

I have already described how we can measure complexity in a communication system we do not understand and they come out above us.

Which indicates that it is not a good way to determine the true nature of their communication.

To judge the subject matter ("talk" to each other about other things than hunting and mating) and the flexibility of construction (generating new "words" and "sentences" as they go) we would have to understand it. I do not see these as necessary, and understanding is certainly not practically possible any time soon.

Qualitative analysis is the only way to answer whether a non-human species is capable of language.

I guess my point is that they have a communication system that is comparable if not more complex than ours.

Again, extraordinary claims and all that. Judging from the fact that humans developed complex cultures while dolphins have not, I am more than a bit sceptical. I am pretty open to the assertion that among animals, dolphins and other cetaceans have a fairly advanced system of communication. That's about it - if someone wants to assert that they actually have a system qualitatively comparable to a human one (or even better), I want to see some pretty unequivocal evidence for that.

They have social relationships that are comparable in complexity to ours.

No, they don't. I'd say any small village populated by humans has a social dynamic thousands of times more complex than any 'pack' of dolphins.

They learn and adapt there communication from what they have heard (cf. humpback whale song).

So do singing birds.

They spend a lot of their time doing other things than hunting and mating even if we have no evidence they talk about them. I cannot say that they are not missing something that we consider fundamental to language, but I think it is quite clear that whatever that is cannot be that important to them.

And I'd say that if dolphins possessed mental and communication skills comparable to those of humans, we would have noticed already.

 

[bhsup]

Just interjecting for a quick educational post

such as identification of the individual members of the... what is the 'pack' of dolphins called in English? ...

Pod.

 

[Winner]

What I see here is you setting the bar for TrueLanguage at a certain point. Why are you setting the bar in that specific spot?

Because if we don't people will start claiming that squirrels have language(s) and we're just too dumb to understand them (which is what sparked this off-topic discussion ). I think that there is a good reason we don't extent the meaning of "language" to just any form of communication. Microbes do communicate, insects do communicate, animals do communicate - pretty much all forms of life communicate information in various ways.

But I don't really see why it matters all that much. I mean, OK - you don't want to allow that Dolphins use language. But that doesn't mean that they aren't communicating in ways that we never even knew was possible just 30 years ago. Advances in sensing and computational analysis have allowed us to see (literally) their sonar vocalizations as well as hear their clicks and squeaks.

Go ahead an don't call it a language, but they're still communicating novel information and very likely have names for eachother and objects.

And I find it fascinating.

EDIT:
Someone mentioned that non-human animals only have a limited set of instictual sounds for 'Predator!' or 'Run!'. The PrarieDog thing I linked to earlier counters this statement. They have a grammar, they have adjectives, they have nouns. Give it a listen - it's fascinating.

I know about it - we even discussed that with our linguistics professor a few years ago. His view was pretty much the same I am expressing here - it's a fascinating venue of research which will probably help us better understand the origins of language and its features. Still it's nowhere near the complexity of even the simplest of human languages.

Just interjecting for a quick educational post

Pod.

Thanks

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Very drole!

What Cetaceans lack, it would seem, is a tool making culture. This may, or may not, be significant as far as language is concerned.

This would probably be a very different world if cetaceans had hands. I'm being completely serious.

 

[Borachio]

Yes, I think you are. Who doesn't appreciate the magnificence of a dolphin or a whale? Apart from tuna, krill and the like.