Why Not Animals Have A Language?

Researchers studies have shown that it is possible for an animal to communicate. For example, a dog barks when it's hungry, wants water, or wants to play just like Kanzi a bonobo. In the article, “Speaking Bonobo” Paul Raffaele said, “Kanzi touched symbols for marshmallows and fire… Kanzi snapped twigs for a fire, lit them with matches and toasted the marshmallows on a stick.” So you see now that animals can communicate with humans by pointing at symbols. Also it says, “Kanzi can understand words that aren't a part of his keyboard vocabulary.” So when you talk to a animal it probably will understand you. On the other hand,

According to Susanne K. Langer in the essay “Language and Thought,” an essential difference between animals and humans is the way humans think in symbols and signs, instead of just solely relying on signs. Langer suggests that thinking in signs, which is something both humans and animals share in common, is a process that leads us to react instinctively to the physical presence of that sign. Signs are very much a direct cause to a particular effect. It seems that to learn a sign you simply must be conditioned to respond certain ways to a specific observation. Symbols, though, are exclusively human devices of language that provoke thoughts about a particular thing. The use of symbols has allowed humans to reach much more complex levels of thought,

Have you ever wondered how we speak? How about why our communication is considered a language and other animal’s communication is not considered language? A wide range of beliefs exist on what defines language. Thus, by exploring the definition of language and lexicon, evaluating language’s key features, the four levels of language structure and processing, and the role of language in Cognitive Psychology, an understanding of what language is becomes clear. Let us begin by defining language and a term named lexicon.

Thesis: Humans differ from animals because humans have developed a complex language which gives man the ability to store knowledge, communicate complex ideas, and is not a hereditary skill.

When looking through animal history, we humans have praised ourselves for our exceptional ability to communicate in an advanced manner. Whether we are listening or speaking, humans have crafted language into a powerful tool that is boundless and flexible against other arts. Moreover, through the perspective of building civilizations, communication has been the foundation of community. As Language is our most advanced form of communication; to what degree of value do we hold it in our society? Throughout the seminars, groups of people explored the history and significance of how we perceive language and the hidden advantages or disadvantages it provides.

“What makes us human?”, is an unanswered question asked by many. Is it because of our ability to have empathy for others? Or is it because of our cognitive ability which allows us to look into the future? One of the main arguments made that separates humans from animals is our communication style; our language. Is language inherently unique to human? To answer such a question, we first operationally define language as; “a system of communication based upon words and the combination of words into sentences” (University of Oslo). The purpose of language is for us to be able to convey an infinite amount of ideas to one another. Sign language in general also falls under this definition as it has a complex system of rules and syntax that allow the signed figures to function as words. Animal communication on the other hand, is operationally defined as, “the transmission of a signal from one animal to another such that the sender benefits, on average, from the response of the recipient” (Pearce 1987). With this in mind, current research has shown that the answer is that language is inherently unique to humans.

For example, imitation and teaching explain that chimpanzee’s may watch their mother doing actions academically (problem-solving) she never gives her young enough feedback or just a simple look to reinforce his observation. He concludes by explaining that humans have a preexisting capacity that allows them to represent what they imagine by combining human elements (language) while, animals clearly do not.

Alternatively, some may argue other intelligent species, such as dolphins or chimpanzees also possess the ability to express views and opinions, having language very similar to ours; however, what makes human language so unique is its variety and complexity. As cleverly described by Jason Goldman (2012): “Whales sing, monkeys howl, birds chirp. Lizards bob their heads up and down to communicate, and some squid do it by regulating the coloration of their skin cells. But none of these processes can be explained by language.” The distinctiveness of human language is not defined by how it allows individuals to communicate with each other, but instead, the infinite variety that follows. While other species communicate to

Descartes posits that animals lack intelligence, a characteristic that is distinctly a human possession (p.30, Adam & Tannery). By this he means their ability to be rational, to exercise reason and to speak; the act of putting words in an orderly fashion to express thoughts. While the deaf and the dumb lack this possession, they have the ability to speak through a different language, sign language (p.31). Parrots in contrast, have the ability to speak but lack the comprehension to express higher levels of thought (p.31). Language is a learnt behavior. If Descartes thought of language as a measure of intelligence, then Washoe a chimp who has been taught to communicate through American Sign Language (ASL) would be a refutable example of this statement. Critics argued that the chimps were only taught to mimic, but Washoe shocked researchers when she taught her adopted son Loulis about 50 ASL signs without researchers intervention2. Surely, this is evidence that animals

The claim, humans are the only animal that can acquire language has been the subject of much debate as scientists have investigated language use by non-human species. Researchers have taught apes, monkeys, parrots and wild children with various systems of human-like communication. Thus, one might ask, what is human language? According to Ulla Hedeager, A universally accepted definition of language or the criteria for its use does not exist. This is one of the reasons for the disagreement among scientists about whether non-human species can use a language. In nature, researchers find numerous types of communication systems, several of which appear to be unique to their possessors, and one of them is the language of the human species. Basically, the purpose of communication is the preservation, growth, and development of the species (Smith and Miller 1968:265). The ability to exchange information is shared by all communication systems, and a number of non-human systems share some features of human language. The fundamental difference between human and non-human communication is that animals are believed to react instinctively, in a stereotyped and predictable way. Generally, human behavior is under the voluntary control,

Mead declared that our gift of language, our ability to manipulate and interpret abstract symbols, was what separated human beings from the other animals. I feel in a big way that Mead is correct. Humans understand and filter out information whether they intend to or not, all due to the channel of

It is as if one says a human who is an experiencing subject of a life must be able to understand and communicate its thoughts. Where do animals fit in? Do we discount them because they do not speak our language and we cannot understand theirs?

If you have a pet like dog, you will think it knows us. They know our expressions and they always can give us a comfort when we are in terrible situation. I think a lot of people often think about do animals know humans’ language? I want to discuss about Do animals have ability to learn language and what is the difference between human language and animal language.

The young girl writes feverishly, partly because she wants to perform the puppet play as soon as possible, and partly because she is genuinely, and poetically inspired.

Ever since the scientific community came to the conclusion that animals can communicate, new questions on the function of animal signals arouse. Scientists wondered whether when animals communicate they do it in order to manipulate one another or to inform each other. Through extensive research over the years, scientist continue to be divided; many believe that the function of the animal signals is simply to manipulate while others believe that when animals communicate, they do it in order to inform. In reality, both sides of the argument are correct as communication without manipulation or information would be pointless.