4 ms·

It doesn't help that the main conclusion of over 100 years of this kind of animal language research, is that -- and I quote -- "animals don't have language" [0]

by 317070 1y ago

It doesn't help that the main conclusion of over 100 years of this kind of animal language research, is that -- and I quote -- "animals don't have language" [0] [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_ape_language https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_ape_language

mettamage 1y ago
The most charitable viewpoint I can give is: that can be true or that can be false. Time will tell. If it's true, then we are exceptional but how can we truly know at this point? I mean, Michael the Gorilla told us about what poachers did [1]. If it isn't true, then it shows how in the prevailing consensus we are still too arrogant. In that case, we don't understand that well what sets us apart and what doesn't. It will probably be a nuanced discussion either way regardless of what the truth is probably due to the definition of language. But in this particular case I'd want to characterize it: some way of communicating that is about as effective as whatever it is that humans do, when they speak out loud. Also, when you look nowadays at some of the dog/cat videos and they press those buttons, they clearly are capable of communicating something. I remember one dog inventing a word for ambulance given the words he/she knew. Ah, found it! [2] There's clearly a lot more research to be done here. I hope AI can accelerate it. I know AI is a tricky business, but one can hope. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXKsPqQ0Ycc&ab_channel=kokoflixhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXKsPqQ0Ycc&ab_channel=kokoflix https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXKsPqQ0Ycc&ab_channel=kokof... [2] https://www.youtube.com/shorts/a93PWudceKk https://www.youtube.com/shorts/a93PWudceKk
- 0xEF 1y ago
  I wonder if part of the nuance here is understanding what language and communication are, respectively. I am definitely not in my own lame here, but at first glance of Great Ape Language Wikipedia article and some comments, it seems like that it is not addressed? My admittedly infantile assessment is this; all language is communication, but not all communication is language. For example, I can issue a warning to another human by using the words "step back or there will be a problem." Assuming they also speak English, my structured sentence conveys the warning in a clear way. My neighbor's dog can also issue a similar warning by growling as I move into it's space. It's not using any sort of structure or specific messaging, rather a universally understood sound that conveys some sort of feeling related to caution and fear. I use the "warning" example since fear/caution are extremely powerful and seem easiest to convey across species. Again, not adept at this, so my example might be dumb. I'm super interested in understanding more about this, though. Any suggestions of further reading?
  - xg15 1y ago
    Agreeing with your distinction. Also, you could "issue the same warning" by growling like the dog, too - or by waving your hands frantically or shaking your head, etc. This would absolutely convey the same information and count as an act of communication, but we wouldn't describe it as using language. But the information in that example is also relatively simple. There are other kinds of information that are much harder to convey without language, talking about future or hypothetical events or abstract concepts, etc. There seems to be evidence that dolphins use sounds to identify each other and to coordinate tasks that involve a number if animals. I think this is much more interesting and strongly hints that something language-like is going on there. https://www.ecowatch.com/dolphins-language-communication-evidence.html https://www.ecowatch.com/dolphins-language-communication-evi... https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8074934/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8074934/
    - 0xEF 1y ago
      Interesting reads, thank you. You're right in that the complexity of the information matters when it comes to how it can be communicated, although I also think of the bit, as in the smallest unit of information, and how we have accomplished communicating some wildly complex information by cramming a billion transistors into microchips. Still blows my mind while it seems like it's become so commonplace for most people. When I first learned about the dolphin "names" whistle, I thought of the way dogs supposedly identify each other by scent in the way that there's subtle differences that our olfactory system is not able to pick up on, but theirs is. In both cases, it begs me to ask what that means for consciousness. If the dolphins and dogs can assign individual labels to each other and recognize those labels when used later on, does that imply they form some sort of a personal identity? I also have to wonder how language, as opposed to other forms of communication, promotes the birth of that identity, but so much of this is over my head in a way that leaves me grasping at how to, well, communicate my own questions so that I receive answers that promote better understanding of the phenomenon and its challenges.
  - 317070 1y ago
    So, one of my favourites is this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Man_Without_Words https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Man_Without_Words Not a good book by any means, but there has been surprisingly little written about people who go from having no language to their first language post-puberty and are asked about their experience of living without language. Language is extremely important to living as a human, even outside of social relations. Memories don't form well, it is really hard to keep events in order of time, it is hard to order places in space and not get lost. It's even hard to remember people. It's an engineer take, of course, but I like understanding systems by what happens when they break.
CMCDragonkai 1y ago
Is language still unique to humans given the rise of LLMs lol!
chongli 1y ago
This is the conclusion of linguists. Linguists’ definition of language necessarily includes a productive grammar. It’s not enough to be capable of uttering from a long list of sounds or signs. To have language we must be able to regularly construct novel and unique communications composed of strings of symbols governed by grammatical rules. All animals that we’ve studied — including great apes we’ve attempted to teach sign language — have so far failed to demonstrate the acquisition of grammar. This means the number of unique communications they can express is exactly limited to the number of utterances they know.

by 317070 1y ago

mettamage 1y ago

The most charitable viewpoint I can give is: that can be true or that can be false. Time will tell. If it's true, then we are exceptional but how can we truly know at this point? I mean, Michael the Gorilla told us about what poachers did [1]. If it isn't true, then it shows how in the prevailing consensus we are still too arrogant. In that case, we don't understand that well what sets us apart and what doesn't. It will probably be a nuanced discussion either way regardless of what the truth is probably due to the definition of language. But in this particular case I'd want to characterize it: some way of communicating that is about as effective as whatever it is that humans do, when they speak out loud. Also, when you look nowadays at some of the dog/cat videos and they press those buttons, they clearly are capable of communicating something. I remember one dog inventing a word for ambulance given the words he/she knew. Ah, found it! [2] There's clearly a lot more research to be done here. I hope AI can accelerate it. I know AI is a tricky business, but one can hope. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXKsPqQ0Ycc&ab_channel=kokoflixhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXKsPqQ0Ycc&ab_channel=kokoflix https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXKsPqQ0Ycc&ab_channel=kokof... [2] https://www.youtube.com/shorts/a93PWudceKk https://www.youtube.com/shorts/a93PWudceKk

0xEF 1y ago
I wonder if part of the nuance here is understanding what language and communication are, respectively. I am definitely not in my own lame here, but at first glance of Great Ape Language Wikipedia article and some comments, it seems like that it is not addressed? My admittedly infantile assessment is this; all language is communication, but not all communication is language. For example, I can issue a warning to another human by using the words "step back or there will be a problem." Assuming they also speak English, my structured sentence conveys the warning in a clear way. My neighbor's dog can also issue a similar warning by growling as I move into it's space. It's not using any sort of structure or specific messaging, rather a universally understood sound that conveys some sort of feeling related to caution and fear. I use the "warning" example since fear/caution are extremely powerful and seem easiest to convey across species. Again, not adept at this, so my example might be dumb. I'm super interested in understanding more about this, though. Any suggestions of further reading?
- xg15 1y ago
  Agreeing with your distinction. Also, you could "issue the same warning" by growling like the dog, too - or by waving your hands frantically or shaking your head, etc. This would absolutely convey the same information and count as an act of communication, but we wouldn't describe it as using language. But the information in that example is also relatively simple. There are other kinds of information that are much harder to convey without language, talking about future or hypothetical events or abstract concepts, etc. There seems to be evidence that dolphins use sounds to identify each other and to coordinate tasks that involve a number if animals. I think this is much more interesting and strongly hints that something language-like is going on there. https://www.ecowatch.com/dolphins-language-communication-evidence.html https://www.ecowatch.com/dolphins-language-communication-evi... https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8074934/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8074934/
  - 0xEF 1y ago
    Interesting reads, thank you. You're right in that the complexity of the information matters when it comes to how it can be communicated, although I also think of the bit, as in the smallest unit of information, and how we have accomplished communicating some wildly complex information by cramming a billion transistors into microchips. Still blows my mind while it seems like it's become so commonplace for most people. When I first learned about the dolphin "names" whistle, I thought of the way dogs supposedly identify each other by scent in the way that there's subtle differences that our olfactory system is not able to pick up on, but theirs is. In both cases, it begs me to ask what that means for consciousness. If the dolphins and dogs can assign individual labels to each other and recognize those labels when used later on, does that imply they form some sort of a personal identity? I also have to wonder how language, as opposed to other forms of communication, promotes the birth of that identity, but so much of this is over my head in a way that leaves me grasping at how to, well, communicate my own questions so that I receive answers that promote better understanding of the phenomenon and its challenges.
- 317070 1y ago
  So, one of my favourites is this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Man_Without_Words https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Man_Without_Words Not a good book by any means, but there has been surprisingly little written about people who go from having no language to their first language post-puberty and are asked about their experience of living without language. Language is extremely important to living as a human, even outside of social relations. Memories don't form well, it is really hard to keep events in order of time, it is hard to order places in space and not get lost. It's even hard to remember people. It's an engineer take, of course, but I like understanding systems by what happens when they break.

CMCDragonkai 1y ago

Is language still unique to humans given the rise of LLMs lol!

chongli 1y ago

This is the conclusion of linguists. Linguists’ definition of language necessarily includes a productive grammar. It’s not enough to be capable of uttering from a long list of sounds or signs. To have language we must be able to regularly construct novel and unique communications composed of strings of symbols governed by grammatical rules. All animals that we’ve studied — including great apes we’ve attempted to teach sign language — have so far failed to demonstrate the acquisition of grammar. This means the number of unique communications they can express is exactly limited to the number of utterances they know.