Design features of language LING 200 Winter 2009 Jan. 7

Plan for today Questions about language Hockett’s proposed design features Chimp studies Cell phones off please

The big question(s) Is language unique to humans? Is it fundamentally different from animal communication? (What is language anyway?)

Getting at the big question Charles Hockett (1960) “The Origin of Speech.” Scientific American 203: 88-96. Smaller questions What are properties of human language? Which are shared by other communication systems? Caveat In Hockett’s day, not much known about ASL Stokoe, William (1960) Sign Language Structure: An Outline of the Visual Communication Systems of the American Deaf. (Studies in linguistics: occasional papers 8.) Silverstock, MD: Linstock Press.

Hockett’s proposal Design features characterize language, distinguish it from other communication systems System must have all 9 features to be language Is he right? No one’s come up with a radically different system.

9 features Mode of communication Semanticity Pragmatic function Interchangeability Cultural transmission Arbitrariness Discreteness Displacement Productivity Common to all(?) communication systems Not found in all communication systems

Interchangeability = A user can both transmit and receive messages Not all communication display this flexibility silkworm moths: only females secrete chemicals whistling moths: males make territorial sounds

Cultural transmission Nature (innate) (vs. nurture--learned) = At least some aspect of a communication system is learned from other users A Cambodian child with an American parent will learn English, not Khmer Animal communication systems vary Fireflies and cowbirds: entirely innate Finches: can learn to make some calls if raised in isolation; but don’t learn full system

Arbitrariness (vs. iconic) Does the form of a sign/call/signal resemble what it refers to? Sign languages may seem relatively iconic… KNOW BLACK CANADA

Arbitrariness in some animal communication systems baring teeth Vervet monkeys http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~mnkylab/media/vervetcalls.html Distinct arbitrary calls for snakes, leopards, eagles

Discreteness (sometimes called duality of patterning) System decomposable into smaller, recombinable parts a, p, r, t combine to form trap, part, rapt Doesn’t seem to be found in most animal communication systems But bee dances http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/bees/danceswagg.html (the waggle dance, a.k.a. the sickle dance) pattern, direction can be combined for different meanings Or do we just not understand animal communication systems well enough?

Displacement Not limited to the here and now Last night, 10 million years ago… Bees: limited displacement round dance: relatively close sickle dance: intermediate distance tail-wagging dance: relatively far

Productivity Unlimited potential to express novel ideas Bees Elements of system are fixed or infinite? “Intonational phenomena in Sahaptin identified to date can be described exclusively with nuclear pitch accents.” Bees Vertical sugar water experiment

Chimp (and other primate) studies 20th century hypothesis: Maybe chimps (and other primates) don’t use human language because of lack of opportunity to learn it. Chimp vocal tracts not suited to speech, but sign language okay

Chimps’ accomplishments Can learn to associate referents with arbitrary signs Can learn to use signs spontaneously Can learn to use signs creatively Washoe (at CWU): 'water bird' (for swan) Can invent totally new signs Washoe: a new sign for 'bibs' Can come up with creative solutions to problems Kanzi: When friend Austin the chimp was moved out of compound, Kanzi got lonely, typed 'Austin TV' to request videotape of Austin.

Chimps’ main limitation Syntax length: 2-3 sign utterances inconsistent word order See also http://www.gorilla.org/world/talk_aol.html Noam Chomsky (“I told you so”) It is hardly likely that some species has this capacity but has never thought to use it until instructed by humans…the evidence suggests that the most rudimentary features of human language are far beyond the capacity of otherwise intelligent apes, just as the capacity to fly or the homing instinct of pigeons lie beyond the capacity of humans.

Summary and preview Human language seems to be qualitatively different from animal communication systems Human vocal tract even seems designed for speech

Question Good site on onomatopoeia in different languages (but no sound files ) (onomatopoeia: vocabulary that imitates sound) http://www.eleceng.adelaide.edu.au/Personal/dabbott/animal.html What does this tell us about arbitrariness in spoken languages?