Defining human and Animal Communication

THESIS:
Humans have domesticated a good number of animals over their span of history, among these are pets. As humans with emotions, we tend to get so attached to that fluffy dog or cat that we start to give them human characteristics that only belong to us. We are all guilty of this, including myself. We want that animal to be a part of our family so much that we begin to mistake simple animal behavior for something way beyond. Animals cannot communicate with human beings; they can only do sophisticated tricks for things like food and comfort. They do not understand what the words of our language are, but they can do certain things when they hear the placement of our sounds, tones, gestures, and even facial expressions. Animals are just adapting to where they can survive and be comfortable.

Quotes:

“The Standard explanation is that the animal produces a particular behavior in response to a particular sound-stimulus or ‘noise’, but does not actually ‘understand’ what the words in the noise mean.” (From “The Study of Language” by George Yule)

I plan to use this quote to explain to my audience that animals merely respond to a noise that they have been trained to. For example: A human trains its dog that “come” means to go to the position of its master with means of food and comfort. The animal sees this as a good thing, as it helps it survive, and will follow the noise that it is trained to. The dog does not understand the meaning of come, but it knows it will be rewarded so it obeys.

“ As in may critical studies of animal learning, the chimpanzees are cleaver creatures who learn to produce a certain type of behavior (signing or symbol selection) in order to get rewards and are essentially performing sophisticated ‘tricks’.” (From “The Study of Language” by George Yule)

This quote is perfect for me to begin my rant about how the animals that are able to sign or use symbols are merely just doing what the dog, in my latter example, is doing. The only difference is that the chimpanzee has found a more clever way to accomplish what the dog is trying to do.

“Therefore, in a number of cases, vocal interactions in animals do conform to the basic
requirements of turn-taking organization, both in its general context-free aspects
and in contextual flexibility.” (From “Evolution of Communicative Flexibility: Complexity, Creativity, and Adaptability in Human and Animal Communication” by Oller, D. Kimbrough. Griebel, Ulrike.)

I am using this quote to argue with it of course….animals only show turn based organization because that’s how everything flows. All causes have an effect, and to be honest humans are more of a disordered turn system. We talk to each other all the time while the other is talking, so this theory that humans and animals share a turn based system of communication is wrong.

Learning Language: Biological, Cultural, or Both?

Tyler Gunnin
English 1101
Dr. Hughes
9/25/09

Thesis Statement- As we develop and mature as humans into the full perspective of the world and the languages it has to offer, the genes given to us from our parents that give us the knowledge of language, is also supported through the outside surroundings giving us our education of speaking through both biological and cultural methods.

Quote 1
Children will learn their native language adequately whatever anyone does, and the attempt to teach them language is fraught with psychological perils... But happily, since every child is a linguistic genius, there is no need to do any such thing. Every child will have the linguistic equipment he needs, merely by virtue of growing older. -Theodore Dalrymple "The Gift of Language"

I plan to use this in my essay to show that he is describing that we learn language as we grow older in a biological and cultural sense. He notes children learn adequately whatever anyone does, and by the virtue of growing older. The fact that he states this shows that I can have a counterargument and credibility.

Quote 2
If so, why choose language of all the gifts that they gave him? Presumably, he means that they gave him the opportunity to learn standard English, even if they did not speak it themselves. -Theodore Dalrymple "The Gift of Language"

I plan on using this in my essay by showing that this quote states that our parents give us the opportunity to not only learn english, but it also says that even if they did not speak the language that is being learned, the culture affects our knowledge of language. This also gives a nice counterargument to the matter at hand.

Quote 3
Over and over again, Pinker stresses that children do not learn language by imitation; rather, they learn it because they are biologically predestined to do so. “Let us do away,” he writes, with what one imagines to be a rhetorical sweep of his hand, “with the folklore that parents teach their children language.” It comes as rather a surprise, then, to read the book’s dedication: “For Harry and Roslyn Pinker, who gave me language.” -Theodore Dalrymple "The Gift of Language"

I plan on using this in my essay as another counterargument and for establishing credibility. Pinker states that we are predestined to learn language. Although he says this in his writing, he dedicates his book to his parents who gave him language. By doing this, it shows that Pinker is in agreement that although we may be influenced by the culture around us, we are also given the genes to learn and speak language by our parents.