A SEARCH for Human Uniqueness
NICHD Templeton Foundation Ted Townsend Brief Chronology of Ape Language -- See Hillex and Rumbaugh (2004) for chronology from 1000BC to 2004
Ape and Child, Kellogg and Kellogg, The First Signs of Washoe, 1933 Gardner and Gardner, 1969
Reading and Sentence Completion, Rumbaugh, 1972
A Chimpanzee Learns Language, Premack, 1970 Life with Lucy, Fouts, 1972 Conditioned Discrimination
Imitation accounts for Nim and Washoe I WAS FOOLED, WE WERE ALL FOOLED! Terrace, 1979
Nim Chimpsky Changed My Mind, Terrace, 1979
Chaining All of these learning processes exist in human language and all of them play a role in language acquisition in children.(Greenfield, 1976).
The question was NOT whether these processes occurred in apes, but whether their language could be reduced to these processes alone. Was it stimulus-bound rather than self- guided and reflective?. It’s a social thing It’s a cognitive thing.
Reversed Position
Left the response to Fouts
Terrace ignores the data Can’t point Can’t teach Can’t acquire recursion Can’t vocalize voluntarily Can’t do RMTS Can’t imitate What Had Been Ignored? Training and Emergents a. "Please machine give X" (where X = 8 different foods and drinks b. "Please machine give piece of X" (where X =5 different foods) c. "X give Y" (where X=7 different animates and Y = 8 objects + 13 1. Lana was not imitating different foods and drinks) d. "X move into/out of room" (where X = 7 different animates and 'room' = one room, Lana's room). e. "You put X in machine." (where X = 13 different foods and drinks_ 2. She was not being taught chains or f. "Please machine make X" (where X = 6 different events) conditioned discriminations -- rather g. "Lana want eat/drink X" (where X = 13 different foods and drinks) h. "X tickle (groom, swing)" Y (where X.Y = 7 different animates) both were intermingled i. "Please machine make X " (where X = 6 different events) j. “Question you carry Lana? k. “Name this X” (where X = 6 different foods) l. “Name this X that’s Y(where X = 6 different objects and Y = 6 different colors)
3. Each chain had multiple conditioned discriminations linked to real world events and internal desires
4. Chains were not display based
5. A chimpanzee was creating sentences But these were, in fact, display based By age 4, Lana was employing 69 sequences, not a board with stationary different sentence frames which had symbols. No real world events to emerged from her stock sentences - each of discriminate existed. Consequently nothing which contained as many 135 different could be constructed from these chains. alternatives for the ‘blank’ spaces. Novel Conditions Examples Created by Lana 900 “Sweet Potato name this that’s in cup.” 675 “Juice name this that’s purple in box.”
450 “You put M&M in box.”
225 “Lana want banana that’s in room.”
“Lana want eat sweet potato that’s 0 Total Stock Emerged Correct Syntax-E Word-E orange.” Error of Equating Display Based Responses
No Real World Linkages
With Keyboard Utterances
Only Real World Linkages The keyboard was an Inversion of the basic Stimulus-Response approach of Psychology
If you did not CONTROL the STIMULUS Presentation - You could not control the RESPONSE In the REAL WORLD there exists and ever changing array of stimuli and the organism determines which ones to attend to and, if linguistic, which utterances to make that direct the attention of others as it desires.
?Tim give Lana Banana which is Black Lana was employing language to direct Tim’s attention to something he was otherwise not going to give to her. Error of Equating Display Based Responses See X -> select order 1,2,3 etc.
With Keyboard Utterances
See Anything -> Say Anything Order is NOT in the display, it is in the GRAMMAR What does it mean to say the order is IN the GRAMMAR
The Grammar was designed by Von Glasserfeld to have a order relevant to spatial and categorical transformations in the real world.
Lana acquired the grammar as she acquired an understanding of the real world transformations; they become inextricably linked in her cognitive computations Why was the Research with Lana Stopped?
4 different psychologists (Gardner, Premack, Rumbaugh and Terrace) steeped in learning theory tried 4 different methods and got 4 different results, just as the theory would have predicted.
A call went forth to stop all funding in the field, because it was being done by scholars who were either intentionally fraudulent or just plain incompetent.
New York Academy of Sciences 1979 Sebeok Terrace
The Gardner’s did not attend and they lost their funding.
Rumbaugh attended but Tim left the field and Lana was retired from language and moved to counting.
Signing efforts continued with Washoe, Moja, Pili, Dar, Koko and Chantek, but reports were few and data was generally ignored as they made no effort to address the ‘learning issues’ or the ‘cueing issues.’ Research Trajectory was stopped by a “replication” that was methodologically inappropriate
Lana remains alive and recalls her lexigrams when tested. If funding could be attained to give her a keyboard, she could again produce novel, syntactically appropriate recursive sentences, without imitating and without being cued. R
Research moved from ‘stock sentences’ to linguistic communication between chimpanzees It ought to provide for natural communication as well Rule #1 - B needs to ask for food Rule #2 - A needs to give the requested food B Rule #3 order is optional Rule #4 food is to be shared
16 foods available (6 to 10 in a bout)
over 100 A lexigrams available THEY WERE CLEARLY CONSCIOUS THAT THEY WERE COMMUNICATING 11 different foods were tested by directionally, both were correct on 90% of the trial #1 presentations
apple ??
Share Did they Know That Symbols Communicate and/or That They Need to Communicate? Sa vage-Rumbaugh (1986)
It ought to work without the keyboard.
It ought to work with novel symbols.
=
???
Share Skinner Responded with Pigeons
Jill - look at 3 colors, select letter key for each color Jack - look at three letter keys, select color key
Spoof Magazinein Science
Information was transmitted though Jill to Jack. The Intention to do so and/or the self knowledge that they had done so were considered to be irrelevant, because they were animals. What kinds of socio-linguistic skills emerged?
Chimps Pigeons
1. Pointing 2. Joint Attention None reported 3. Joint Regard 4. Turn-taking Science Magazine refused to review any 5. Sensitivity to what the other knows (TOM) more papers. “You can’t even imagine 6. Made their own rules what people say.” Research Trajectory was stopped for a second time by a “replication” that was methodologically inappropriate
Sherman is alive and well and recalls his lexigrams. He could be forming novel sentences, even without stock sentence training, if funding were available and if he had a keyboard.
Research moved from language TRAINING to Language AQUISITION Growing up in a Pan/Homo, culture from birth to death
Recursion
Lana: Question you move apple that’s orange into room. (Production)
Kanzi: Can you give me the one that Liz had?
Can you tell me what Matata said?
Panbanisha can you show me where my glasses are? (Comprehension) Many researchers have feared creating these bonds, considering the best interests of the ape. However, in our world, a baby bonding with a human in captivity does not preclude an ape’s ability to recognize another bonobo, nor does it interfere with maternal or reproductive behaviors. However, in palpable ways, there are enormous differences between humanly enculturated apes and those that are not. We all live together in a peaceful, happy harmony; however, we perpetually negotiate sameness and otherness. The following paragraphs are ethnographic narratives which offer insight to the various world views and languages created among our colony and how we manage to live together.
Ethnographic observations from Kanzi’s “home”
We communicate with all the apes in our colony, but how we communicate with apes with receptive competence for English is quite different and far more efficient than how we communicate with the control group. A very simple example is this: If something unusual is going to happen in the lab, it can be stressful to the apes, such as a big husky repairman is going to fix our clogged potty. The apes will respond to a visitor as though it is a significant threat and danger. So we prepare them for every event we can. With Kanzi and his group, we can explain, “The plumber is coming and he is going to fix our potty so we can have coke with our visitors later.” Kanzi listens, and if he agrees, he will start watching, waiting for the plumber to arrive. We are able to plan three to six hours in advance with Kanzi. When the plumber arrives, Kanzi observes but he understands why the plumber is there and tolerates his presence. All the while, Matata’s non-English group is sending off alarm calls that something bad has come too close. If we had not spoken to Kanzi earlier, gotten his permission that the workman may come, Kanzi and Matata would be vocalizing together: a sonic event that is hard to describe and impossible to forget. Bonobo vocalizations are so loud in indoor spaces that humans’ chest cavities are impacted by the blasts of sound. One cannot think clearly, other than to decide to flee the noise. However, when one has coordinated with Kanzi using English, you can ask him to tell Matata that a good visitor is coming and not to be afraid. Having Kanzi communicate with Matata does help, depending on when you do it. Usually you have to wait until the visitor is present, because Matata, even when Kanzi communicates to her in a bonobo way, does not seem to have the ability to understand about things not present. So, Kanzi and I usually plan to wait until the visitor arrives and I will remind him to tell Matata everything is OK once she starts vocalizing danger. Usually, we have to promise her strawberries to be quiet. However, I cannot directly communicate that to Matata at this level. I must send a message to her through Kanzi, Panbanisha, or Nyota. And often, we have to remind her during the visit, as the idea is not sustained for very long. Matata is an immediate person and the past and present are not features of her world in the way it is in mine, Kanzi’s, and the other apes who understand English.