INFORMATION TO USERS This reproductionwasmade from a copy of a manuscriptsent to us for publication and microfilming. While the most advanced technology has been used to pho­ tograph and reproduce this manuscript. the qualityof the reproduction is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted. Pages in any manuscript may have indistinct print. In all cases the best available copy has been filmed. Thefollowing explanationoftechniques is provided to helpclarifynotationswhich may appear on this reproduction. 1. Manuscripts maynot always be complete. When it is not possible to obtain missing pages. a note appears to indicate this. 2. When copyrighted materials are removed from the manuscript. a note ap­ pears to indicate this. 3. Oversize materials (maps. drawtngs, and charts) are photographed by sec­ tioning the original. beginningat the upperleft hand comerand continu­ ing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each oversize page is also filmed as one exposure and is available. for an additional charge. as a standard 35mm slide or in black and white paper format. * 4. Most photographs reproduce acceptably on positive microfilm or micro­ fiche but lack clarity on xerographic copies made from the microfilm. For an additional charge. all photographs are available in black and white standard 35mm slide format.* *For more information about black and white slides or enlarged paper reproductions. please contact the Dissertations CustomerServices Department. Dissertation UMI••Information Service University Microfilms International A Bell & Howell Information Company . 300 N. Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 8628546 Hoban, Esme THE PROMISE OF ANIMAL LANGUAGE RESEARCH University of Hawaii PH.D. 1986 University Microfilms International 300 N.Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI48106 PLEASE NOTE: In all casesthis material has been filmed in the best possible way fromthe availablecopy. Problemsencountered with this document have beenidentified herewith a check mark_",_. 1. Glossyphotographs or pages __ 2. Colored illustrations, paper or print _ 3. Photographs with dark background __ 4. Illustrationsare poor copy _ 5. Pages with black marks, not original copy / 6. Print showsthrough asthere is text on both sides of page _ 7. Indistinct, broken or small print on several pages _ 8. Print exceeds margin requirements __ 9. Tightly bound copy with print lost in spine . 10. Computerprintout pageswith indistinct print _ 11. Page(s) lacking when material received, and not available from school or author. 12. Page(s) seem to be missing in numbering only astext follows. 13. Two pagesnumbered . Text follows. 14. Curling and wrinkled pages__ 15. Dissertation contains pageswith print at a slant,filmed as received _ 16. Other _ University Microfilms International THE PROMISE OF ANIMAL LANGUAGE RESEARCH A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE DIVISION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII IK PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUlREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN LINGUISTICS AUGUST 1986 By Esme Hoban Dissertation Committee: Derek Bickerton, Chairman Ann M. Peters Patricia A. Lee P. Gregory Lee Richard Schmidt ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This dissertation is the culmination of ten years of "higher" education, so I'll start my thank-you's from the beginning. I would like to thank Joan Maling who taught my very first class in linguistics back in September, 1975, for filling my first exposure to the study of linguistics with the excitement of discovery. I thank Ray jackendoff for sparking the fire that drove me to find out more. I recall fondly those sunny afternoons out on the grass at Brandeis. Ray set up an easle with a huge pad of paper on it, and proceeded to mark it up with X's with bars on top. He was teaching me X-bar theory before I even knew standard theory. At Tel-Aviv I had the privilege of being taught by Robert Lees, who never once broke down and called me "Esm~"-­ always "Miss Hoban", well, now you can call me "Dr. Hoban", thank you Dr. Lees. I have been here at the University of Hawaii for five years now, studying in both the psychology and linguistics departments. There is one person to whom I am indebted for all her help: Dr. Martha Crosby-­ despite all odds, we made it! Most of all, I would like to thank Moti Bordoley, who has been a strong motivating factor in my life since before I even started college. During the writing of this dissertation he suffered with me through those times when inspiration abandoned me, discussing the material and helping me work out my ideas. Ma agid lecha foof, ata gadol mikol, iii ABSTRACT Research over the past two decades has yielded some noteworthy results and a great deal of controversy in the field of animal language research (ALR). This dissertation critically reviews some of the recent reports of language acquisition by apes and dolphins and proposes that a closer relationship between ALR and linguistics is necessary for future progress in both fields. It is demonstrated that ALR sheds light on the process of language acquisition in humans: by comparing the results of language training in a chimp to language acquisition in a child we can see that both share a common non-linguistic stage of language learning. While the child goes on to acquire language, the chimp does not. Animals may be prevented from acquiring language by biological constraints, but this can only be clearly established by future work in which appropriate language models are employed. Current knowledge of linguistic processes in language acquisition and language change suggest new approaches for ALR. In particular, since recent work on creole languages has demonstrated their importance as a key to Universal Grammar, it is proposed that a creole-based model is the most appropriate language model for future research in ALR. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKN'OWLEDGMENTS............................................................... iii ABSTRACT iv LIST OF TABLES. .. viii LIST OF FIGURES...................................................... ix PREFACE.................... x CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION "" ""."............. 1 Chapter I Notes 0............ 39 CHAPTER II. AMERICAN SIGN LANGUAGE AND APES............. 40 Characteristics of ASL......................... 42 Iconicity.... 42 Simultaneity................................................... 45 Word Order................................................... 46 Inflectional Morphology.... 48 Derivational Morphology................................... 50 Non Manual Signs........................................... 52 Apes and ASL..................................................... 52 Word Order................................................... 58 Word Function................................................ 59 Simultaneity................................................... 60 Repetition....................................................... 62 Non Manual Signs........................................... 63 Time Line and Deixis........ 65 Conclusion.......................................................... 66 Chapter II Notes. 70 v CHAPTER III. SETH AND NIM.... 75 'T"'1-_ 1\T~ __ n __ ! __ ... .." J. ne 1'1111 C rojec.••••••••.•.••..••.••••••._......................... 10 The Seth Project..................................... 80 The Subject.............................................. 81 The Data Sample............................................ 82 Classification of Utterances for the Discourse Analysis.................... 82 Results and Discussion.............................. 85 Imitation............................................. 85 Spontaneous and Initiated Utterances...... 92 Expansion............................................ 93 Adjacency and Interruptions.............................. 94 Structure... 98 Continued Development..................................... 102 Implications......................................................... 106 Summary................................................. 109 Chapter III Notes....................... 111 CHAPTER IV. MARINE MAMMALS............................................ 114 Early Work With Dolphins........................ 116 The Herman Dolphin Project..................... 120 Sensitivity to Order........................... 122 Ability to Generalize............................ 126 Tacit Knowledge of Linguistic Rules................. 127 Recursion.. 134 Linguistic Reference.... 134 Summary and Implications......................... 137 vi Chapter IV Notes.. 146 CHAPTER V. DISCUSSION................................................. 151 The Two-Stage Hypothesis. 152 Models of Child Language Acquisition.................... 156 Abrahamsen, Cavallo and McLuer's Three-Stage Model....................................................... ..... 156 Berman's Three-Stage Model.. 157 Petitto's Two-Stage ModeL....................... 158 Bickerton's Two-Stage ModeL........................ 158 The Evidence...................................................... 174 Predictions Which Follow From the Hypothesis...... 180 Chapter V Notes ,............................... 190 CHAPTER VI. FUTURE DIRECTIONS....................................... 192 Chapter VI Notes.. 220 APPENDIX A. TRANSCRIPTION CONVENTIONS........................ 223 ApPENDIX B. SETH TRANSCRIPTS......................................... 229 APPENDIX C. SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY OF ANIMAL LANGUAGE RESEARCH......................... 283 REFERENCES........................................................................... 296 vii LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1 Breakdown of Utterances in Each Seth Transcript......