Editing Animal language (section)

{{Short description|Complex animal communication}}
[[File:Mallee ringneck 42 - Patchewollock.jpg|thumb|right|250px|Parrots ([[Australian ringneck]])]]
'''Animal languages''' are forms of [[animal communication|communication]] between animals that show similarities to human [[language]].<ref name="NYT-20230920">{{cite news |last=Shah |first=Sonia |title=The Animals Are Talking. What Does It Mean? – Language was long understood as a human-only affair. New research suggests that isn't so. + comment |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/20/magazine/animal-communication.html#permid=127890141 |date=20 September 2023 |work=[[The New York Times]] |url-status=live |archiveurl=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/OXeIZ |archivedate=21 September 2023 |accessdate=21 September 2023 }}</ref> Animals communicate through a variety of signs, such as sounds and movements. [[Sign language|Signing]] among animals may be considered a form of language if the inventory of signs is large enough, the signs are relatively arbitrary, and the animals seem to produce them with a degree of volition (as opposed to relatively automatic conditioned behaviors or unconditioned instincts, usually including facial expressions).

Many researchers argue that animal communication lacks a key aspect of human language, the creation of new patterns of signs under varied circumstances. Humans, by contrast, routinely produce entirely new combinations of words. Some researchers, including the [[Linguistics|linguist]] [[Charles F. Hockett|Charles Hockett]], argue that human language and animal communication differ so much that the underlying principles are unrelated.<ref name="Hockett 1960">{{cite book|author=Hockett, Charles F.|year=1960|chapter=Logical considerations in the study of animal communication|title=Animals sounds and animal communication|editor1-first=W.E.|editor1-last=Lanyon|editor2-first=W.N.|editor2-last=Tavolga|pages=392–430|publisher=American Institute of Biological Sciences}}</ref>  Accordingly, linguist [[Thomas A. Sebeok]] has proposed to not use the term "language" for animal sign systems.<ref name="Martinelli 2010">{{Cite book |last=Martinelli |first=Dario |title=A Critical Companion to Zoosemiotics: People, Paths, Ideas |publisher=[[Springer Netherlands]] |year=2010 |isbn=978-90-481-9249-6 |series=Biosemiotics |volume=5 |location=Dordrecht |pages=1–64 |chapter=Introduction to Zoosemiotics |doi=10.1007/978-90-481-9249-6_1}}</ref> However, other linguists and biologists, including [[Marc Hauser]], [[Noam Chomsky]], and [[W. Tecumseh Fitch]], assert that an evolutionary continuum exists between the communication methods of animal and [[Language|human language]].<ref name="hauser_faculty">{{cite web|author=Hauser, Marc D. |author2=Chomsky, Noam |author3=Fitch, W. Tecumseh |url=http://www.chomsky.info/articles/20021122.pdf |title=The Faculty of Language: What Is It, Who Has It, and How Did It Evolve? |publisher=American Association for the Advancement of Science |work=Science |date=22 November 2002 |access-date=28 March 2014 |volume=298 |pages=1569–1579 |quote=We argue that an understanding of the faculty of language requires substantial interdisciplinary cooperation. We suggest how current developments in linguistics can be profitably wedded to work in evolutionary biology, anthropology, psychology, and neuroscience. We submit that a distinction should be made between the faculty of language in the broad sense (FLB) and in the narrow sense (FLN). FLB includes a sensory-motor system, a conceptual-intentional system, and the computational mechanisms for recursion, providing the capacity to generate an infinite range of expressions from a finite set of elements. We hypothesize that FLN only includes recursion and is the only uniquely human component of the faculty of language. We further argue that FLN may have evolved for reasons other than language, hence comparative studies might look for evidence of such computations outside of the domain of communication (for example, number, navigation, and social relations). |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131228122250/http://www.chomsky.info/articles/20021122.pdf |archive-date=28 December 2013 }}</ref>