For those wondering (like I did) "what is a JCB?" - it is a large construction vehicle, like a dump truck, bulldozer, or backhoe, etc. It's not a Jinormous Cacophanous Bird. The term stems from a large manufacturer of heavy equipment called...JCB. And just like Caterpillar here in the US, they prominently paint their name on all their equipment.
@@ColleenJousma I adore Time Team. Especially the episodes in the cotswolds where I lived for 3 years. The Romans clearly loved it too, with so many villas built there from 200-400CE.
Thanks for the detail - it’s especially helpful to have a common language/vocabulary in light of this video’s topic! 😎 Although, I do like the Jinormous Cacophonous Bird option!!!
My parrot calls me "Mommy." He says 'comeer' (come here), 'come on', baby, Teki (his name), kiss me, and a few other words/phrases. He uses them in the correct context. I didn't specifically teach them to him, he just picked them up. I never said 'kiss me' tho. I don't know how he got that one. He's a small conure. He usually just says 'mommy' a lot, like a 2 year old. lol. He actually uses tones that are forceful too when he says "comeer." I don't say 'come here' to him like he does to me. Sometimes he says "mommy, comeer" if he's in the room and far away from me, over and over. lol
my aunt had an african grey parrot that could swear, and use the swear words properly. We were having Thanksgiving dinner, and the parrot wanted some turkey, so he started chanting "f-you". My uncle finally reached over and whacked his cage. The parrot then began chanting "a-hole". Once again the cage got a whack, and then he started chanting "BIG a-hole".
parrots are very intelligent, so it's possible they might work out some contexts for words or phrases but generally they're just copying things they've heard
@@maxsz91 yes, we pick up language from people around us while we're young but a parrot will always use language it's learned like a child would, as to say with little context and probably quite short sentences that are copied directly from whoever spoke or whoever taught the bird directly and could maybe recognise context in some of those. Whereas a human child over time will be able to add more contexts to words and actually understand how they all fit together. Parrots may assign words to situations but if your timetable day to day is the same for your parrot it most likely just knows the routine. (not to say that people are lying when talking about their mimic birds though. My family had an African Grey that seemed to know the context of my name and when he couldn't see me he would scream that I was at school. Probably just copied my mum saying it) there are probably a lot of mistake in this comment because I'm pretty tired.
I love how Simon is obviously so fucking brainy but completely humble and unpretentious and takes the time to remind us the difference between nouns and verbs, acknowledging that everyone should share in this awesome knowledge regardless of our level of familiarity with linguistic terms
One thing I'm really fascinated by is corvid vocal communication, which is sophisticated enough not only to refer to places and times not in the here and now, but to describe a human face well enough that individuals can recognize a human they've never seen. But considering how difficult it is to decipher even the language of our closest relatives, the task of decoding corvid languages seems practically impossible
I'm not sure if any chimps have asked questions but I do know that Koko the gorilla asked many questions, told lies, told jokes, apologized for things, and teased people sometimes. (She was also very sad to hear that her kitten died. And she was sad again when she was told that Robin Williams, whose movies she watched and she met once, had died)
According to her handlers, who were the only ones who could interpret semantically meaningful sentences from her signing. The mainstream media are terrible at reporting on science and stories about Koko were almost always presented uncritically... but you won't find many behavioral scientists or biologists (apart from those who were in the Koko project) who attribute much beyond either normal animal training (operant conditioning) or a "Clever Hans" effect (animal is taking verbal and non-verbal cues from the handler) with Koko's signing. It's also notable that almost no scientific papers were ever presented about Koko, and the few bits that did get published were speculative and did not even attempt to claim the sophisticated communication that the project reported widely in the mainstream media. IOW they were way better at PR than they were at science. This is also the reason no-one has duplicated this experiment, some tried but if you do it with robust research methodology it doesn't work :)
Parrots ask questions. I remember reading an anecdote in the book "Alex and Me" by Irene Pepperberg about the famous African Grey parrot. The researchers had decided in the beginning not to give Alex any mirrors. One day he rode into the restroom an someone's shoulder and Alex got to see himself for the first time. After intently studying his reflection Alex asked, "What color?" One of the local pet shops I frequent has a grey parrot who loves to play "the animal sound game." He plays it in two different ways: he will either make an animal sound, like "woof, woof," to which the human is supposed to respond, "What does the dog say," or he will ask the human, "What does the dog say," to which we are supposed to respond with the appropriate sound. I always feel really lucky when he chooses to play this game with me.😆
alex and me is ana amzing book, not an easy read but it clearly proves how clever they relly are. although your example doesnt provide eveidnce of them understanding anything. its no different to the whistling game we used to play with our parrot. i or the oarrot would start a long drawn out whistle from low to high and the responder would do the opposite.
A few non-primate language anecdotes and observations (from the perspective of a biology major): I had an African Grey parrot who did on multiple instances seem to spontaneously ask questions using words that it had learned separately from each other. Most of the time she was inquiring as to the nature of a food, but once asked if I wanted to be petted (she was often asked if she wanted to have her head scratched, so that was the one case where she actually heard the words together as a question presented to her, but it was clear from the context that she thought I wanted her to make me feel better). Parrots are exceptionally intelligent among the animal kingdom, and their verbal communication abilities are stand-out among terrestrial animals. Relating to other species abilities to understand the concept of grammer/syntax, there was an interesting study conducted on dogs to determine if they understood human speech. While the study was not broad enough to conclusively prove that they do, the findings strongly supported the idea that dogs do in fact understand those things in some capacity. They also showed significant activity in the part of the brain associated with language comprehension during the study. That said, with tens of thousands of years of selective pressure as domestic companions to humans, where the ability to understand our needs have probably forced significant neurological development in that direction, it's both an intriguing peek into a possible avenue towards linguistic development, and also a man-made artificial selection situation that could be nowhere similar to how we arrived where we are today. A final interesting note in the non-primate world of language is that of dolphins. Due to visual limitations within the water and the fact that sounds (in certain frequencies at least) can carry well in that environment, dolphins rely much more on audio communication than visual. Research strongly supports that individual dolphins have "names" (individual-specific calls given by their mothers at birth) that are used within the pod to identify that individual and that are given when meeting strangers. They also seem to use calls related to verbs (hunt, play), not just nouns (fish, shark). While humans probably have the most complex grammar of all species, there is an increasingly compelling body of research that indicates other species may be moving towards more advanced communication that could eventually come to rival that of our natural linguistic abilities. Fascinating stuff.
The question of whether animals can understand human language runs into an ideological problem. If they can use language effectively, they can presumably think. But many people who study animals do so from a behaviourist standpoint (including "verbal behaviour") which assumes that animals (including humans for Watsonian fundamentalists) don't "think."
@@faithlesshound5621 While I am not an authority on the matter, I do believe animals "think", at least in the context of conceptual abstraction, if not with the "inner monologue" that most humans (though apparently not all) have. Watching a crow work out a complex puzzle, or a ferret examining an object and finding novel ways to interact with it, or an octopus learning how to focus a camera so it can photograph aquarium tourists (yes, that happened, and octopuses don't even have a centralized brain), shows creativity that requires at least some form of both investigative and anticipatory thinking.
@@faithlesshound5621 source for the idea that many animal researchers believe animals don’t think? That doesn’t seem correct, or at least a vast simplification
@@yommish I don't know about modern animal researchers, but Behaviourists of JB Watson's ilk were reluctant to ascribe thought to humans - at the most they would accept "subvocalic tremor of the larynx" as a surrogate for "inner speech." A fortiori, they would not have allowed that animals could think.
I used some info from your last video that I remembered off the top of my head during a discussion in my historical linguistics class today! You're awesome Simon!
It just stroke me now, the thing that most differentiate us from all the others animals is the ability to ask "why". And the most powerful tool we have ever invented "science" is pretty much a succession of "why" question.
I think that complicated sign language might have predated complicated vocal language. Why? Both when hunting prey and evading predators it is very vital to be able to read and respond to gestures. What to do, where to go, what is happening. This might also explain why asking questions for chimps isn't a thing: people would generally follow the orders of a higher ranked individual or at least a single individual whom has an advantageous position in a giving hunting or evading scenario.
And if your hand is full with a point rock or a stick/spear in amidst a hunting, you'll need other ways to communicate complex thing, such as this strange apparatus that you use to express emotion by emitting some noises.
Questions are just a polite way of using an imperative. At some point in prehistory 'Would you like to come back to my cave?' started working better than 'You, come back to my cave.'
How, if tones and gestures were already available for being polite? Plus, the question you mentioned is a rephrasing of an imperative, but not all questions are. "What are you eating" is not an order to eat sth. It is also not sth apes ask. Perhaps they do have a gesture for "show me your food" and the ape figured out this is what sign language for "what eat" means ... Plus, you are presuming prehistory occurred - it is not historically recorded, only reconstructed.
@@jointgib Well, it is obvious that all questions allude to an imperative "tell me" ... but as apes have generally "show" rather than "tell" they are not likely to use it.
This is a really fascinating question. There are a few approaches to this, as you mentioned. The comparative angle (e.g. comparing with closely related species) has been compelling, and it should be noted that both social and non-social learning is unique in humans. Specifically, where young chimps (for example) will attempt to imitate their mothers, children will *over*-imitate (exaggerate and generalize) behaviors they encounter. Orangutans are not similar to us in that respect, and as a result have impressive tool use, but they have very small social groups. There's the social aspect of, "What good is it too speak?" but there has been difficulty painting a picture of why evolutionary pressures would truly favor the development of uniquely linguistics features of communication (hierarchical grammar, etc.). There's the evolutionary approach to considering those pressures; one explanation I like is that, combined with existing vocalizations, language developed in concert with tool creation (which requires similarly hierarchically organized development). (See Kolodny and Edelman 2018) Also forgot to mention in the last one, best to avoid looking at individual genes like FoxP2 (which hasn't actually been under selection, as far as we can tell!). The development and evolution of complex traits is a very very tricky topic, and no one agrees with anyone else :) Good video! Always appreciate goats.
Hey, Simon. Loved the content. I did have a bit of a comment/correction-ish to make?: There are human languages that are analyzed to pretty clearly and consistently not make distinctions between nouns and verbs. In particular, the Salishan and Wakashan languages are quite famous for this. It's pretty easy to find some solid papers and research articles on it with a google search, you should check it out! It's super cool. There are some other families/languages that are suspected potentially to not make distinctions but the evidence might be a bit shoddier in some instances. Things like the Munda/certain Austronesian languages, Riau Indonesian, etc. Some Nahuan languages and Classical Nahuatl are known to be 'omnipredicative' and display some features of 'noun-lessness' but there still are distinctions to make between some of the words when it comes to inflection in some categories. But those are some other potential examples that come to mind. I've seen/read some of a collected textbook on this, but I can't remember the exact name atm. Thanks again for the content!
I am fascinated by this idea too, my intuition (as a well read layman, not a professional linguist of course) is that these can be described as complex evolutions from the basic idea of nouns and verbs, because these languages still have identifiable noun or verb roots, or both. There's no telling whether these represent a later development or a retention of a basic mental structure. We may never know, considering how inaccessible the thousands of unrecorded years of language and consciousness are in humans.
T.C. Bramblett I'm not sure what you mean by still having identifiable noun/verb roots. While some definitions of roots are certainly more equatable to what we associate with nouns, morpho-syntactically there is absolutely no distinction made
Thank you! I was sure there must be languages that didn't accomodate the conventional (in IE linguistics) noun/verb distinction, and I've found a fair bit of literature on it since making this video, though not re. the languages you've mentioned - I'll look into them more specifically and correct this in the description :)
Simon, thank you for these amazing videos. I have started learning German and it is extremely interesting to find similarities between Old English and German (sometimes even Russian).
One way one might approach this question is not so much the focus on Chimpanzee gestures, but to explore what is the origin of ‘knowing’ that leads to a gesture. In that we are linking up brain regions to gesture, and how language tends to break apart perception of motion/verbs from surface appearance/ nouns.
I have always wondered if other people have feelings that they can’t put into words in English. Sometimes I have found words in other languages that accurately describe my feelings but not always. I feel language has strong limits when it comes to expressing feelings. And of course if you feel something and can’t describe it it can’t exist in our reality.
Like the Portuguese “saudade”. English Wikipedia needs a long paragraph to describe what it is. However I strongly disagree that something “can’t exist in our reality” if we can’t describe it. If we don’t have a word for something we’ll have to use more than one, or even several sentences. The limits of vocabulary and/or the limits of our ability to express ourselves don’t make feelings/things cease to exist.
So before ppl start using "hangry" no one got angry when was hungry? Of course not, they just dont bother in it having a name of its own. This notion that if we dont describe something in a language we use we cant perceive it, is really old and already prove false. As that guy said with "saudade" that every brazilian (i dont know about the Portugueses) has to come up every time, you still feel what that word is meaning but instead of using a single word you would say "i'm missing you so much and i have a nostagia about out time together so great that i wanna throw my heart to where you are" maybe not like that but you get the point.
If we don't have adequate words for the concepts we're expressing we use whatever words are closest, and if it's a concept we talk about enough we just develop brand new words and phrases to fit. For example, my sexual orientation. I consider myself Pansexual but if I didn't have that word as a descriptor I would probably call myself Bisexual. But there are some fundamental differences between being Bisexual and being Pan. The main difference being the concept of gender - blindness. That means someone's gender identity and or presentation doesn't really impact your attraction to them. You're attracted to their body, their face their voice, but it doesn't relate back to whether they're men, women or anything in between. It's more just...them? When you talk to Bisexuals though their feelings of attraction are related to gender. That's why you hear them talk about their attraction to men and women being "equal but different." That's not the same experience as Pansexuality and pretty alien to me, but if you're in a pinch "Bisexual" gets across that you're commonly attracted to both men and women and not just one or the other. Which can be enough if there are no other words to use. So if you're feeling or thinking about something that doesn't have a name, give it one. An undescribed concept you're struggling to rationalize? Describe it. I do this all the time and it's helped me organize my thoughts and my experiences in the world so much.
@@TheZenytram We can certainly perceive any emotion that it is possible to attach a name to, but I do think it is true we are less likely to bring it up if there is no established concept in the language for it. And it also seems possible that having the concept and communicating it more often might cause a bit of a feedback loop that enhances whatever the concept describes, if it is related to our inner world.
I think coming down from the trees changed selective pressure significantly for hominids. Would reckon the need for different food sources, ie more hunting, had a lot to do with it
I am fascinated by the case of the Campbell monkeys - even though the implications of the ongoing research into their system of communication have been a bit exaggerated by the media ("they have grammar", "clearly capable of symbolic thinking" etc.). Apparently, they have three alarm calls, one meaning "leopard", and the second one "eagle" while the meaning of the third one is not entirely clear and probably just means "unspecified disturbance". As such they alert the others to an immediate danger - for example an approaching leopard - and lead to an immediate reaction (for example climbing high up into a tree to escape the leopard). However, in addition, they have a fourth sound that can be added as a suffix which modifies the meaning of the preceding alarm call, taking away the "alarm" aspect (and thereby not triggering the usual panicked reaction). For example, they might use "leopard + suffix" to communicate that they have spotted a leopard, but in a safe distance, or also, as some believe, to tell others about a leopard that was there earlier in the day, but has already left, etc. However, that's just scratching the surface, apparently the research is still very much ongoing.
On the subject of teaching chimpanzees how to inflect words: You have to consider what that might mean in sign language. For example, person inflection in sign language can be the directions of symbols. I believe the ASL verb for GIVE is inflected in this way, where the direction towards ones chest is related to 1st person, the forward direction (or maybe the direction toward the listener?) is related to 2nd person, and a sideways direction is related to third person. The direction of the motion is then from agent to benefactor. All of this seems pretty intuitive and obvious, so you might not realize that it's a kind of person inflection. You actually mention apes doing this sort of thing at 5:28 , so it sounds like you have heard of apes using morphology, at least in a sense, though maybe not very abstract morphology. Things like reduplication and speed are other types of morphological alterations that happen in ASL, in addition to ordinary affixes. I don't know if non-humans have been taught any of these things, but I thought I would point it out.
I didn't know much about inflection in fully grammatical sign languages so this is very interesting, thank you! Yes, from what I've read, the modifications they make to verbs tend to be fairly intuitive (e.g. if they want you to do something, they might direct the gesture at you in some way).
@@simonroper9218 everything is fine here mate, thanks. 2nd wave and stage 4 lockdown almost finished here in Melbourne. Weather is getting warmer and sunnier, summer is on its way, things are on the up! 😉
About (around 7:10) the idea that apes are recognising questions as imperatives... How about their responses? Do they believe a response like ‘apple’ is imperative too? Fascinating topic!
i'm not sure about chimpanzees, but i think coco the gorilla has asked questions on her own. if i remember correctly she had a pet cat who died, and she asked the caretaker where the cat was. she also said she was sad when the caretakers explained the cat had died.
*THANK YOU* for the mention. Very good pronunciation, but in Swedish the g before e, i, y, ä, ö become [j] as well as after l or r at the end of a word, so Swedish is [je:orj], and in German the final g as word final has "Auslautverhärtung", so [ge:ork] (if any open o, that's not on the keyboard). As to content, I wonder if not the nouns as well are very action related, like, could you teach the ape the difference between "apple" and "pear" when they are eaten the same way? Oranges, bananas and nuts are eaten different ways from apples and from each other. Obviously, there is also the capacity of admitting to sth (like eating an apple). I'd like to know more about "strings of gestures" - do they connect more like words in a sentence (giving ape one part of the double articulation) or more like sentences added on each other?
I read a recent study that suggests Neanderthal male / female chromosomes may have been replaced by modern human dna because of evolutionary advantages. Neanderthals had a very small genetic pool which, possibly, created negative mutations in a high percentage in their dna than ours.
there was a lady who taught a chimp sign language and when she asked, what happend to his parents... the chimp signed out exactly what happened. and the lady knew what happened prior (the chimps parents were killed by poachers and then was taken as a young baby chimp) so she knew the chimp was really signing and thinking and remembering etc... it was really sad to watch cuz the chimp was noticeably saddened and hurt by what happened. but he acted just like we would do. it was really interesting.
I've been wondering about primate communication for a long time. thank you for quelling this flame of questions that's been bothering me. Granted I have more but still
couple of points, why would an animal need to seek information, they will ask for food (dogs, queen bees) but they don't deal in information as researchers do. secondly would language not arise from the division between those whom one grooms by touch and those whom one does not touch but needs to cooperate with.
I think u need to build ur fence higher for the goats. cuz if they can hop over it so easily then it isnt doing anything. lol but either way, those goats r really cute and adorable.
I came across a discussion with Noam Chomsky, (sorry couldn't find the link) where he seemed to suggest a difference between the idea of "language" or at least the language centres of the brain and "communication". He went as far as to say that it appears that language did not evolve from the purposes of communication, but rather as a means of organising thought.
@@TheZenytram I think you misunderstand. "Communication" is a pattern that we use to move information, whereas the process in the brain that enables the interpretation of those patterns (when taking information in) and enables the creation of the patterns when (when putting information out) did not develop to do that. They developed, presumably serving another function or series of functions and later humans adapted to using them for communication. It would be inaccurate to say that that communication causes babies to learn how to use that part of the brain, as it would be inaccurate to say that "walking causes a baby to learn how to move it's legs".
A lot of research about primate language acquisition - including that of the Gardners, which you have cited - has some pretty serious methodological criticisms leveled against it. So much so that many - cards on the table, myself included haha - would be inclined to question how scientifically valuable their conclusions actually are. I was somewhat surprised to see that you didn't address any of those criticisms here.
Am I stating the obvious by pointing out theory of mind stuff? In order to ask a question of someone else, you have to have the capacity to think that that someone else might know something that you don't.
Hi Simon, I'm really interested in the claim made here about distinction between nouns and verbs in answering questions in Chimpanzee sign language. Was this a claim made in your source "Teaching Sign Language to Chimpanzees" ? I'm having trouble finding a copy of the book or otherwise tracking down a source. Do you have any leads? Thank you.
I have seen several books on sale about "body language," but none about the kind of hand-waving that some people do while they speak. That seems to be more of a thing among women, and for speakers of Italian.
Simon Roper ah cool, don’t live there anymore but grew up nearby and my mum worked there for a while - I worked flipping burgers at Beltain one year too
I heard that there is evidence that a large enough group of prelinguistic babies left in isolation develops its own language (without adult interference). It's as if language were something that just grows from us. This might indicate that, while a social context is essential, a cultural one is not (meaning by "culture" a pre-existing set of normalized communal practices). There are some philosophers who focus on the issue of the phylogeny of language (the initial development of language as a whole) and whose work might be of some viewers' interest: two prominent ones are Robert Brandom and John McDowell. Maybe also Daniel Dennett from a more naturalistic point of view.
Evidence from zebra finch experiments suggests that what would happen is that the human langauge would be simple or pidgin-like at first but would develop over a few generations to a full langauge.
@@cathjj840 i understand that this particular phenomenon happened in Nazi (or other) concentration camps. I assume they gave some minimal care to the babies, but they talked with each other in some form of language that was new for all intents and purposes
@@seamusoblainn Well,the Nazis tried that and they wound up with a bunch of dead or severely dysfunctional humans. Marasmus and depression. Think up something else, preferably for nothing higher than cold-blooded beings.
Geometry at the preconscious level is what great apes use without being shown, and at different levels of mind-body connection, the global workspace of say corvids, is not really "smaller" but different in biases and priority of sense input, yielding a different "kind" of conscious agent. Chomsky had it half right, we DO create a world whole cloth in verbal narrative, albeit non-linear and non-deterministic in nature. Animals have this MATH and PHYSICS running below their conscious experience in the stack, or so it would necessarily seem to us. WE are special because we can tell a story about it, and include synthesized elements that do not exist yet; we can imagine. See the Thomas Nagel callout video on my channel. Academic philosophy is B@t $#!t Cr@zy.
@@umbrellastation25 When I looked at physics from true first principles, it occured to me that the high-minded academics and the shit throwing apes are doing the same operations, in different transforms. Standing on the ground, attached to a planet that is rotating, orbiting and likely moving away from a Universal "center' point, we have epistemic access to all points, except the center of the planet we stand on. If you jump and look to the core of the Earth, your epistemic access to that line of sight changes because of the competing accelerated reference frames. I tried to do Nima Arkani-Hamed's Amplituhedron work, as a gorilla. No wonder academic physics looks like the circus to me.
Yes ! The stoop of a falcon involves a very complex calculus of trajectory, distance, speed, wind, prey movement ... Perhaps one way we humans are unique is that our conscious selves are invading/claiming territory from the preconscious intelligence. Language (and culture) may be a technology for achieving that aim.
@@mondopinion3777 I challenged computer science to a game of Go/Chess; combined rule sets of the two games we genuflect at the calculator beating us at. Suddenly all the "smart" people who supposedly know math have nothing to say to ME. You got it; eyes and the Pre-Cambrian explosion. God's compiler kernel is the preternatural pressure mediation/mapping of self to sustenance. The geometry determines the topos, or trace of the identity matrix of the thing. Language is a displacement engine for denying our animal savagery and telling a story. If you see yourself as an animal alone, then you never build, you exist. We have denied our motivations to endlessly pursue them. Look at the internet. I rest my case for Extinction Protocol Human.
I replaced it on the post which for now at least comments on your videos part 1 and 2: assortedretorts.blogspot.com/2020/08/how-did-language-start-part-1-27.html
Roper's apparent complete ignorance of the difficult relevant problems raised by Chomsky renders all of this complete silliness. Start, Roper, with some definition of "language" before asking the question of how it "starts." Recognize the qualitative difference between human language on a purely syntactic level first.
he's not though, he's an archaeology student with an interest in the development of languages. not to say he doesn't have linguistic knowledge, just that he's not necessarily a student of linguistics.
If aliens were watching humans they might not initially get that vibrations in the air were the thing we were communicating with. They might assume that blushing or farting was our language (and I suppose the former is a form of communication, so our decision that it doesn't count is probably somewhat arbitrary).
Would they eventually understand us, or we them? Wittgenstein said, "If a lion could speak, we could not understand him," meaning in his gnomic way that, since we have nothing in common, there is no way we can communicate. I suspect that the same applies to humans and cats, dogs or the common farm animals we used to live alongside for thousands of years. I have not heard of any folk wisdom about what animals say or mean. So, is it impossible for us to communicate? The same could be said of babies: their experiences are unlike ours, but they can be taught to use elements of Makaton sign language before they learn to speak.
![ILLSLICK - KILLSHOT REMIX [FULL VERSION]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/RIK8RrqIAzE/mqdefault.jpg)
"How did language start?"
"Well you see, one day some dude decided to chase some goats around with a water gun"
Simon's aesthetic slowly becoming a 1870s English aristocrat w/ those sideburns
now, i know from where his style looks alike
John Stuart Mill, when he loses his hair.
bold of you to assume he isn’t from the 1870s
But with goat cuts
good, we need more of that old sense of fashion back.
Well “non-linguist”, I think your content Is some of the best linguistic content on the platform, and hope you keep up the good work!
That's a really lovely thing to read, thank you :) Bear in mind I do still make mistakes, though!
Those who are critisizing Simon Roper are losers. Maybe jelas also.
@@simonroper9218 ,, Why dose the Grimsby accent sound like Aussie? (Australian accent) Its the only accent from the UK that sounds Australian.
As a linguist-in-the-making, I have to wholeheartedly agree with this comment. I love your content and your way of presenting it!
@@ianfarr-wharton1000 I hear cockney and northern Irish in Oz accents - but I am British so probably pick up different sounds.
For those wondering (like I did) "what is a JCB?" - it is a large construction vehicle, like a dump truck, bulldozer, or backhoe, etc. It's not a Jinormous Cacophanous Bird.
The term stems from a large manufacturer of heavy equipment called...JCB. And just like Caterpillar here in the US, they prominently paint their name on all their equipment.
I learned what JCB is after watching Time Team. :)
@@ColleenJousma I adore Time Team. Especially the episodes in the cotswolds where I lived for 3 years. The Romans clearly loved it too, with so many villas built there from 200-400CE.
John Deere*
Thanks for the detail - it’s especially helpful to have a common language/vocabulary in light of this video’s topic! 😎 Although, I do like the Jinormous Cacophonous Bird option!!!
JCB joseph cyril bamford
My parrot calls me "Mommy." He says 'comeer' (come here), 'come on', baby, Teki (his name), kiss me, and a few other words/phrases. He uses them in the correct context. I didn't specifically teach them to him, he just picked them up. I never said 'kiss me' tho. I don't know how he got that one. He's a small conure. He usually just says 'mommy' a lot, like a 2 year old. lol. He actually uses tones that are forceful too when he says "comeer." I don't say 'come here' to him like he does to me. Sometimes he says "mommy, comeer" if he's in the room and far away from me, over and over. lol
my aunt had an african grey parrot that could swear, and use the swear words properly. We were having Thanksgiving dinner, and the parrot wanted some turkey, so he started chanting "f-you". My uncle finally reached over and whacked his cage. The parrot then began chanting "a-hole". Once again the cage got a whack, and then he started chanting "BIG a-hole".
parrots are very intelligent, so it's possible they might work out some contexts for words or phrases but generally they're just copying things they've heard
So do we.. xD
Where did you learn english? Was it some kind of heavenly enlightenment or you just picked it up from your parents as a kid? :-P
@@maxsz91 yes, we pick up language from people around us while we're young but a parrot will always use language it's learned like a child would, as to say with little context and probably quite short sentences that are copied directly from whoever spoke or whoever taught the bird directly and could maybe recognise context in some of those. Whereas a human child over time will be able to add more contexts to words and actually understand how they all fit together. Parrots may assign words to situations but if your timetable day to day is the same for your parrot it most likely just knows the routine. (not to say that people are lying when talking about their mimic birds though. My family had an African Grey that seemed to know the context of my name and when he couldn't see me he would scream that I was at school. Probably just copied my mum saying it) there are probably a lot of mistake in this comment because I'm pretty tired.
@@faroukabad LOL!!
I love how Simon is obviously so fucking brainy but completely humble and unpretentious and takes the time to remind us the difference between nouns and verbs, acknowledging that everyone should share in this awesome knowledge regardless of our level of familiarity with linguistic terms
One thing I'm really fascinated by is corvid vocal communication, which is sophisticated enough not only to refer to places and times not in the here and now, but to describe a human face well enough that individuals can recognize a human they've never seen. But considering how difficult it is to decipher even the language of our closest relatives, the task of decoding corvid languages seems practically impossible
Yeah Corvids are so smart they scare me
@@helenaren If they had opposable thumbs they'd probably rule this planet.
I think the JCB is trying to communicate.
I went back and watched the first minute again, muted the audio and played the Terminator theme. Another interesting video!
Intro was just Simon herding in the subscribers
Goat:🐐
Farmer: so anyway, i started blasting
Lmao
Hahaha! 🤣
You're amazing. I would think you're a linguistics professor if I didn't know otherwise
the internet has changed education forever
@@rubadubmedia word.
he aint shit. but maybe linguistics professors aint shit either
Simon is the GOAT
I'm not sure if any chimps have asked questions but I do know that Koko the gorilla asked many questions, told lies, told jokes, apologized for things, and teased people sometimes.
(She was also very sad to hear that her kitten died. And she was sad again when she was told that Robin Williams, whose movies she watched and she met once, had died)
According to her handlers, who were the only ones who could interpret semantically meaningful sentences from her signing. The mainstream media are terrible at reporting on science and stories about Koko were almost always presented uncritically... but you won't find many behavioral scientists or biologists (apart from those who were in the Koko project) who attribute much beyond either normal animal training (operant conditioning) or a "Clever Hans" effect (animal is taking verbal and non-verbal cues from the handler) with Koko's signing.
It's also notable that almost no scientific papers were ever presented about Koko, and the few bits that did get published were speculative and did not even attempt to claim the sophisticated communication that the project reported widely in the mainstream media. IOW they were way better at PR than they were at science. This is also the reason no-one has duplicated this experiment, some tried but if you do it with robust research methodology it doesn't work :)
Sorry to break it for you, but the whole "We taught Koko language" thing has been pretty much debunked. It was a pseudo-scientific scam.
Parrots ask questions. I remember reading an anecdote in the book "Alex and Me" by Irene Pepperberg about the famous African Grey parrot. The researchers had decided in the beginning not to give Alex any mirrors. One day he rode into the restroom an someone's shoulder and Alex got to see himself for the first time. After intently studying his reflection Alex asked, "What color?" One of the local pet shops I frequent has a grey parrot who loves to play "the animal sound game." He plays it in two different ways: he will either make an animal sound, like "woof, woof," to which the human is supposed to respond, "What does the dog say," or he will ask the human, "What does the dog say," to which we are supposed to respond with the appropriate sound. I always feel really lucky when he chooses to play this game with me.😆
alex and me is ana amzing book, not an easy read but it clearly proves how clever they relly are.
although your example doesnt provide eveidnce of them understanding anything. its no different to the whistling game we used to play with our parrot. i or the oarrot would start a long drawn out whistle from low to high and the responder would do the opposite.
A few non-primate language anecdotes and observations (from the perspective of a biology major):
I had an African Grey parrot who did on multiple instances seem to spontaneously ask questions using words that it had learned separately from each other. Most of the time she was inquiring as to the nature of a food, but once asked if I wanted to be petted (she was often asked if she wanted to have her head scratched, so that was the one case where she actually heard the words together as a question presented to her, but it was clear from the context that she thought I wanted her to make me feel better). Parrots are exceptionally intelligent among the animal kingdom, and their verbal communication abilities are stand-out among terrestrial animals.
Relating to other species abilities to understand the concept of grammer/syntax, there was an interesting study conducted on dogs to determine if they understood human speech. While the study was not broad enough to conclusively prove that they do, the findings strongly supported the idea that dogs do in fact understand those things in some capacity. They also showed significant activity in the part of the brain associated with language comprehension during the study. That said, with tens of thousands of years of selective pressure as domestic companions to humans, where the ability to understand our needs have probably forced significant neurological development in that direction, it's both an intriguing peek into a possible avenue towards linguistic development, and also a man-made artificial selection situation that could be nowhere similar to how we arrived where we are today.
A final interesting note in the non-primate world of language is that of dolphins. Due to visual limitations within the water and the fact that sounds (in certain frequencies at least) can carry well in that environment, dolphins rely much more on audio communication than visual. Research strongly supports that individual dolphins have "names" (individual-specific calls given by their mothers at birth) that are used within the pod to identify that individual and that are given when meeting strangers. They also seem to use calls related to verbs (hunt, play), not just nouns (fish, shark).
While humans probably have the most complex grammar of all species, there is an increasingly compelling body of research that indicates other species may be moving towards more advanced communication that could eventually come to rival that of our natural linguistic abilities. Fascinating stuff.
The question of whether animals can understand human language runs into an ideological problem. If they can use language effectively, they can presumably think. But many people who study animals do so from a behaviourist standpoint (including "verbal behaviour") which assumes that animals (including humans for Watsonian fundamentalists) don't "think."
@@faithlesshound5621 While I am not an authority on the matter, I do believe animals "think", at least in the context of conceptual abstraction, if not with the "inner monologue" that most humans (though apparently not all) have. Watching a crow work out a complex puzzle, or a ferret examining an object and finding novel ways to interact with it, or an octopus learning how to focus a camera so it can photograph aquarium tourists (yes, that happened, and octopuses don't even have a centralized brain), shows creativity that requires at least some form of both investigative and anticipatory thinking.
@@faithlesshound5621 source for the idea that many animal researchers believe animals don’t think? That doesn’t seem correct, or at least a vast simplification
@@yommish I don't know about modern animal researchers, but Behaviourists of JB Watson's ilk were reluctant to ascribe thought to humans - at the most they would accept "subvocalic tremor of the larynx" as a surrogate for "inner speech." A fortiori, they would not have allowed that animals could think.
You have the best intros in the game.
This is one of my favorite videos that you have done. I had to Google what a JCB was. 😝❤
I used some info from your last video that I remembered off the top of my head during a discussion in my historical linguistics class today! You're awesome Simon!
So how that went?
Sideburns are on point.
It just stroke me now, the thing that most differentiate us from all the others animals is the ability to ask "why". And the most powerful tool we have ever invented "science" is pretty much a succession of "why" question.
I think that complicated sign language might have predated complicated vocal language. Why? Both when hunting prey and evading predators it is very vital to be able to read and respond to gestures. What to do, where to go, what is happening. This might also explain why asking questions for chimps isn't a thing: people would generally follow the orders of a higher ranked individual or at least a single individual whom has an advantageous position in a giving hunting or evading scenario.
And if your hand is full with a point rock or a stick/spear in amidst a hunting, you'll need other ways to communicate complex thing, such as this strange apparatus that you use to express emotion by emitting some noises.
“whom has”
Spot on. Notice how combat soldiers communicate situation updated and plans by sign language (for obvious reasons)
Greetings from Tulsa, Oklahoma(a.k.a. Indian Territory) You're my hero Simon!!! I love all of your videos! Keep 'em coming!
The thing I like most about this guy is- that profile pic. Spectacular.
Love your content- keep up the fantastic work
Questions are just a polite way of using an imperative. At some point in prehistory 'Would you like to come back to my cave?' started working better than 'You, come back to my cave.'
How, if tones and gestures were already available for being polite?
Plus, the question you mentioned is a rephrasing of an imperative, but not all questions are. "What are you eating" is not an order to eat sth. It is also not sth apes ask. Perhaps they do have a gesture for "show me your food" and the ape figured out this is what sign language for "what eat" means ...
Plus, you are presuming prehistory occurred - it is not historically recorded, only reconstructed.
@@hglundahl Tell me what you're eating.
@@jointgib Well, it is obvious that all questions allude to an imperative "tell me" ... but as apes have generally "show" rather than "tell" they are not likely to use it.
you always display a commonsense to a subject that could be well and truly "off with the fairies". Thank you.
This is a really fascinating question. There are a few approaches to this, as you mentioned.
The comparative angle (e.g. comparing with closely related species) has been compelling, and it should be noted that both social and non-social learning is unique in humans. Specifically, where young chimps (for example) will attempt to imitate their mothers, children will *over*-imitate (exaggerate and generalize) behaviors they encounter. Orangutans are not similar to us in that respect, and as a result have impressive tool use, but they have very small social groups.
There's the social aspect of, "What good is it too speak?" but there has been difficulty painting a picture of why evolutionary pressures would truly favor the development of uniquely linguistics features of communication (hierarchical grammar, etc.).
There's the evolutionary approach to considering those pressures; one explanation I like is that, combined with existing vocalizations, language developed in concert with tool creation (which requires similarly hierarchically organized development). (See Kolodny and Edelman 2018)
Also forgot to mention in the last one, best to avoid looking at individual genes like FoxP2 (which hasn't actually been under selection, as far as we can tell!). The development and evolution of complex traits is a very very tricky topic, and no one agrees with anyone else :)
Good video! Always appreciate goats.
Great videos, just organically delivered info and not blasted with ads either.
Very interesting topic. I like this little series and the thoughtful way you're presenting it.
And it shows how intelligent apes and goats are.
Hey, Simon. Loved the content. I did have a bit of a comment/correction-ish to make?:
There are human languages that are analyzed to pretty clearly and consistently not make distinctions between nouns and verbs. In particular, the Salishan and Wakashan languages are quite famous for this. It's pretty easy to find some solid papers and research articles on it with a google search, you should check it out! It's super cool. There are some other families/languages that are suspected potentially to not make distinctions but the evidence might be a bit shoddier in some instances. Things like the Munda/certain Austronesian languages, Riau Indonesian, etc. Some Nahuan languages and Classical Nahuatl are known to be 'omnipredicative' and display some features of 'noun-lessness' but there still are distinctions to make between some of the words when it comes to inflection in some categories. But those are some other potential examples that come to mind. I've seen/read some of a collected textbook on this, but I can't remember the exact name atm. Thanks again for the content!
I am fascinated by this idea too, my intuition (as a well read layman, not a professional linguist of course) is that these can be described as complex evolutions from the basic idea of nouns and verbs, because these languages still have identifiable noun or verb roots, or both. There's no telling whether these represent a later development or a retention of a basic mental structure. We may never know, considering how inaccessible the thousands of unrecorded years of language and consciousness are in humans.
T.C. Bramblett I'm not sure what you mean by still having identifiable noun/verb roots. While some definitions of roots are certainly more equatable to what we associate with nouns, morpho-syntactically there is absolutely no distinction made
Thank you! I was sure there must be languages that didn't accomodate the conventional (in IE linguistics) noun/verb distinction, and I've found a fair bit of literature on it since making this video, though not re. the languages you've mentioned - I'll look into them more specifically and correct this in the description :)
More goats please. You are by far my favourite non linguist linguist too.
extremely interesting as usual. Now I'll read the story of Washoe while waiting for Part 3.
Greetings from Vietnam.
Simon, thank you for these amazing videos. I have started learning German and it is extremely interesting to find similarities between Old English and German (sometimes even Russian).
One way one might approach this question is not so much the focus on Chimpanzee gestures, but to explore what is the origin of ‘knowing’ that leads to a gesture. In that we are linking up brain regions to gesture, and how language tends to break apart perception of motion/verbs from surface appearance/ nouns.
Chimps actually do ask questions spontaneously, there are videos of washoe asking her keeper if it's time to eat and stuff like that
Interesting, I wonder if that's still tied to their directive language though- they might really be asking *permission* to eat, maybe?
I have always wondered if other people have feelings that they can’t put into words in English. Sometimes I have found words in other languages that accurately describe my feelings but not always. I feel language has strong limits when it comes to expressing feelings. And of course if you feel something and can’t describe it it can’t exist in our reality.
Humboldt and Sapir were on your trail in regards to that.
Language is interconnected with the mind, thus with culture and concpets.
Like the Portuguese “saudade”. English Wikipedia needs a long paragraph to describe what it is.
However I strongly disagree that something “can’t exist in our reality” if we can’t describe it. If we don’t have a word for something we’ll have to use more than one, or even several sentences. The limits of vocabulary and/or the limits of our ability to express ourselves don’t make feelings/things cease to exist.
So before ppl start using "hangry" no one got angry when was hungry? Of course not, they just dont bother in it having a name of its own.
This notion that if we dont describe something in a language we use we cant perceive it, is really old and already prove false.
As that guy said with "saudade" that every brazilian (i dont know about the Portugueses) has to come up every time, you still feel what that word is meaning but instead of using a single word you would say "i'm missing you so much and i have a nostagia about out time together so great that i wanna throw my heart to where you are" maybe not like that but you get the point.
If we don't have adequate words for the concepts we're expressing we use whatever words are closest, and if it's a concept we talk about enough we just develop brand new words and phrases to fit. For example, my sexual orientation. I consider myself Pansexual but if I didn't have that word as a descriptor I would probably call myself Bisexual. But there are some fundamental differences between being Bisexual and being Pan. The main difference being the concept of gender - blindness. That means someone's gender identity and or presentation doesn't really impact your attraction to them. You're attracted to their body, their face their voice, but it doesn't relate back to whether they're men, women or anything in between. It's more just...them? When you talk to Bisexuals though their feelings of attraction are related to gender. That's why you hear them talk about their attraction to men and women being "equal but different." That's not the same experience as Pansexuality and pretty alien to me, but if you're in a pinch "Bisexual" gets across that you're commonly attracted to both men and women and not just one or the other. Which can be enough if there are no other words to use. So if you're feeling or thinking about something that doesn't have a name, give it one. An undescribed concept you're struggling to rationalize? Describe it. I do this all the time and it's helped me organize my thoughts and my experiences in the world so much.
@@TheZenytram We can certainly perceive any emotion that it is possible to attach a name to, but I do think it is true we are less likely to bring it up if there is no established concept in the language for it. And it also seems possible that having the concept and communicating it more often might cause a bit of a feedback loop that enhances whatever the concept describes, if it is related to our inner world.
I think coming down from the trees changed selective pressure significantly for hominids. Would reckon the need for different food sources, ie more hunting, had a lot to do with it
I am fascinated by the case of the Campbell monkeys - even though the implications of the ongoing research into their system of communication have been a bit exaggerated by the media ("they have grammar", "clearly capable of symbolic thinking" etc.). Apparently, they have three alarm calls, one meaning "leopard", and the second one "eagle" while the meaning of the third one is not entirely clear and probably just means "unspecified disturbance". As such they alert the others to an immediate danger - for example an approaching leopard - and lead to an immediate reaction (for example climbing high up into a tree to escape the leopard). However, in addition, they have a fourth sound that can be added as a suffix which modifies the meaning of the preceding alarm call, taking away the "alarm" aspect (and thereby not triggering the usual panicked reaction). For example, they might use "leopard + suffix" to communicate that they have spotted a leopard, but in a safe distance, or also, as some believe, to tell others about a leopard that was there earlier in the day, but has already left, etc. However, that's just scratching the surface, apparently the research is still very much ongoing.
On the subject of teaching chimpanzees how to inflect words: You have to consider what that might mean in sign language. For example, person inflection in sign language can be the directions of symbols. I believe the ASL verb for GIVE is inflected in this way, where the direction towards ones chest is related to 1st person, the forward direction (or maybe the direction toward the listener?) is related to 2nd person, and a sideways direction is related to third person. The direction of the motion is then from agent to benefactor. All of this seems pretty intuitive and obvious, so you might not realize that it's a kind of person inflection. You actually mention apes doing this sort of thing at 5:28 , so it sounds like you have heard of apes using morphology, at least in a sense, though maybe not very abstract morphology. Things like reduplication and speed are other types of morphological alterations that happen in ASL, in addition to ordinary affixes. I don't know if non-humans have been taught any of these things, but I thought I would point it out.
I didn't know much about inflection in fully grammatical sign languages so this is very interesting, thank you! Yes, from what I've read, the modifications they make to verbs tend to be fairly intuitive (e.g. if they want you to do something, they might direct the gesture at you in some way).
Mate, I love your videos! And those are some meaty chops! Would love to see how you sport a beard!! Loads of respect from Australia :D
Thank you! They're a consequence of lockdown, I was going to get rid of them at some point! Hope everything's okay over there :)
@@simonroper9218 everything is fine here mate, thanks. 2nd wave and stage 4 lockdown almost finished here in Melbourne. Weather is getting warmer and sunnier, summer is on its way, things are on the up! 😉
Grug 2 weeks to go you mexican lol
@@jenniferschmitzer299 2 weeks to gooooooo mate and I can not wait 😂 man I miss pub beer and my mates 🍻
@@jenniferschmitzer299 ya banana bender hahaha
Fascinating. Thanks so much for this, Simon.
I'm a simple man
Simon uploads, I stop everything and watch
Thank you for uploading this video. I was interesting.
About (around 7:10) the idea that apes are recognising questions as imperatives... How about their responses? Do they believe a response like ‘apple’ is imperative too? Fascinating topic!
i'm not sure about chimpanzees, but i think coco the gorilla has asked questions on her own. if i remember correctly she had a pet cat who died, and she asked the caretaker where the cat was. she also said she was sad when the caretakers explained the cat had died.
(the cat got run over by a car for anyone who is curious)
Zoë de Wijn yes, I recall Koko asking about the kitten, All Ball, after it died. She seemed terribly sad.
@John Osman oh very interesting!! :)
@@mrsmac5196 uhuh :( poor koko
That initial scene is so obvious in England. There is no place like that in any land I have visited.
very interesting, Simon. You are a linguist, no doubt. Your explanations are very good.
*THANK YOU* for the mention. Very good pronunciation, but in Swedish the g before e, i, y, ä, ö become [j] as well as after l or r at the end of a word, so Swedish is [je:orj], and in German the final g as word final has "Auslautverhärtung", so [ge:ork] (if any open o, that's not on the keyboard).
As to content, I wonder if not the nouns as well are very action related, like, could you teach the ape the difference between "apple" and "pear" when they are eaten the same way? Oranges, bananas and nuts are eaten different ways from apples and from each other. Obviously, there is also the capacity of admitting to sth (like eating an apple).
I'd like to know more about "strings of gestures" - do they connect more like words in a sentence (giving ape one part of the double articulation) or more like sentences added on each other?
Can you do a video where you try to speak to someone who only speaks Frisian whilst you speak in Old English? I think that would be very interesting!
Yes, I see you did refer to a story from Next of Kin!
I read a recent study that suggests Neanderthal male / female chromosomes may have been replaced by modern human dna because of evolutionary advantages. Neanderthals had a very small genetic pool which, possibly, created negative mutations in a high percentage in their dna than ours.
That was one hell of an introduction...
there was a lady who taught a chimp sign language and when she asked, what happend to his parents... the chimp signed out exactly what happened. and the lady knew what happened prior (the chimps parents were killed by poachers and then was taken as a young baby chimp) so she knew the chimp was really signing and thinking and remembering etc... it was really sad to watch cuz the chimp was noticeably saddened and hurt by what happened. but he acted just like we would do. it was really interesting.
It's not only craniel capacity that is important equally important is how the brain is wired!
I've been wondering about primate communication for a long time. thank you for quelling this flame of questions that's been bothering me. Granted I have more but still
Thanks for not forgetting about our cousins the bonobos.
Have you looked into non-primate communication, such as the communication between cetaceans?
I haven't, but thanks for the suggestion! I've looked a bit at corvids but I know next to nothing about birds. Very interesting nonetheless!
I have just asked the same thing. Good question!
Should have read the comments first.
couple of points, why would an animal need to seek information, they will ask for food (dogs, queen bees) but they don't deal in information as researchers do. secondly would language not arise from the division between those whom one grooms by touch and those whom one does not touch but needs to cooperate with.
I think u need to build ur fence higher for the goats. cuz if they can hop over it so easily then it isnt doing anything. lol but either way, those goats r really cute and adorable.
I really love your videos. Please can you tell me where the goat scene is shot? It looks like an anglo Saxon village
I came across a discussion with Noam Chomsky, (sorry couldn't find the link) where he seemed to suggest a difference between the idea of "language" or at least the language centres of the brain and "communication". He went as far as to say that it appears that language did not evolve from the purposes of communication, but rather as a means of organising thought.
I can already say that is false, i dont know if this guy or you know, but there is ppl like me who dont think in any language.
And if wasnt for communication in the first place no babe would learn it and then using it in their thoughts.
@@TheZenytram I think you misunderstand. "Communication" is a pattern that we use to move information, whereas the process in the brain that enables the interpretation of those patterns (when taking information in) and enables the creation of the patterns when (when putting information out) did not develop to do that. They developed, presumably serving another function or series of functions and later humans adapted to using them for communication.
It would be inaccurate to say that that communication causes babies to learn how to use that part of the brain, as it would be inaccurate to say that "walking causes a baby to learn how to move it's legs".
This is fascinating. Does anyone know of any studies of dolphin and whale communication and how they communicate with humans?
I'd be interested to know if you've read Steven Pinker (after Chomsky) on the fallacy of apes learning/handling sign language.
A lot of research about primate language acquisition - including that of the Gardners, which you have cited - has some pretty serious methodological criticisms leveled against it. So much so that many - cards on the table, myself included haha - would be inclined to question how scientifically valuable their conclusions actually are. I was somewhat surprised to see that you didn't address any of those criticisms here.
After recording the video, he killed the JCB driver...
Wouldnt looking at children make more sense than monkeys?
Am I stating the obvious by pointing out theory of mind stuff? In order to ask a question of someone else, you have to have the capacity to think that that someone else might know something that you don't.
As always in evolution we fall in the chicken egg question
Hi Simon, I'm really interested in the claim made here about distinction between nouns and verbs in answering questions in Chimpanzee sign language. Was this a claim made in your source "Teaching Sign Language to Chimpanzees" ? I'm having trouble finding a copy of the book or otherwise tracking down a source. Do you have any leads? Thank you.
How long could Simon remain sane for if he were to spend some time in a monastery full of monks who had taken a vow of silence?
I laughed when simon said "There's a joker outside doing god know's what" lol
I think he said "a JCB" which is a kind of digger.
Fascinating.
Simon Roper, Why dose the Grimsby accent sound like Aussie? (Australian accent) Its the only accent from the UK that sounds Australian.
Thanks Simon, looking forward to the next instalment. All the best
what shampoo do you use?
Interesting stuff. Can you make one or two longer videos, say 20 to 30 min?
I have seen several books on sale about "body language," but none about the kind of hand-waving that some people do while they speak. That seems to be more of a thing among women, and for speakers of Italian.
them chops tho
is the intro shot at Butser??
It is!
Simon Roper ah cool, don’t live there anymore but grew up nearby and my mum worked there for a while - I worked flipping burgers at Beltain one year too
Not sure whether the mutton chops add or detract from the narrative..
They add.
Thank you for this gold
I heard that there is evidence that a large enough group of prelinguistic babies left in isolation develops its own language (without adult interference). It's as if language were something that just grows from us. This might indicate that, while a social context is essential, a cultural one is not (meaning by "culture" a pre-existing set of normalized communal practices).
There are some philosophers who focus on the issue of the phylogeny of language (the initial development of language as a whole) and whose work might be of some viewers' interest: two prominent ones are Robert Brandom and John McDowell. Maybe also Daniel Dennett from a more naturalistic point of view.
Evidence from zebra finch experiments suggests that what would happen is that the human langauge would be simple or pidgin-like at first but would develop over a few generations to a full langauge.
How do prelinguistic babies left in isolation survive? Does that apply to the neglected kids found in Romanian orphanages on the fall of Ceaucescu?
@@cathjj840 they'd have to be cared for by non-speaking humans or robots
@@cathjj840 i understand that this particular phenomenon happened in Nazi (or other) concentration camps. I assume they gave some minimal care to the babies, but they talked with each other in some form of language that was new for all intents and purposes
@@seamusoblainn Well,the Nazis tried that and they wound up with a bunch of dead or severely dysfunctional humans. Marasmus and depression. Think up something else, preferably for nothing higher than cold-blooded beings.
I'm proud of being a not-so-fully-functioning member of a fully-functioning species. In its own right, whatever that entails.
There was an orang utan who was very good with human sign language died a few years ago.
I love that place!
I just wanted to say I think Hobaiter is a brilliant name.
You need to sell merch, m8...Simon's Vlog Shirt...just sayin'.
I love this farm!
hey, why you have deleted some of your old videos, can you return them back please
Geometry at the preconscious level is what great apes use without being shown, and at different levels of mind-body connection, the global workspace of say corvids, is not really "smaller" but different in biases and priority of sense input, yielding a different "kind" of conscious agent. Chomsky had it half right, we DO create a world whole cloth in verbal narrative, albeit non-linear and non-deterministic in nature. Animals have this MATH and PHYSICS running below their conscious experience in the stack, or so it would necessarily seem to us. WE are special because we can tell a story about it, and include synthesized elements that do not exist yet; we can imagine. See the Thomas Nagel callout video on my channel. Academic philosophy is B@t $#!t Cr@zy.
Umm.. yes. Yes you are for saying blackbirds are super spesh and the rest lol
Yes. From what I've seen, primates are intuitively capable of pulling a back-flip. Such skill normally takes a lot of time for humans to master.
@@umbrellastation25 When I looked at physics from true first principles, it occured to me that the high-minded academics and the shit throwing apes are doing the same operations, in different transforms. Standing on the ground, attached to a planet that is rotating, orbiting and likely moving away from a Universal "center' point, we have epistemic access to all points, except the center of the planet we stand on. If you jump and look to the core of the Earth, your epistemic access to that line of sight changes because of the competing accelerated reference frames. I tried to do Nima Arkani-Hamed's Amplituhedron work, as a gorilla. No wonder academic physics looks like the circus to me.
Yes ! The stoop of a falcon involves a very complex calculus of trajectory, distance, speed, wind, prey movement ... Perhaps one way we humans are unique is that our conscious selves are invading/claiming territory from the preconscious intelligence. Language (and culture) may be a technology for achieving that aim.
@@mondopinion3777 I challenged computer science to a game of Go/Chess; combined rule sets of the two games we genuflect at the calculator beating us at. Suddenly all the "smart" people who supposedly know math have nothing to say to ME. You got it; eyes and the Pre-Cambrian explosion. God's compiler kernel is the preternatural pressure mediation/mapping of self to sustenance. The geometry determines the topos, or trace of the identity matrix of the thing. Language is a displacement engine for denying our animal savagery and telling a story. If you see yourself as an animal alone, then you never build, you exist. We have denied our motivations to endlessly pursue them. Look at the internet. I rest my case for Extinction Protocol Human.
Did a comment of mine get caught in the spam filter?
I put it here and can't find it for reproduction on my blog ...
I replaced it on the post which for now at least comments on your videos part 1 and 2:
assortedretorts.blogspot.com/2020/08/how-did-language-start-part-1-27.html
Good video!
Roper's apparent complete ignorance of the difficult relevant problems raised by Chomsky renders all of this complete silliness. Start, Roper, with some definition of "language" before asking the question of how it "starts." Recognize the qualitative difference between human language on a purely syntactic level first.
Simon saying "I'm not a linguist" is one of the biggest lies of the century
he's not though, he's an archaeology student with an interest in the development of languages. not to say he doesn't have linguistic knowledge, just that he's not necessarily a student of linguistics.
@@pseudonym50 it's a joke mate
If aliens were watching humans they might not initially get that vibrations in the air were the thing we were communicating with. They might assume that blushing or farting was our language (and I suppose the former is a form of communication, so our decision that it doesn't count is probably somewhat arbitrary).
Would they eventually understand us, or we them? Wittgenstein said, "If a lion could speak, we could not understand him," meaning in his gnomic way that, since we have nothing in common, there is no way we can communicate.
I suspect that the same applies to humans and cats, dogs or the common farm animals we used to live alongside for thousands of years. I have not heard of any folk wisdom about what animals say or mean. So, is it impossible for us to communicate?
The same could be said of babies: their experiences are unlike ours, but they can be taught to use elements of Makaton sign language before they learn to speak.
Thanks brother
aliens watching us are probably like us trying to figure out what dolphins r saying to eachother. lol.
These are fun!
Those cheeky goats!😅
You're awesome