Nature and nurture Human language Animal communication Comparing human language to animal communication Nature or Nurture: Mechanisms for Learning Words and Syntax. Pag sinabi mo kasing syntax, ito kasi yung order or arrangement of words and phrases to form proper sentences and yung most basic syntax follows nga a subject + verb + direct object formula. For example nga is "Jillian hit the ball." Jillian ayun ung subject, hit is the verb and yung the ball ito yung direct object . Through syntax, we could understand that we wouldn't write, "Hit Jillian the ball." Dun pa lng sa example na yun, hindi mo maiintindihan yung gusto nitong iparating kasi hindi nga nakaaarrange into proper sentences kaya mahalaga tlga yung syntax. But the main question is .How we acquire language, is it nature or nurture? . Maraming pag-aaral or even yung mga debate patungkol dito and some of them would say na natutunanan natin yung mga words or even our language through experience which is ito yung nurture while yung iba nakafocus naman on biological predisposition or nature. Ang pinakasikat na approach patungkol sa nurture is yung behaviorist approach ni B. F. Skinner (1957). According to him that theory of learning which states all behaviors are learned through interaction with the environment. It means na natutunanan natin yung language natin sa pagmamagitan ng pagiimitate o panggaya natin dun sa environment na nakikita natin .While kay Noam Chomsky (1959), his theory is on the nature side, it means na inborn na tayo or innately prewired with knowledge about language and that language acquisition is a maturational process, like learning to walk. In fact that children everywhere acquire language the same way, and without much effort, seems to indicate that we're born wired with the basics already present in our brains. Yung mga bata daw ,they have the ability to produce language that they never heard before or they can produce without produce words without imitating someone. Pero ang tanong din natin why do Chomsky and others propose that much of language acquisition natin is driven by innate knowledge of language? kasi yung Language acquisition appears to follow the same basic pattern across different languages and cultures. It means na sinasuggests nito na yung language natin it may be a maturational process rather than learned process (like yung walking).Pag sinabi mo kasing maturational or Maturation din and it means na ito yung process natin of reaching maturity or adulthood, and maturational is anything that has to do with the process of growing or ripening. Additionally din, language din daw natin is productive. It means na kaya natin umintindi and magproduce ng mga sentences we have never experienced before. So it suggest na yung reinforcement of past experiences is not sufficient for language learning. Kaya nga for Chomsky nature yung approach niya. Aside nga sa behaviorist approach and Chomsky nature’s approach, meron din another another approach which is yung interactionist approaches and according to this theory, yung language learning natin is the result of the interaction between yung experience, the nurture side and biological predispositions or nature side for language and cognition. For example nga is yung emergent coalition model nina Golinkoff, Hirsh-Pasek, and yung mga colleagues nila. So yung model na ito emphasizes that early word learning begins associatively but transitions to social and cognitive constraint-driven processes. It means that yung mga infants daw are born with biases to attend to and integrate attentional (e.g., perceptual salience, temporal contiguity), social (e.g., eye gaze, social context), and linguistic (e.g., grammar, intonation) cues when learning words. Over time, the relative importance of these cues may change. Yung model na ito nagpopropose that infants are born with biases to attend to and integrate attentional (e.g., perceptual salience, temporal contiguity), social (e.g., eye gaze, social context), and linguistic (e.g., grammar, intonation) cues when learning words. However nga, as they get older they use other linguistic and social cues (either in combination or alone). Nagrereflect ito ng developmental shift in the use of relevant cues. But ano nga ba yung major linguistic milestones of a six-month-old infant? A twelve-month-old infant? A two-year-old child? Kasi yung mga six to twelve months infants kaya na nilang marecognize yung mga names of familiar objects, foods, and body parts like eyes,nose,ears,mouth. While yung yung six-montholds typically produce reduplicated babbling like yungpaguulit ulit nila ng word like babababababa, while twelve-month-olds naman magsisimula na silang magproduce ng mga first words nila.and from age one to two years, yung mga bata kaya na nilang ipoint out yung mga objects and pictures kapag pinapangalanan yun and kaya na din nilang umintindi nila ng mga requests or questions. By their second birthday, they typically produce two hundred to three hundred words and are beginning to combine the words into short “telegraphic” utterances. In conclusion, How do we acquire language? Infants and children learn language rapidly and without explicit instruction. So yung Production abilities tend to lag behind comprehension initially, but yung gap is typically closed by the second year and yung patterns of acquisition appear to be relatively stable across different individuals and cultures and sinasuggest nga na some of us have an innate ability to learn language or we have an inborn ability while yung iba naman pinapaniwalaan nila na yung acquisition of language natin is the result from interactions between cognitive biases and language experience. So now let’s proceed to the Human Language and Animal Communication We started the chapter by asking the question “What is language?” and part of the answer is that ,ito yung way to exchange information or communicate.Masasabi natin na humans and animals use many ways to communicate (e.g., pheromones at pagsinabi mong pheromones parang similar siya sa hormones natin but work outside of the body. Like yung sexual arousal natin. For animals natin particularly yung mga insects, kumbaga ito yung mga chemical substance that they secreted externally by certain animals and it may affect nga dun sa behaviour or physiology of other animals of the same species.Aside from pheromones, meron din mga gestures, facial expressions, body language). Karamihan nga sa atin kinakausap natin yung mga pets natin and marerealize natin na yung interaction natin sa mga alaga natin is not the same as talking with another person. In fact, most researchers believe that fullfledged language use is unique to humans. Full-fledged it means completely developed or trained. So yung chapter nga na ito begins by comparing human language to animal communication and ends with recent attempts to teach animals human language. So sisimulan natin sa . Comparing Human Language to Animal Communication There have been many attempts to define the unique characteristics of human language and according kay Hockett nga na may thirteen design features of communication such as yung vocal/ auditory channel, broadcast transmission/ directional reception,racing fading and marami pang iba at karamihan din include aspects of language related to issues we have discussed earlier in the chapter such as nga yung productivity, semanticity, arbitrariness, duality of patterning, and traditional transmission and sila Hauser, Chomsky, and Fitch naproposed sila na ang minimum distinguishing characteristic of human language is recursive syntax. Which is yung Recursion nangyayari siya when a rule calls for a version of itself. Parang ito yung procedure that can repeat itself indefinitely. For example nga, kapag kinonsider the phrase structure rules we discussed earlier. Sa isang noun phrase kasama niya yung noun (kapag sinabi niyong noun it is a word used to describe a person,place,things,animals or even the events) and this noun may be modified nga by an article, adjective, or prepositional phrase and yung prepositional phrase is made up of a preposition and a noun phrase. So this is Recursion results because the noun phrase can contain a prepositional phrase, which can in turn contain a noun phrase. So how do systems of animal communication stack up? Bilang ako, as an owner of a dog, yung tahol ng aso natin, hindi naman tlga nating naiintindihan, kumbaga wala naman silang lenggwahe ng katulad sa atin and for us ,alam na natin kung anong ibig sbhin ng pagtahol nila , it’s either a warning, territory marking, defense, and protest, minsan nga gusto lng nila magpapansin and according nga kay Pongrácz, Molnár, and Miklósi found that people are able to use acoustic properties of dog barks to categorize them as aggressive nila or happy and playful. Yung evidence nga nito nasasusuggests na yung pagtahol nila may serve a communicative role. Perhaps surprisingly, yung mga bees din nageeexhibit sila ng system that shares more features with humans. Like yung Honeybees dance and ginagamit nila ito to communicate the location of nectar sources .So yung angle ng dance nakaindicates the direction, and the rate of looping indicates the distance. The bee system of communication exhibits some features (e.g., displacement, semanticity, and productivity) but not others (e.g., discreteness, arbitrariness, and duality of patterning). Masasabi natin na yung Perhaps the system of animal communication that comes closest to human language is yung songbirds. Dibah!! Karamihan sa mga birds, they use calls to signal particular behaviors *Make sound Wilann , it’s either warning alarm or coming in for a landing); for other bird din they also use songs. Songs that typically limited to males, ginagamit nila ito para attract females and to force other males to drive away of the same species.Ganun din satin gumagamit ng pangharana to attract women or kung gusto nilang ligawan ito. Yung songs kasi are structurally complex, made up of individual notes combined into ordered subparts. However, yung hallmark of human language is how word order and syntax are associated with meaning,while yung variations in birdsongs have not been demonstrated to reflect differences in meaning. According nga kina Gentner, Fenn, Margoliash, and Nusbaum, tinrained nila yung isang European starlings or also known as common starling, isa itong ibon. Tinrained nila ito to distinguish between song sequences containing recursive and non-recursive structures. However, the ability to distinguish recursion does not demonstrate that starlings can use recursion in their songs (Corballis, 2010). Dahil nga dito, it is little convincing evidence na yung communication systems of animals meet the currently accepted definitions of human language. This can be offer a strong support for the notion that language use is unique to human beings. So How does human language differ from animal communication? Katulad ng sinabi ko kanina yung mga Animals, they use systems of communication that share some of the features of human language which is ayun nga yung the thirteen characteristics of human language na pinoposed ni Hockett but unfortunantely hindi naman lahat ng characteristics of human language,meron din yung animals. Pero dahil nga din sa pagkakapareheas ng human language ni Hockett sa animal communication ,nagattempts nga yung mga researchers to teach animals to use systems of human language have had limited success. So now let proceed to the …. Attempts to Teach Animals Human Language So as a human, yung vocal system has evolved to allow for speech .No other animals’ vocal systems are adapted for this capability. Kahit sabhin mo na yung mga parrot kaya maturuan na gayahin yung mga human sound speech, hindi pa din nmaman maituturing na language yung panggagagaya nila ng speech sa mga tao. And marami ngang taong nagattempet turuan yung mga hayop using human language.Like si Irene Pepperberg inattemp niyang turuan si Alex an African grey parrot, ng language. With thirteen years of language instruction, Alex was able to demonstrate some remarkable abilities. Like nakabuo siya ng mga vocabulary of nearly eighty words, which is ayun nga yung mga different colors and composition, and meron din siyang ability to make some unique combinations of words. Aside kay Alex , si Chaser, aso siya, it is a border collie, tinarained and tinuruan din siyang marecognize and distinguish ng mga proper names of more than one thousand objects (Pilley & Reid, 2011). Her trainers have argued that she has an awareness that maps words onto referent objects. Aside din kay chaser ,si Sofia, a mixed-breed dog, can reportedly respond to requests resulting from unique combinations of action and object terms .But perhaps yung pinakafamous and intensive attempts to teach language to animals have involved chimpanzees. Which is si Washoe, isang female chimpanzee, she was brought up as a human child and tinuruan siya ng mga American Sign Language (Gardner & Gardner, 1969). From morning to night, yung communication between Washoe and her caregivers was with sign language. Using nga sa mga daily records of Washoe’s signing, the experimenters estimated that she could use from 150 to 200 signs, from many different syntactic classes. According din sa mga Caregivers ni Washoe na nakakademonstrated din siya ng mga behaviors similar to those of human children learning language, including overgeneralization of words, and could create new signs generatively (e.g., combined signs for “water” and “bird” ,ito ay nangangahulugan as a duck). According nga din kila Fouts, Fouts, and Van Canfort reported that si Loulis, which is inaddopt to ni Washoe right after na namatay yung totoong anak niya. Isa tong tenth month chimpanzee and according to them natutunan niya din gumagamit ng mga language from other signing chimpanzees. Though this nga ,masasabi natin na marami ngang nagattempt na turuan yung mga animals to learn human language but still hindi lahat ng experiments is successful and some of it limited lang tlga. --end----How does the performance of chimpanzees taught to use language compare to human children learning language? Attempts to teach animals to use systems of human language have had limited success. While animals may learn some words (many fewer than do human children), animals fail to learn to use all but the simplest syntax.
