[HN Gopher] Review of Why Animals Talk: The New Science of Anima...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Review of Why Animals Talk: The New Science of Animal Communication
        
       Author : tintinnabula
       Score  : 22 points
       Date   : 2024-02-10 06:13 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (literaryreview.co.uk)
 (TXT) w3m dump (literaryreview.co.uk)
        
       | james_david wrote:
       | Ed Yong's book An Immense World is an incredible exploration of
       | one of the questions raised in this review, which is what animals
       | talk about. He explains the incredible array of senses animals
       | have and how those shape their worlds (Umwelten, in biology
       | terms). If we want to understand how and why animals communicate,
       | seeing the world from their point of view is essential, and Yong
       | does a brilliant job of that. His book will pair well with this
       | one.
        
       | mcswell wrote:
       | From the review: "But is any of this really language? Kershenbaum
       | shrewdly sidesteps the question." Of _course_ he does, because it
       | would ruin his thesis. He 'd rather use the word "talk" because
       | it's vague enough that he can use it without being called out,
       | yet sounds meaningful enough to the common person that it sounds
       | like he's saying something, while at the same time pulling in all
       | kinds of feelings about how nice or smart some animals are. (And
       | yes, I've had pet birds, fish, cats and dogs, and at least the
       | cats and dogs, and maybe the bird, sort of communicate. And they
       | were--one of the cats still is--nice.)
       | 
       | Peter Wohlleben does the same thing in his book "The Hidden Life
       | of Trees: What They Feel, How They Communicate", using the word
       | "communicate". Trees exude certain chemicals when injured or
       | infested, and you can sort of kinda maybe call that communication
       | --but of course you can't call it language.
        
       | FrustratedMonky wrote:
       | Wasn't there a study a few years ago that had identified a
       | rudimentary language in bats.
       | 
       | It was just 3-4 words/concepts like:
       | 
       | 'i don't like you'
       | 
       | 'don't want to sleep next to you'
       | 
       | 'like you'.
        
         | dleeftink wrote:
         | > just 3-4 words
         | 
         | Isn't that quite profound? I'd wager these concepts will get
         | you a long way in any language.
        
         | 082349872349872 wrote:
         | pedantry: many non-human animals communicate, in that they
         | create signals with understood meanings; what appears to be
         | special about language is that using it, one can string the
         | same symbols together in different orders, and the understood
         | meaning changes.
        
           | FrustratedMonky wrote:
           | Tomato / Potato
           | 
           | We discovered animals using 'words'.
           | 
           | NO, that isn't what we meant by language, because then humans
           | wouldn't be special.
        
           | underlipton wrote:
           | That seems to be satisfied by the existence of "like/dislike"
           | modifiers (and possibly directional/proximity modifiers, if
           | the example given is accurate to the research).
        
       | pcw7321 wrote:
       | "What's it like to be a bat" posed the question; "the character
       | of cats" (horses; or dogs) goes some way towards answering it.
       | Does the reviewed work extend our knowledge? Do I really need to
       | sign up to find out? Animal communication certainly is an
       | interesting topic IMHO but yet another rehash of "animals see
       | things differently" is, I suspect, just click bait. Tell me if
       | it's a descent litt survey.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-02-11 23:01 UTC)