crows call me breadladyi’m convinced there are numerous non-human sapient species on earth but an anthropocentrism practiced at scale denies us the opportunity to discover or explore these frontiers
it’s been shown that you can teach various species intermediary languages (amy the gorilla speaking sign language, for instance) so pure translation matrices aren’t necessary for meaningful communication. moreover peoples around the world have historically developed complex material relationships with animal communities using what can be considered gift economies. for instance it’s actually pretty simple to establish trade relationships with crows 🐦
Lizardsquid, maker of noises@garbados we can distinguish between communication systems and languages — in language, we can talk about things outside our environment, whereas non-lang communication cannot.
If you wake up on an island with someone who doesn't speak your language, you can still communicate, collaborate to build shelter, etc, but holding a conversation isn't possible. To our knowledge, Animals can communicate, but they're limited to their environment.
I hope we find a species with language…
If you wake up on an island with someone who doesn't speak your language, you can still communicate, collaborate to build shelter, etc, but holding a conversation isn't possible. To our knowledge, Animals can communicate, but they're limited to their environment.
I hope we find a species with language…
@garbados animals definitely can communicate, often in very complex ways, and calling them non-sapient is… wrong
Often, the capacity for language is the only difference between the intelligences of animals and humans
Animals do speak to each other. But for something to be language, it has to meet certain criteria. No known animal communication systems meets all the criteria, but all known human languages do — even languages that isolated children invented with no guidance.
Often, the capacity for language is the only difference between the intelligences of animals and humans
Animals do speak to each other. But for something to be language, it has to meet certain criteria. No known animal communication systems meets all the criteria, but all known human languages do — even languages that isolated children invented with no guidance.
@garbados (from the top of my head, one of the most important criteria is "recursion" — in English, we can embed sentences inside sentences with words like "that":
"I thought that (they were the farmer who (ate the jam donut))"
There's no limit to how deep we can embed sentences, except that our memory is limited and we can easily lose track.
Almost no animal communication systems allow for recursion or embedded sentences.)
"I thought that (they were the farmer who (ate the jam donut))"
There's no limit to how deep we can embed sentences, except that our memory is limited and we can easily lose track.
Almost no animal communication systems allow for recursion or embedded sentences.)