Oh by the way I named that hamster size Norwegian rat Vladimir/Victor after the Russian macho man was popular in the news of the time and the rat trap company that Vlad/Victor had defeated. I think he appreciated that I didn't kill him him and wanted to stick around… But then he died, sad. Boo-hoo
1
A regular Norwegian rat… Ratus n. Or something like that, caught in a trap I set one night, only to find it occupied the next day with a creature I named victor/Vlad mouse, because when I released him into a garbage pail, I couldn't kill it, for I was quite amazed that he survived. He must've been standing on top of the striker bar when it triggered, and flipped him on his back, trapped as if under a barbell, overnight. It was pretty sore, and seemingly week so I fed him some stinky feta cheese and a little water, which he actually supped on. I put it outside and did some errands and when I returned, he had so cleverly escaped his garbage pail prison that was actually Half toppled over so not too hard, but he was still hopping around and staying within 15 feet of the area and did not try to escape. Bottom line is I think he was grateful and happy to be alive in that I released him I even touched him see if he was OK and he actually tried to first bite me but then quickly retracted… But I felt his teeth touch my forefinger, briefly.
Now I know why pet rats are people's friends to: this guy seem didn't want to be my friend because when he saw me he would get up on his hind legs and even take some munchies from me. I was sad that he died probably of his traumatic injuries
Now I know why pet rats are people's friends to: this guy seem didn't want to be my friend because when he saw me he would get up on his hind legs and even take some munchies from me. I was sad that he died probably of his traumatic injuries
2
You guys, I found out what they're saying:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0BfcdPKw8E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0BfcdPKw8E
2
I raise large livestock. We "harvest" their fiber. But we never consume them as protein nor do we sell them for such purpose when their fiber no longer yields premium profit.
In fact, when we have a mortality, the creature is cremated and their ashes respectfully returned to the wilderness around us.
One only needs to be silent and observant to realize that each species maintains a complex society through real, serious and fact-laden communication.
That humans don't get it doesn't make animals "dumb." It makes humans arrogant, stupid and immoral. I am an infantry combat veteran and no stranger to gore. There are reasons to kill...but murdering fellow, sentient beings for sport isn't one of them.
In fact, when we have a mortality, the creature is cremated and their ashes respectfully returned to the wilderness around us.
One only needs to be silent and observant to realize that each species maintains a complex society through real, serious and fact-laden communication.
That humans don't get it doesn't make animals "dumb." It makes humans arrogant, stupid and immoral. I am an infantry combat veteran and no stranger to gore. There are reasons to kill...but murdering fellow, sentient beings for sport isn't one of them.
4
My lovebird, Disney, and I talked all the time. There was not a lot he had to say, but he was quite clear about it. He had an extraordinary sense of time, and absolutely would not let me fail to turn on CNBC by 7am, because he had a huge crush on Erin Burnett.
I was once cooking at the grill on the back patio, and a jay told me to refill the birdfeeder. I replied, "I know, I know," and then remembered that I was not talking to Disney. But when I turned, I saw that the feeder was indeed empty.
I was once cooking at the grill on the back patio, and a jay told me to refill the birdfeeder. I replied, "I know, I know," and then remembered that I was not talking to Disney. But when I turned, I saw that the feeder was indeed empty.
2
The only difference between human language and the communication of the other animals? Only the arrogance and exceptionalism of humans. The naysayers won't have to worry though about humans specialness for long as our arrogance and exceptionalism continues to wipe out whatever gets in our way.
2
I recall the old Far Side cartoon where a scientist has a device to understand what dogs are saying as they bark. The result? "Hey! Hey! Hey! Hey! Hey!"
1
I would like to thank all those, here, who have expressed opposition to the massive killing of prairie dogs, often by federal and state government agencies. It's time to stop this outrage, this totally immoral practise. People of conscience must speak out and support organizations working to stop the killing.
3
Thanks NYT. I needed that.
2
For heavens' sakes, NYT, give us the choice to turn off the sound effects.
1
Some humans hide behind accusations of "anthropomorphism" because they can't face the reality that so much of themselves which they think of as "human nature" is in fact animal nature.
1
If we could decipher what the prairie dogs are 'saying', I would venture that it would be incomparably more interesting than the current political noise trying to make 'America great again.'
2
An unemphasized point is that prairie dogs live in communities. The connection of community to communication is important. Solitary animals like certain species of cat do not have this talent.
Likewise, we are seeing the ability of Americans to communicate becoming seriously impaired with the isolation brought about by advertising and mindless talk radio and TV.
Likewise, we are seeing the ability of Americans to communicate becoming seriously impaired with the isolation brought about by advertising and mindless talk radio and TV.
3
Prairie dogs? Ever met a raccoon on garbage night when 'shoo' doesn't work?
She is not rabid, just looking for food and trying to get away from the kids for a few hours:)
She is not rabid, just looking for food and trying to get away from the kids for a few hours:)
2
good article. the recent definition of language as "the ability to systematically combine symbols" would probably mean that our ancestors had a system of communication though not a language. most dictiionaries now define language as human communication. the focus on language has overshadowed any attention to consciousness or understanding. everyone accepts that a prairie dog knows a dog from a coyote from a person, though being able to make different noises for each to communicate that understanding to other prairie dogs is somehow seen as a sign of increased consciousness. as though the ethical equation changed because the animal displayed an ability that is not indicative of its understanding.
1
A concern that has repeatedly been brought forth by many who study this topic is barely touched in this article - are some observers and commenters confusing communication and survival tactics? Basically, so many of these studies are centered on warning calls, often exclusively so. Thus, is that truly "communication"? I am not denigrating these studies, and the earnestness involved, at all; rather, I support them for the advance in understanding of all species. But I wonder at the lack of demonstration of something basic to communications - in this instance, can prairie dogs be shown to just "talk" to one another, in a non-threatening environment? Sounds of warning by its very nature can evolve, change and become more complex...in fact, it must do so if that capability is to continue to serve its purpose. But do these species use sounds to share thoughts, ideas and observations beyond observable threats? And that does not include trained responses that are often touted as communications - the identification of certain colored blocks and their number, for instance. But pure, interactive communication not instigated through human intervention would be a monumental breakthrough in these studies. There are so many other variables in the possibility of communication, well-known if one spends significant time outdoors with animals; the best example is body language and posture.
1
It's no mystery why so many people are reluctant to accept that animals can communicate, and are conscious beings - once one accepts that, one must also reject the idea that they are here for our benefit, and that we may remove them from their homes because we deem them "pests," or confine them, control their fertility, take away their babies, use their fur, skin, and feathers, and slaughter them them for our pleasure. Only by assuming that what every pet owner believes about their dogs and cats cannot be true of wild or farmed animals can we continue to justify these practices.
3
Of course many animals communicate and collaborate and some use tools. They can definitely think and some have a provable concept of self and can think around several corners. But they cannot speak.
I would maintain that the most important feature of human language is the ability to tell stories about non-present objects. If someone could show that animals are planning in the abstract and/or later tell each other what happened, I would concede that they indeed have a language. Current attempts to define language overly broadly and thus bestow the term to very limited systems of communication are just as limiting as he old behaviorist denial of animal thought.
I would maintain that the most important feature of human language is the ability to tell stories about non-present objects. If someone could show that animals are planning in the abstract and/or later tell each other what happened, I would concede that they indeed have a language. Current attempts to define language overly broadly and thus bestow the term to very limited systems of communication are just as limiting as he old behaviorist denial of animal thought.
2
What a wonderful article, and equally wonderful comments by so many thoughtful and fully functioning human beings.
In my lifelong effort to understand the the foundation of reality itself, I seem to have come to a speculation that reality itself is a language, and "we" and all things, are a creation of that language. That we live, and are, as languages within languages.
That in the final analysis, there is no "us", there is only "it".
Coming to that understanding was the breakthrough that fit all of the pieces of "the great struggle to understand" together.
That consciousness itself is a language. That the language of consciousness is a symbolic language that has limits, boundaries, and structure. And that nothing can enter consciousness unless and until it is first translated into the language of consciousness.
To look at a fence (or anything else) and to know that it is a fence only because we say it is a fence, is a stunning experience.
To know that everything must be assigned a name before we can process it.
To look into a mirror or into the the eyes of another living creature, is to look into the eyes of the abstract source of all things made manifest.
To ask the question "Whence am I" and to receive the answer from the universe (that I am not), is to have endless love for all things great and small. For the privilege and experience of being life aware of itself.
To know that love is the thread, and fabric, and language, that holds the universe together.
In my lifelong effort to understand the the foundation of reality itself, I seem to have come to a speculation that reality itself is a language, and "we" and all things, are a creation of that language. That we live, and are, as languages within languages.
That in the final analysis, there is no "us", there is only "it".
Coming to that understanding was the breakthrough that fit all of the pieces of "the great struggle to understand" together.
That consciousness itself is a language. That the language of consciousness is a symbolic language that has limits, boundaries, and structure. And that nothing can enter consciousness unless and until it is first translated into the language of consciousness.
To look at a fence (or anything else) and to know that it is a fence only because we say it is a fence, is a stunning experience.
To know that everything must be assigned a name before we can process it.
To look into a mirror or into the the eyes of another living creature, is to look into the eyes of the abstract source of all things made manifest.
To ask the question "Whence am I" and to receive the answer from the universe (that I am not), is to have endless love for all things great and small. For the privilege and experience of being life aware of itself.
To know that love is the thread, and fabric, and language, that holds the universe together.
2
The remark made by the Yale linguist Anderson in the article captures a very unscientific side of the language debate. Anderson like many linguists before him defines language in such a way that most humans wouldn't meet it. "the ability to systematically combine symbols into an infinite array of sentences." Well, first of all, we can't measure 'infinite' so to take him literally, assuming he was quoted properly, the criterion is useless. And what does the word 'systematically' mean in this context? Hopelessly vague. This could be the fault of the Times writer, but in my experience, the same kinds of errors of logic appear in the writings and thinking of linguists. Too often, they have come into the debate with a conclusion, "language is uniquely human", and then worked hard to prove it. This is not how good science is done.
1
Think of the simplest example possible, a pet recognizing it's name. I had several cats and they appeared to recognize their own names and the names of each other. Nancy was the mother of Alice. I could simply say "Alice", and Nancy would look at her. I could say, "Where is Alice?" if Alice wasn't around, and Nancy would look for her.
What does it mean, to recognize a name? The level of abstract thought is really quite remarkable. The cat hears a random sound invented by a human, and manages to associate that sound with itself, or another. This implies self-awareness and individual identity, as well as an ability to assign meaning to abstract sounds.
How much longer are we going to hide from the reality that animals are highly conscious, self-aware and share so many of the traits we want to think of as "human"?
They appear to experience love, fear, frustration, playful joy ... acting and responding the way people do when feeling those emotions.
This is not anthropomorphism. Rather, the refusal to acknowledge our similarity to animals is a refusal to acknowledge that those aspects of ourselves are part of our ANIMAL NATURE.
We are animals and animals love, fear, play, desire, feel sadness, happiness, wonder, curiosity ...
Human animals also have a huge capacity for empathy and sympathy. Realizing how close we are to animals makes it really hard to go rampaging through the world, destroying ecosystems in the pursuit of profit.
What does it mean, to recognize a name? The level of abstract thought is really quite remarkable. The cat hears a random sound invented by a human, and manages to associate that sound with itself, or another. This implies self-awareness and individual identity, as well as an ability to assign meaning to abstract sounds.
How much longer are we going to hide from the reality that animals are highly conscious, self-aware and share so many of the traits we want to think of as "human"?
They appear to experience love, fear, frustration, playful joy ... acting and responding the way people do when feeling those emotions.
This is not anthropomorphism. Rather, the refusal to acknowledge our similarity to animals is a refusal to acknowledge that those aspects of ourselves are part of our ANIMAL NATURE.
We are animals and animals love, fear, play, desire, feel sadness, happiness, wonder, curiosity ...
Human animals also have a huge capacity for empathy and sympathy. Realizing how close we are to animals makes it really hard to go rampaging through the world, destroying ecosystems in the pursuit of profit.
2
Re: "The Yale University linguist Stephen Anderson says the idea that prairie dogs have language is ludicrous. The essence of language, he argues, is not a set of symbols or phrases but rather syntax: the ability to systematically combine symbols into an infinite array of sentences."
If the essence of language is syntax, why does human acquisition of language begin without syntax? Is Anderson willing to maintain with a straight face that a baby's collection of "mommy", "daddy", and various other isolated nouns and--maybe--verbs has no relation whatsoever to his loquacious fully syntactic chattering of a few years later? Clearly in humans syntax is merely part of a more sophisticated form of the same ESSENTIAL faculty. If that inconveniences a pedant's sentence diagramming, c'est damage. Biology is under no obligation to conform to anyone's artificial constructs.
If the essence of language is syntax, why does human acquisition of language begin without syntax? Is Anderson willing to maintain with a straight face that a baby's collection of "mommy", "daddy", and various other isolated nouns and--maybe--verbs has no relation whatsoever to his loquacious fully syntactic chattering of a few years later? Clearly in humans syntax is merely part of a more sophisticated form of the same ESSENTIAL faculty. If that inconveniences a pedant's sentence diagramming, c'est damage. Biology is under no obligation to conform to anyone's artificial constructs.
3
Manitoba prairie dogs or the song of Cardinals and Blue Jay birds.
Its pretty cool to hear early in the morning.
Guessing one is saying to the other, over here.
Miss the human power lines.
What is the difference between a telephone line and a hydro wire.
Um, never mind.
Its pretty cool to hear early in the morning.
Guessing one is saying to the other, over here.
Miss the human power lines.
What is the difference between a telephone line and a hydro wire.
Um, never mind.
1
I went to Northern Arizona University back in the day, and remember the prairie dogs right outside one of the entrances to the school. It seems as if they built all around their territory, and I hope they are still doing well,.
2
Some day we'll understand what animals are saying. I wish the same was true for biologists (and other scientists). We may listen. We don't understand.
1
Whenever I read an article by a non-expert on a topic who says "No one really knows what [topic X] is" (in this case, language), I stop reading the article. Such an author cannot be trusted, since they have just made an enormously confident claim about something they know very little about.
1
Wonderful, compelling work by the scientist.
And beautiful shots of Flagstaff, Arizona by the Times photographers.
And beautiful shots of Flagstaff, Arizona by the Times photographers.
1
"did the mind create language or did language create the mind?"
The implications of this question are huge, and hugely ignored. This connection explains the force of right-wing media upon its listeners. It isn't just alternative facts, it's a rotting of the brain along with its language.
The neglect of language accounts for many of the problems we cannot solve.
The implications of this question are huge, and hugely ignored. This connection explains the force of right-wing media upon its listeners. It isn't just alternative facts, it's a rotting of the brain along with its language.
The neglect of language accounts for many of the problems we cannot solve.
2
A close study of animals' communication systems is clearly called for. If we want to truly understand human language then understanding what it developed out of is obviously needed.
Hockett's features are interesting but he clearly is not going to have the final word.
Arguing about whether we should call a particular animal communication system language strikes me as quite silly. It's an argument over the definition of a term.
If someone wants to claim that some animal system is, in essence, indistinguishable form human language, good luck, you're going to need it.
I believe there will always be important differences but so what? That doesn't make the study of animal communication systems any less interesting or important. No doubt there are some who would insist that animal communication has no relevance for understanding language. Hard not to see those folks as foolish.
Hockett's features are interesting but he clearly is not going to have the final word.
Arguing about whether we should call a particular animal communication system language strikes me as quite silly. It's an argument over the definition of a term.
If someone wants to claim that some animal system is, in essence, indistinguishable form human language, good luck, you're going to need it.
I believe there will always be important differences but so what? That doesn't make the study of animal communication systems any less interesting or important. No doubt there are some who would insist that animal communication has no relevance for understanding language. Hard not to see those folks as foolish.
1
Every time I read an article about some animal species, I find a sad warning that the unfortunate creature is losing habitat and population. I think most of us realize on some level that we are crowding out other species, yet we cannot restrain ourselves from continually trying to augment the health and wealth of other humans
2
Thank you for this article. I have seen many animals, including the birds in my backyard, vocalize information. Yet, I had never heard about the complexity of the prairie dog. I hope that his research can help raise awareness about this species so that we can help save them from their fate of being destroyed by the US government.
Last year, our tax dollars paid for the US Wildlife Services to kill more than 82,000 prairie dogs. The data are published on this site.
https://www.aphis.usda.gov/wildlife_damage/pdr/PDR-G_Report.php?fld=&...
What can we do to help defend them from this destruction?
Last year, our tax dollars paid for the US Wildlife Services to kill more than 82,000 prairie dogs. The data are published on this site.
https://www.aphis.usda.gov/wildlife_damage/pdr/PDR-G_Report.php?fld=&...
What can we do to help defend them from this destruction?
4
I am an avid gardener, even though my yard is about as urban as it gets. One thing I delight in is being out in the sun, bent over my flower containers (my yard is almost entirely cement, alas) listening to the birds. As soon as the neighbor's cat makes any type of move in her own yard, the bird calls instantly change. No matter the species, there is an obvious, rather elaborate alarm system that they've cooperatively developed. I rarely see the cat, but the birds' scolding and swooping always tell me where she is as she's on the move between yards. How humans ever made that first decision, declaring that most creatures besides Man are stupid and do not communicate, is simply not paying attention.
7
Many animals talk or communicate. Just because we don't understand them doesn't invalidate their language. Human arrogance.
6
A generous and wonderful article! (PBS nature series has spent a bit of time with the Prairie Dog and brushes on their communication with each other). Lovely photo of the singing Prairie Dog with the healthy stands of Blue Gama grasses in the foreground, which they cultivate just in the course of doing what they do throughout their day.
All hail to the Prairie Dog with their mighty communities, fantastic songs and poetic and innate sense of purpose!
Marvelous creature!
We could all use more than a weekly dose of this sort of news these days.
All hail to the Prairie Dog with their mighty communities, fantastic songs and poetic and innate sense of purpose!
Marvelous creature!
We could all use more than a weekly dose of this sort of news these days.
5
Why is it so hard to believe that animals communicate? Why must humans believe they are the only "intelligent" beings on earth? I have lived with dogs and I know they understood what I said and I understand their "barks" for certain things.
4
First, the Yale linguist's objection is pretty devastating. Second, how is saving a species because they share a human trait -- were it the case -- a *reduction* of ego? Third, we, like every other species -- every other aspect of the universe, in fact -- are already embedded in the fabric of the universe, "grand" or not as our parochial view might be. Where else *could* we be embedded? Fourth, language is not "for" communication if that means the transmission of information. All kinds of things alive or not transmit information. The vast majority of language use is silent and internal. Try thinking without language right now. Other than music or math, possibly other forms of language or closely allied themselves, or emoting, it's awfully hard to do. Language is thought; how it's externalized is various -- sign or speech or written. The question is, does any species other than our own think? Lest you think this arrogantly egotistical, it's not at all clear that whatever human intelligence actually is it's a long-term benefit. Given our brief existence, evolutionarily speaking, which is looking all the more tenuous, intelligence may well be a dead end: auto-suicidal. Maybe that's why we get no SETI signals: as soon as a species gets it's mind around basic natural forces, it destroys itself -- "soon" in terms of centuries. In any event, it's only evolved once on this planet in 4bn years -- a contingent accident, it seems, unlike basic functions like eyes/vision.
2
No definition of language? Let's start with "language is the understanding of metaphor; the understanding that THIS represents THAT." If these are more than alarm calls, and if the animals really do have language, they would understand that physical objects can also be metaphors. They would understand that an arrangement of sticks could mean "food over here" or "a snake was there yesterday." They don't.
We have evidence that humans knew this 100,000 years ago. Symbols abound in the archaeological record and a symbol left by one human ages ago can spark the mind and imagination of any human today.
Wishful thinking makes lousy science. Cute videos, though.
We have evidence that humans knew this 100,000 years ago. Symbols abound in the archaeological record and a symbol left by one human ages ago can spark the mind and imagination of any human today.
Wishful thinking makes lousy science. Cute videos, though.
6
Why would we "start with" what is arguably one of the most complex aspects of speech? This article rightly starts with components and combinations of symbols.
1
Language is not synonymous with meaningful objects such as writing (or smoke signals or strands of knots). Suggesting that a person who is illiterate has no language is nonsensical. That prairie dogs have not made yard signs complaining "eagle was here" is hardly to the point.
1
My cat understood her name, and the name I had given her kitten.
This means first of all that she had individual self-awareness. Second, she could assign to an abstract sound invented by myself a meaning, a symbol of her. That's what a name is. Third, she could assign the other abstract sound I had created, the meaning of her kitten.
Think about what that means in terms of self-awareness and an ability to engage in abstract thought.
That cats never developed elaborate grammatical structures or complicated means of communication, such as your arrangement of sticks, may simply be the result of having already successfully evolved a survival strategy without those abilities.
Your brushing aside the decades of work by committed scientists with the derisive phrase "wishful thinking" is much too glib.
This means first of all that she had individual self-awareness. Second, she could assign to an abstract sound invented by myself a meaning, a symbol of her. That's what a name is. Third, she could assign the other abstract sound I had created, the meaning of her kitten.
Think about what that means in terms of self-awareness and an ability to engage in abstract thought.
That cats never developed elaborate grammatical structures or complicated means of communication, such as your arrangement of sticks, may simply be the result of having already successfully evolved a survival strategy without those abilities.
Your brushing aside the decades of work by committed scientists with the derisive phrase "wishful thinking" is much too glib.
2
Not sure if they can talk, but they sure can make a racket. Walking through a Prairie Dog town is a noisy experience.
2
Language is an innately human trait. No other animal has a vocal tract evolved to produce speech, no other species has a brain highly evolved enough to command grammar, much less tense and aspect, or refer to abstract objects, never mind to initiate speech that is not the reaction to some outside stumuli, such as a threat. A normal, hearing child will grow up speaking the language(s) in her environment; deprived of such stimuli, her language will fail to develop, as is true of hearing impaired children or "feral" children. Birds, bees, whales and prairie dogs do not posess language in the same sense, as it is hardwired into their DNA and does not need stimuli to emerge. Ethical considerations aside, raising a group of deafened prairie dogs, or raising them separately from their social group would likely have no effect on the sounds they produce. The best that can be said for their ability to "describe" objects is that they have a rudimentary slot grammar which has evolved as a survival mechanism.
2
A "hearing child . . . deprived of such stimuli, her language will fail to develop." That does not sound like language is humanly innate or any different than initiating speech in reaction "to some outside stimuli," which is how you characterize animals.
Is it not possible language exists on a spectrum, that animals have their own form for communication? Animals do learn behaviors from their social group interactions. The more we learn, the more we are surprised by their abilities. Why assume humans have any innately distinct traits when we are evolved animals?
Is it not possible language exists on a spectrum, that animals have their own form for communication? Animals do learn behaviors from their social group interactions. The more we learn, the more we are surprised by their abilities. Why assume humans have any innately distinct traits when we are evolved animals?
2
I have a deaf dog and she cannot bark like my other dogs. She was raised with other dogs who barked, but because she couldn't hear them she does not make the same noises. She has found other ways to communicate with us, and with her dog siblings, but barking is not one of them.
2
Other animals DO possess the vocal cords, and they're mentioned in the very article you're commenting on. What's more, these "cords" don't need to be complex at all to convey language. See Morse Code if you need convincing that as little as two distinct sounds are sufficient.
2
Beautifully written. Thank you so much for sharing Professor Skobodchikoff's work. It is inspiring and validates our ancient and native understanding that animals are our peers. Honoring them honors us.
15
Alan! Alan! Alan! Al! (If you don't know what this reference, see the hilarious BBC talking animals program clips on youtube. Like many commenting here, I live with animals (a mother and son cat team) and I recognize their different vocalizations. Sometimes the cats get outside and the son will come back sooner than the mother. He will make a worried sound, and I have to say, "It's okay she'll come back when she's ready." Or sometimes the mother is sitting at the door, but I don't notice -- she is very polite and would never make demanding scratches like her son -- and he makes that sound to tell me, "She's here, please let her in." He never makes it in other contexts, so it has a very particular meaning.
13
All conjecture.
If a cow can fly it can jump over the moon.
This is the trend in the "sciences" that has led to a great loss of credibility to truth.
Language is the difference between animals and human beings.
In advertising the words they use are called "weasel words" and are meant to tell a semblance of truth when presenting myth or fanciful imagination.
They have a greater job than those who tried to figure out hieroglyphics before the Rosetta Stone.
Except no stone exist for these researchers.
Because animals communicate, but don't talk, unless you are watching a Bugs Bunny or Donald Duck cartoon.
They will get millions in funding though.
2
I wonder if tomorrow's edition of the Times will reveal if men can communicate and if so will women be able to understand them?
9
oh, I disagree that u spend too much time with your dogs! they and u sound delightful. loved your story.
4
If a language is something only humans can have, then other species don't have a language. A more reasonable and more interesting approach assumes that all species that communicate must have languages and that all species that communicate using sound must talk.
7
I wondered if prairie dog warnings mimicked rattlesnakes, which are abundant just outside the colony.
3
In Colorado they're saying ... We have come to take over the world!!
1
Interesting article. It begs the question, if animals are not communicating with one another, why are they making the noises to begin with.
14
We should have listened to their Trump warning calls
16
Why on earth would so many animals vocalize so elaborately if it didn't have meaning? Of course they are communicating with each other. We humans are so thick.
35
I have always assumed that must warm blooded animals are capable of some verbal communication to signal the common thoughts of danger, food, attraction, and "go away". Others communicate by physical dances, and.or pheromones. It is highly presumptuous to believe only humans possess this talent.
And some inter-species communication is also possible. I have lived with highly verbal Siamese cats for years. I can certainly distinguish verbal messages of "feed me", "I see a creature I want to pounce on and kill"," I need some petting and attention", "I am content", and "Pay attention, something is wrong".
And growing up on a dairy farm, different mooing sounds convey different bovine emotions, but not much factual information.
And some inter-species communication is also possible. I have lived with highly verbal Siamese cats for years. I can certainly distinguish verbal messages of "feed me", "I see a creature I want to pounce on and kill"," I need some petting and attention", "I am content", and "Pay attention, something is wrong".
And growing up on a dairy farm, different mooing sounds convey different bovine emotions, but not much factual information.
8
I think the REAL difference between humans and other animals is that humans are the only ones who voluntarily wear clothing.
9
Wonderful story, wonderful photos. I've had a special affection for prairie dogs since I read Terry Tempest Williams' Finding Beauty in a Broken World. She makes a strong case for their sense of community, and it seems consistent that they would have language.
9
Please become vegetarian today. History will judge us harshly for the atrocities that we perpetrate on billions of animals each year.
15
Interesting science and worth studying, yet it should be a well known fact by now that many animals and birds have a language.
11
Human's arrogation of language, 'self', and yes, 'soul', is only ignorance. Anyone with a pet, beloved and loved, knows as much. Wild animals seem to exhibit altruism, which we consider a noble selflessness, more commonly than humans.
14
Some 20 years ago, I visited my friend in Bloomington, IN. He sent me a half-page directions from the nearby airport to his home and I was so impressed by its nice description (only sentences can express a three-dimensional sight so vividly!) and by the "culture" developed by the cur society in the US. Nowadays, people just use GPS and such practices based on sophisticated languages are rapidly gone. We are losing the most important human skill.
2
How soon can we teach them to understand "stop digging up my back yard or I will end you?" Meanwhile, we'd like to ship a few dozen from our ranch in Colorado to Central Park.
3
Maybe it is THEIR back yard.
16
Of course animals can talk: prairie dogs squeak and scary dogs tweet. Prairie dogs help other prairie dogs in the face of predators by squeaking in a descriptive way. Scary dogs brag on Access Hollywood about their predations and win the presidency anyway.
14
But can they tell a joke properly?
2
A must for anyone who doubts whether prairie dogs can talk (especially Alan)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNfQda8ceGs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNfQda8ceGs
4
I believe all animals talk--just not English or Russian or Polish or French. when we do learnit, we will have a great understanding of them and perhaps reat them with some real respect.
Birds know the language call "predator" no matter who makes the call. If the jay calls, they all go to a tree, if the phoebe calls, everyone is gone.
They understand sounds and the sounds of sentences. I used to tell my free roaming birds "time for bed" and they knew exactly where to go.
But I am consitent in phrases so eventually they "get it".
We tend to favor dogs and cats as intelligent but pigeons and crows are far more intelligent, a Alex the grey parrot was a real linguist.
Keep up the good work.
Birds know the language call "predator" no matter who makes the call. If the jay calls, they all go to a tree, if the phoebe calls, everyone is gone.
They understand sounds and the sounds of sentences. I used to tell my free roaming birds "time for bed" and they knew exactly where to go.
But I am consitent in phrases so eventually they "get it".
We tend to favor dogs and cats as intelligent but pigeons and crows are far more intelligent, a Alex the grey parrot was a real linguist.
Keep up the good work.
1
This is very simple. Scientists use their intuition, but only skeptically. In the end, this is a 'duh' statement. It takes energy to make noise. There is no reason for an animal to develop the ability to make sounds, and yet, not use it for some purpose.
Making noise, enables them to communicate and solve problems, thus enabling survival. Noise=Survival. As long as the little guys build their noises into some kind of coherent signalling mechanism, they will develop a 'language'...this is all guaranteed to happen through species evolution. It's the reason, why we humans talk. So wouldn't it make sense, that the animals work just like us?
Making noise, enables them to communicate and solve problems, thus enabling survival. Noise=Survival. As long as the little guys build their noises into some kind of coherent signalling mechanism, they will develop a 'language'...this is all guaranteed to happen through species evolution. It's the reason, why we humans talk. So wouldn't it make sense, that the animals work just like us?
5
I respectfully disagree with Yale University professor Stephen Anderson who says "the idea that prairie dogs have language is ludicrous" because they don't have syntax. Going by this definition, human two-year olds who are beginning to use two-word sentences do not have language, and that is clearly not the case.
14
the trump sons love to shoot prairie dogs. maybe we don't want to hear what they have to say.
6
Re: The accompanying photo. Where was this Gunnison prairie dog when we desperately needed him to sound the alarm in October and November of last year?
8
Maybe this same biologist can help us make sense of Trump. At the end of the day the prairie dog's going to sound like a genius.
6
Why wouldn't they have a language?
10
We have a lot of mockingbirds in my neighborhood. After listening to their songs for thirty years in my back yard, I am convinced those are conversations and exhortations. Their songs are very long, they are voiced at high enough wattage to be audible over a hundred yards, and each song contains amazing variey of sounds, repeated in patterns that could amount to a kind of grammar.
It would be logical for them to use this audio wattage to exchange information about food supplies, the presence of other bird species competitors like parrots and jays (we have wild parrots in Pasadena), and dog and cat movements, as well as for identification and location of mates and other relations.
Thrre's enough complexity in there for a language to exist.
It would be logical for them to use this audio wattage to exchange information about food supplies, the presence of other bird species competitors like parrots and jays (we have wild parrots in Pasadena), and dog and cat movements, as well as for identification and location of mates and other relations.
Thrre's enough complexity in there for a language to exist.
8
Language is cultural specific. Take a prairie dog from one colony and place it on another far away, far enough so that the foreign prairie dog never heard the call of its new colony.
If when the colony "speaks" the foreign prairie dog looks as not having understood, it is possible it is language. Otherwise they are simple cries evolved in nature.
If when the colony "speaks" the foreign prairie dog looks as not having understood, it is possible it is language. Otherwise they are simple cries evolved in nature.
3
Prairie Dog: "Eeeee Eeeee Eeee Eeee"
Professor Judith Butler (sentence that won the Bad Writing Contest): "The move from a structuralist account in which capital is understood to structure social relations in relatively homologous ways to a view of hegemony in which power relations are subject to repetition, convergence, and rearticulation brought the question of temporality into the thinking of structure, and marked a shift from a form of Althusserian theory that takes structural totalities as theoretical objects to one in which the insights into the contingent possibility of structure inaugurate a renewed conception of hegemony as bound up with the contingent sites and strategies of the rearticulation of power"
"Someday we'll understand what they have to say", but I'm not holding my breath
Professor Judith Butler (sentence that won the Bad Writing Contest): "The move from a structuralist account in which capital is understood to structure social relations in relatively homologous ways to a view of hegemony in which power relations are subject to repetition, convergence, and rearticulation brought the question of temporality into the thinking of structure, and marked a shift from a form of Althusserian theory that takes structural totalities as theoretical objects to one in which the insights into the contingent possibility of structure inaugurate a renewed conception of hegemony as bound up with the contingent sites and strategies of the rearticulation of power"
"Someday we'll understand what they have to say", but I'm not holding my breath
2
If one of the purposes of language is to communicate, I'd say the prairie dog has Professor Butler beat, hands - or paws - down.
8
What a inspiration article, which I have just read for a second time. I admire prairie dogs of course, but the crows in my garden have a terrific way of communicating as well.
7
Of course animals communicate with one another. It is a question of degree and kind that distinguishes human language from other animal languages. the examples in the article, significantly, deal with protection from danger. Add animal language used to attract mates--and you have the whole of animal language: it is limited qua language and survival-specific. Until a prairie dog or any other animal can produce an utterance such as Moby-Dick the kingdom of language indeed belongs to human beings.
1
If you listen closely they are saying "Hey hey, ho ho, Donald Duck has got to go".
7
It is nice to believe that humans are the "crown of creation", as in Genesis. I fear this is not true. This article points out one more species that may have similarities to human behavior.
6
Sounds good to me. But how many of them were on the team that built your phone?
Similar is *not* identical.
How many humans were on the team that built the prairie dog burrows, or for that matter pitched in to help the prairie dog babies? Given recent congressional legislation, I think humans could use some help with that last attribute - helping babies of the same species.
4
Montana's Republican candidate for the upcoming election to replace our representative to the U.S. House of Representatives Brian Zinke (now Secretary of the Interior) recently hosted Donald Trump Junior's fund raising visit with a prairie dog shooting event. I will not call it a hunt since the animals freely stand up in the open for all to see. They reported the fun they had killing rodents in the wide open spaces of Montana. The pictures seemed to indicate that they wore camouflage outfits to outsmart the prairie dogs. Greg Gianoforte, the Republican New Jersey billionaire running for the office, says he represents Montana values and should be elected.
Montana values used to mean that we ate way we shot unless it was an outlaw.
Montana values used to mean that we ate way we shot unless it was an outlaw.
16
Wow, the thought of grown men in camouflage... all to shoot a small prairie dog, says a lot doesn't it? Thanks for sharing.
13
One wonders what 30 years in the Arizona sun does to a person. I guess it could be worse. Perhaps the professor could turn his talents to making out the meaning of the barks coming from the White House Press Secretary.
6
Once in a while, we see an animal standing on two feet, and all we can ask does it "talk". The usual way of making a nature article palatable to humans, even though "language" is defined as "human", and per definition animals could never attain a language with the same semiotics as humans. Therefore the title of this article is very stupid. There are smarter and more intuitive treatises of this theme in European boulevard papers. Once again, The NYT has achieved nothing by just making articles look smart, but they are meaningless, even maybe written by biologists from "elite schools". I have seen similar strategies on BBC nature series. The content is bumped up with so much human emotion, that the life of an animal cannot be perceived as such. It's graphic grandiosity....
4
As apposed to Fort Worth Texas. When a Saskatchewan prairie dog sings this song. RUN.
If not for the hawks a six year old with a sling shot will get you:)
If not for the hawks a six year old with a sling shot will get you:)
Rather obviously a community (with language capability) can define 'language' as narrowly or as broadly as they desire. Broad & narrow definitions will inevitably interact with friction. Labeling a behavior as 'linguistic', within the scientific community, should be immaterial. Whatever the label the behavior is the behavior.
That said a label can easily help (or destroy) conserve a valuable organic resource (inorganic resources tend to be more resilient).
That said 'language' belongs to a small set of tools that has closed an evolutionary feedback loop. Passed among generations while not biologically inherited language has tendency to modify evolutionary paths. Pretty much any behavior falls somewhere on a spectrum of this, language on the more dynamic end. When quantitized [sic] we'll have a narrower debate as to what is or is not 'language'.
That said a label can easily help (or destroy) conserve a valuable organic resource (inorganic resources tend to be more resilient).
That said 'language' belongs to a small set of tools that has closed an evolutionary feedback loop. Passed among generations while not biologically inherited language has tendency to modify evolutionary paths. Pretty much any behavior falls somewhere on a spectrum of this, language on the more dynamic end. When quantitized [sic] we'll have a narrower debate as to what is or is not 'language'.
Prairie dogs are as threatened as everyone else by climate change and air and water pollution. Remember that tomorrow is the deadline for submitting comments to the EPA per Trump's executive order to review existing regulations and “make recommendations to the agency head regarding their repeal, replacement, or modification.” Comment at https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EPA-HQ-OA-2017-0190-0042
2
In Lubbock, Texas, where i grew up, our prairie dog town was reported to be the world's largest prairie dog town. It was at a large park and had a huge wall around it, where we sat and observed for hours at a time. To a child it was definitely as good as a zoo. The animals were intelligent, and social, and they indeed called out to each other. It was clear to me, even at a young age, that the animals were talking with each other.
12
I think we have academics arguing about the definition of language here. You'll find one party in stark opposition while the other exercises some measure of wishful thinking. The division is largely drawn between reputations and subject choice. It's an argument we need to have but not exactly earth shattering.
I know at least one study that hypothesizes the demise of Neanderthals was related to language. By any measure, our closest extinct relatives possessed conscious thought and some means of communication. However, homo sapien sapien were apparently better communicators and therefore more successful in out competing their neighbors. So the theory goes anyway.
The idea is plausible if unprovable. Think about military operations on an evolutionary scale. Effective communication is certainly a critical competent regardless of whether each interaction technically qualifies as language. The military term HUA comes to mind. Soldiers react to communication whether it makes sense to a civilian or not. It remains to be seen whether animals can actually distinguish nuance and abstraction in communication.
Even if you could translate prairie dog language though, what do you think the human application would be? People can already speak a little bit of duck. My guess is some business would make a fortune selling prairie dog hunting calls to ranchers. Communication as bait. You've just reinforced the argument about language and the Neanderthal extinction.
I know at least one study that hypothesizes the demise of Neanderthals was related to language. By any measure, our closest extinct relatives possessed conscious thought and some means of communication. However, homo sapien sapien were apparently better communicators and therefore more successful in out competing their neighbors. So the theory goes anyway.
The idea is plausible if unprovable. Think about military operations on an evolutionary scale. Effective communication is certainly a critical competent regardless of whether each interaction technically qualifies as language. The military term HUA comes to mind. Soldiers react to communication whether it makes sense to a civilian or not. It remains to be seen whether animals can actually distinguish nuance and abstraction in communication.
Even if you could translate prairie dog language though, what do you think the human application would be? People can already speak a little bit of duck. My guess is some business would make a fortune selling prairie dog hunting calls to ranchers. Communication as bait. You've just reinforced the argument about language and the Neanderthal extinction.
2
This reminds of that Far Side cartoon - the one where the guy invents a dog translation device. He's walking down the street and all the dogs are yelling "Hey!...Hey!...Hey!"
7
Observation showed me long ago that animals are capable of surprisingly sophisticated discernment. That they can also have a rudimentary form of language dawned on me after an Australian cattle dog came into my life. He was a rough, exceedingly macho fellow, intent on protecting me from any visitors so whenever I heard someone coming up the drive I would have to urge Warrigal out into the backyard. He left very reluctantly and I noticed that each time he made the same sound - a sort of huff of displeasure. (I've since noticed some other dogs use the same sound.) I was intrigued by this so one day I "huffed" at him. He swung round and looked at me with an expression of utter astonishment which seemed to convey "I didn't know you spoke dog! And what are you annoyed about, anyway??" That look of astonishment changed lightning fast to a broad grin as he realised I wasn't annoyed and he wagged his tail as if to say "Oh, good joke, good joke!" I've never forgotten it. I hadn't realised dogs were capable of something akin to humour although certainly they are capable of great playfulness. Warrigal died 8 years ago but I've noticed that the cattle dog I have now has different barks for different things. She even has a bark that distinguishes between the tamed feral cat who lives with us (whom she hates) and other feral cats. The roosters make a vomiting sound when a hawk flies overhead. This sound seems to be reserved solely for hawks. I think we've just failed to be observant.
24
The conceit of humans is disgusting but perhaps necessary for civilization. What this civilization is worth in the grand scheme of things is impossible to say however.
5
I can't wait for the radio show to be aired . . . Prairie Dog Companion. Maybe Garrison can do one of his bits on it, as a guest.
6
I want to know what their curse words are.
25
I don't know if they curse, but they most certainly scold. You really feel guilty when a whole colony start yelling at you.
2
Darn, got me… Even though I didn't think of that!
If you're talking about domestic animal companions, learning their curses is easily done: Bring out the vacuum 'monster'!
Huzzah! I just won a bet that at least one comment poster would manage to work Trump into the narrative, and there it is in the first comment in 'Readers Pick'! I didn't read the story, just watched the clip about five times and went out on a limb with the wager. Do I know the Times' subscriber base or what!
1
Humans are that single species that is a threat to every other species on this planet. Virgin forests and meadows are gone and also the pristine rivers, estuaries and oceans etc. What action might a visiting species with great intelligence take to correct the situation on Earth? Hopefully they might have a way to awaken humans to the possibilities of this world. In the absence of such a visit might we somehow awaken ourselves?
5
Obviously is saying "Remove Trump from office", very intelligent critters. :)
6
Humans are the idiots here if anyone thinks we are the center of the universe and everything else is sub mental without an ability to communicate. Just ask the US President.
5
Of course we are not alone, there are other conscious, thinking and speaking beings all around us and there always has been, if you believe anything else, then you are not much different than society prior to Copernican Heliocentrism. Just like our place in the cosmos isn't anything special neither is our ability to communicate, it may be scientifically and otherwise marvelous, but special, absolutely not. Anyone who has been around animals or owns a pet, knows that they communicate and tell you how they feel and what they want, whether it's a spoken language the way we perceive it or comes in other forms, what's the difference?
12
Humans have profited from writing and the stored wisdom in books. This *the* big advantage. We can collect the wisdom of millennia with this, and move forward. At least I hope so!
Good comment. I wonder, though what we really have done with our "advanced" language and ability to think. It looks like we've messed things up pretty badly. Certainly more than any animals that may have a simpler language.
We need this story today. NYT should put animal stories on the front pages everyday until Trump isn't president anymore. Thanks NYT!
42
Trump is an animal story.
4
Excerpt from the NY Post, April 25, 2017"
"Brave big game hunter Donald Trump Jr. celebrated Earth Day by shooting tiny prairie dogs — considered a “species of concern” for endangerment, a new report said Tuesday..."
"President Trump’s eldest son spent the weekend in Montana with GOP House candidate Greg Gianforte, who boasted about blasting the little critters, which range in length from 12 to 16 inches and weigh between 1 and 3 pounds.
As good Montanans, we want to show good hospitality to people. What can be more fun than to spend an afternoon shooting the little rodents,” the clueless Gianforte gushed"
"Hunting prairie dogs is legal, but it’s not exactly ethical, the Humane Society told ABC Fox Montana, noting that they are in the middle of breeding season, so some if not most of the female prairie dogs were likely pregnant.
“For prairie dogs, March through June is peak breeding season, which means pregnant, adult females will also be at risk. People do not hunt these animals for food or any legitimate wildlife management purposes,” said Lindsey Sterling Krank, director of the Humane Society’s Prairie Dog Coalition in a press release.
Trump and his kid brother Eric are both avid hunters..."
Looks like Donald screwed both of his older sons up but good... Spoiled rich city boys who get their kicks by murdering helpless animals...
Isn't that how most serial killers start out?
"Brave big game hunter Donald Trump Jr. celebrated Earth Day by shooting tiny prairie dogs — considered a “species of concern” for endangerment, a new report said Tuesday..."
"President Trump’s eldest son spent the weekend in Montana with GOP House candidate Greg Gianforte, who boasted about blasting the little critters, which range in length from 12 to 16 inches and weigh between 1 and 3 pounds.
As good Montanans, we want to show good hospitality to people. What can be more fun than to spend an afternoon shooting the little rodents,” the clueless Gianforte gushed"
"Hunting prairie dogs is legal, but it’s not exactly ethical, the Humane Society told ABC Fox Montana, noting that they are in the middle of breeding season, so some if not most of the female prairie dogs were likely pregnant.
“For prairie dogs, March through June is peak breeding season, which means pregnant, adult females will also be at risk. People do not hunt these animals for food or any legitimate wildlife management purposes,” said Lindsey Sterling Krank, director of the Humane Society’s Prairie Dog Coalition in a press release.
Trump and his kid brother Eric are both avid hunters..."
Looks like Donald screwed both of his older sons up but good... Spoiled rich city boys who get their kicks by murdering helpless animals...
Isn't that how most serial killers start out?
76
It's good the media covered this very unfortunate event of Donald Trump Jr. with the local Republican House candidate killing prairie dogs, who assume that the life of a prairie dog is there for the killing. Thanks, Tom, for informing us about this crude type of politics which ends up in the deaths of sentient fellow creatures.
Their syntax, vocabulary, and sentence structures surpass those of Donald Trump.
48
Almost any sound that animals produce with their mouth or throat is intended as a communication to its own species (and a warning to others). These sounds are languages that convey a wide variety of information . The fact that humans can't understand the lingo is irrelevant.
18
The late, great naturalist, Henry Beston, put it better than anyone else ever has, in my humble opinion, in his spectacular, lyrical book, "The Outermost House," a chronicle of his year spent observing nature and wildlife at the very tip of Cape Cod. I won't quote the full paragraph here, but he said of animals, "We patronize them for their incompleteness, for their tragic fate of having taken form so far below ourselves. And therein we err, and greatly err. For the animal shall not be measured by man. In a world older and more complete than ours they move finished and complete, gifted with extensions of the senses we have lost or never attained, living buy voices we shall never hear.They are not brethren, they are not underlings: they are other nations....." To all of those here who seem to disparage the animal kingdom, I would suggest that you open your hearts and your eyes. Animals know far more than we ever shall. The true First Americans understood this - and thankfully, Henry Beston understood it perfectly, as well. You should take note: I hope that you can learn something. 5/14, 5:15 PM
82
you just put me in tears. thank you
3
Sad that the two older Trump brothers went on a hunting trip to shoot these very same creatures. Clearly those two don't care what animals have to say.
14
Anyone who has ever loved dogs needs no PhD to conclude that not only do they speak, but they understand our language better than we do theirs.
My one year old dog, for example, understands my Hungarian words perfectly when I speak them to her, but I only have an impoverished understanding of her woofs when she speaks to me.
My one year old dog, for example, understands my Hungarian words perfectly when I speak them to her, but I only have an impoverished understanding of her woofs when she speaks to me.
14
Interesting article but also I have found many of the comments fascinating. The article seems to have touched a sensitive spot (emotional investment in human superiority), because many of the comments are more defensive, dismissive, and puerile than is typical for Times readers. It does help if you are going to justify the widespread killing and eating of animals to not think of them as sentient beings who can at least communicate varied and often complex observations. [full disclosure: I am not vegan, I do eat meat]
5
The first time I saw a pineapple, I didn't say, "“My, that looks spiky, so I don’t think I want to eat it.” Guess I'm not capable of language.
9
I guarantee you that HRC won the popular vote from the prairie dog colonies too. No way, would any self respecting prairie dog vote for Trump and I betcha in 2018 we'll win back the house with the support of the prairie dog's too!
2
I respect your commenting but this state we're in is not humorous by any stretch of the imagination. Making light of our troubles shows true antipathy for solutions.
"There is also a persistent notion that horses and cattle break their legs by tripping in prairie-dog burrows, though evidence is scant."
Right, because unless pencil-pushers in a university lab have done a Scientific Study, there is no Evidence. Wow. Maybe, just maybe, farmers and ranchers know more about where their livestock walk than a city-slicker journalist does?
Right, because unless pencil-pushers in a university lab have done a Scientific Study, there is no Evidence. Wow. Maybe, just maybe, farmers and ranchers know more about where their livestock walk than a city-slicker journalist does?
3
No ... maybe farmers and ranchers just like to shoot them because its their idea of fun ..
8
"dingusbean" writes "... because unless pencil-pushers in a university lab have done a Scientific Study, there is no Evidence. Wow. Maybe, just maybe, farmers and ranchers know more about where their livestock walk than a city-slicker journalist does ..."
This comment makes use stereotypes that are not correct and that furthermore build on the worst of the lies and fake news that characterize the present political climate. People at university labs who participate in peer reviewed research are doing real science. Journalists at news organizations like this one are doing real journalism that is specified for and protected in the Constitution.
This comment makes use stereotypes that are not correct and that furthermore build on the worst of the lies and fake news that characterize the present political climate. People at university labs who participate in peer reviewed research are doing real science. Journalists at news organizations like this one are doing real journalism that is specified for and protected in the Constitution.
11
My comment is fake news? That is a pretty weird thing to say. But fine, go ahead and refute the facts:
1) the author of this piece is a city-slicker
2) scientists push pencils
3) livestock sometimes step in prairie dog holes and break their legs
Good luck!
1) the author of this piece is a city-slicker
2) scientists push pencils
3) livestock sometimes step in prairie dog holes and break their legs
Good luck!
Zuberbühler's comment:"I have great respect for the prairie-dog work, but so far there is no evidence that the most nuanced information is meaningful to this species,” could be answered with the argument put forward by Daniel Dennett in "From Bacteria to Bach and Back" that, in the course of evolving to fully meaningful language, many vocal memes (the concept he develops) get created and survive even though they initially have no other useful propose to the creature. If something in the prairie-dog's systems causes them regularly to create and repeat a specific pattern, in response to color say, then, if I understand him, Dennett would argue it's a potential step along the path of language development. To be an evolutionary phenomenon, language had to have a continuous developmental path composed of small steps. Where along that continuum does it become language? Interesting if the small brained prairie-dog had progressed a way up the slope of the improbable mountain of language.
Good article about what sounds like impressive work.
Good article about what sounds like impressive work.
7
What next, flying pigs?
What next? Politicians that think?
4
We’re animals and different from the rest. No language argument or language needed to prove a difference; use your eyes.
1
"Dan K" writes: "We’re animals and different from the rest. No language argument or language needed to prove a difference; use your eyes."
Let's instead use science. As research has advanced, we have learned more and more about the differences between humans and non-human animals. The more we learn, the smaller the difference appears to be.
Let's instead use science. As research has advanced, we have learned more and more about the differences between humans and non-human animals. The more we learn, the smaller the difference appears to be.
7
Not only can they talk, but they speak in parables.
5
Wonderful report.
Pity we humans are so presumptuous, and for the most part, believe we are special, when in fact we are simply one of the likely billions of cognisant species inhabiting the universe.
I suppose it's fear, the idea that we simply exist because a random path to what we are occurred in the evolutionary process, and placed us on it by happenstance.
Pulls one down rather quickly off the pedestal, doesn't it ??
Pity we humans are so presumptuous, and for the most part, believe we are special, when in fact we are simply one of the likely billions of cognisant species inhabiting the universe.
I suppose it's fear, the idea that we simply exist because a random path to what we are occurred in the evolutionary process, and placed us on it by happenstance.
Pulls one down rather quickly off the pedestal, doesn't it ??
17
The hummingbirds are back. I didn't have my feeder out yet, but one of them came to the place where the feeder was last year and flew around in front of the window looking at me. They did the same thing last year. Of course I filled the feeder and put it out!
These birds have flown how many thousands of miles, and yet they remember the places where they can find food!
These birds have flown how many thousands of miles, and yet they remember the places where they can find food!
41
Here's a translation of what that adorable, cute and lovely creature of nature is saying --
"Captain of our fairy band,
Helena is here at hand,
And the youth, mistook by me,
Pleading for a lover's fee.
Shall we their fond pageant see?
Lord, what fools these mortals be!"
- A Midsummer Nights Dream Act 3, scene 2
What -- ??
You didn't know Prairie Dogs passed their bucolic time away by quoting Shakespeare...??
"Captain of our fairy band,
Helena is here at hand,
And the youth, mistook by me,
Pleading for a lover's fee.
Shall we their fond pageant see?
Lord, what fools these mortals be!"
- A Midsummer Nights Dream Act 3, scene 2
What -- ??
You didn't know Prairie Dogs passed their bucolic time away by quoting Shakespeare...??
7
I rather see them quoting Caliban at us: "Be not afeard. The isle is full of noises, / Sounds, and sweet airs, that give delight and hurt not." It is indeed.
5
Most animals are much smarter than us; after all, they don't go about systematically destroying the planet on which they live, do they. The arrogance and ego of Man (not woman) is mind-bogling, at times. Of course, you just wouldn't understand....
13
Excellent point, Bob. We live in the age of the Anthropocene, of massive human-caused killing of life. Can we not reverse course?
What a wonderful article, I will long think the implications through.
7
Language is not just consistent signaling. It includes grammar (syntax) and a vast storehouse of words. That's what makes human language flexible enough to discuss literally anything. If a particular word or concept is lacking in a given language, the idea can be talked around by using longer phrases.
Chimpanzees can be taught sign language, and dolphins and whales are possible candidates for possessing language. Their distinguishing feature is a large brain to body ratio, like humans.
Chimpanzees can be taught sign language, and dolphins and whales are possible candidates for possessing language. Their distinguishing feature is a large brain to body ratio, like humans.
2
Chimpanzees cannot be "taught sign language"; they can learn many signs, but they cannot combine these in anything resembling the complexity of human signed languages.
What a fascinating and enlightening article. The subject should not be particularly surprising as even a suburban city dweller who sees and hears birds and doves and chipmunks is conscious of their communication.
This has nothing to do with superiority or otherwise of humans. So much of the natural world is still a unknown to us. Let us hope that this kind of research is not unfunded because a dollar didn't immediately result.
This has nothing to do with superiority or otherwise of humans. So much of the natural world is still a unknown to us. Let us hope that this kind of research is not unfunded because a dollar didn't immediately result.
19
hmmm. Just outside of the window where I sit right now I am listening to a bird that is singing The Sun Down Song. It is the same every evening during the spring, summer, and early fall. I suppose migration happens at that time of year. I recognize this call and find it doesn't happen if the wind is blowing too strongly, if there is a storm with rain pelting down, or if the farmer is in the field. It happens always just as the sun sink below the horizon and the begins to diffuse. After this little song, it lasts about 45 seconds not including the brief intermission, is repeated 3 times. After which the bird flies off into the forest just beyond the farmer's field.
I use body posture, facial expressions, head tilts, eye sight, and hand gestures to convey language. I've talked to several people through sign language alone. It is a language though no sound is made. My dogs speak to me through a language of body posture, ear movement, tail movement, and sound. When they succeed in making me understand they are joyous and the repeat it for the same thing every time. That is language. My cat will reach up and gently touch her right front paw to my left cheek to tell me 'Let's go take a nap together'. She makes a counter clockwise circle on a large pillow on my desk top to tell me she is hungry. That is a language. They are all languages. It is one species to another to make an attempt to make known something. A bird is not going to talk about walking to a human.
I use body posture, facial expressions, head tilts, eye sight, and hand gestures to convey language. I've talked to several people through sign language alone. It is a language though no sound is made. My dogs speak to me through a language of body posture, ear movement, tail movement, and sound. When they succeed in making me understand they are joyous and the repeat it for the same thing every time. That is language. My cat will reach up and gently touch her right front paw to my left cheek to tell me 'Let's go take a nap together'. She makes a counter clockwise circle on a large pillow on my desk top to tell me she is hungry. That is a language. They are all languages. It is one species to another to make an attempt to make known something. A bird is not going to talk about walking to a human.
19
I think you've got it!
2
Prairie dogs definitely can talk.
The one that was chirping in the header to this piece was definitely saying that he thought Trump should be impeached.
That's what it sounded like to me, anyway.
The one that was chirping in the header to this piece was definitely saying that he thought Trump should be impeached.
That's what it sounded like to me, anyway.
23
Food, danger, reproduction. I think that covers why mammals create sounds. I believe that is talking. My Cockatiels would hear when I woke up and start calling for attention.
3
Of course, they communicate.
Do you think they are simply making random sounds?
We are not the only ones here.
Do you think they are simply making random sounds?
We are not the only ones here.
28
For heaven's sake, ants communicate. The communication among the American honeybee leaves most scientists mouth agape in wonder.
4
Here is a piece of related information that is not happy but is true: a few weeks ago Donald Trump Jr. took a trip out west. One purpose of his trip was to shoot prairie dogs. No practical purpose. No challenge at all. Just the pleasure of killing small, defenseless animals.
22
Of course he did. Next you will be describing how he tortures and kills little babies.
1
"sjaco" writes: "Of course he did. Next you will be describing how he tortures and kills little babies."
This reply is incorrect. The news that Donald Trump Jr. took a trip to shoot prairie dogs was reported by this and other serious news organizations. Earlier in the year those same news sources reported that he had gone to Africa to shoot an elephant; those reports included a photo of Trump holding the tail of the elephant he had shot.
This reply is incorrect. The news that Donald Trump Jr. took a trip to shoot prairie dogs was reported by this and other serious news organizations. Earlier in the year those same news sources reported that he had gone to Africa to shoot an elephant; those reports included a photo of Trump holding the tail of the elephant he had shot.
4
Why? merely because Trump Jr enjoys killing animals?
2
I have been afraid to read this article because there is already so much to worry about with the polar bears and whales and so on, and now I will have to add these little creatures to my list.
11
Actually these little creature seem to adapt very well to the presence of a hostile invasive species.
2
Thank you for saying so. :)
1
We could breed animals, parrots for example, for linguistic ability. After many generations, we might produce a parrot capable of understanding Bible stories as well as a young child. The parrot would sooner or later ask if it could be saved, and thereby precipitate a huge theological crisis. It would have to have bodyguards to protect it, since the easiest way to answer its question would be to eliminate the questioner -- not the first time a theological dispute was resolved in this manner.
6
It used to be said that humans are the only animals that can make and use tools. Now we know that is also not true. As for language there are many diverse examples from the dancing of bees to the calls of crows. And these are not even mammals.
12
When I was in school I saw a cartoon of a crow with a spatula prying a roadkill off the road. I taped it to a piece of paper with the message, "Yet another nail in the coffin of man the tool user theories. My professor posted it on his bulletin board.
Since then there have been so many examples of animals using tools. They weren't seen before because humans weren't paying attention.
Since then there have been so many examples of animals using tools. They weren't seen before because humans weren't paying attention.
6
Man's ever growing detachment from the natural world and his superiority complex largely prevent him from even considering most of the time that our animal friends possess a complexity of communication perhaps even greater than our own. The Native Americans recognized and cherished these gifts that our animal friends enjoy. Really brilliant and necessary work by this scientist. There is ever growing research that plants are capable of communicating and even consciously sharing scarce water resources during droughts. We need to stop, listen and explore our natural world much more than we presently do and then prioritize preserving and protecting our precious friends who together inhabit this magical Earth with us.
12
I wish I could upload pictures for this article. We have marmots in our little glen with a pond and meadows at the base of the Sierra Nevada.
Prairie dogs and marmots are related: " The similarly-sized but more social prairie dog is not classified in the genus Marmota but in the related genus Cynomys." (Wikipedia)
Lots of chirping yellow-bellied marmots around here, but they take their cues from all of the other animals as well. It is so intricate it is like a paen to the music of life- and death.
I spend a lot of time outside and the alpha female comes to nibble my toes. I love her- and have for 5 years. She comes when she is called. Our neighbors shoot them but nothing to be done about that. They reproduce at an amazing rate and die or are eaten by hawks and coyotes. Of course everyone has to eat, but it is always a sad moment.
Prairie dogs and marmots are related: " The similarly-sized but more social prairie dog is not classified in the genus Marmota but in the related genus Cynomys." (Wikipedia)
Lots of chirping yellow-bellied marmots around here, but they take their cues from all of the other animals as well. It is so intricate it is like a paen to the music of life- and death.
I spend a lot of time outside and the alpha female comes to nibble my toes. I love her- and have for 5 years. She comes when she is called. Our neighbors shoot them but nothing to be done about that. They reproduce at an amazing rate and die or are eaten by hawks and coyotes. Of course everyone has to eat, but it is always a sad moment.
11
Vegans and PETA love all this language by animals nonsense. Of course they communicate somehow but that's it. They are lower forms of life than humans---PERIOD.
3
"PERIOD"? The issue discussed in the article is an empirical question, the discussion of which is not usefully terminated with a shout of "PERIOD."
GH is just venting.
GH is just venting.
4
Because I say so. Because God says so. PERIOD. Right?
3
some humans also behave like "lower forms of life". Sometimes I think seeking the company of prairie dogs might be the way to go!
6
Yes, and if the sum of all their discourse is taken together and analogy made to the cells in a body, you would have to conclude that what they are saying has a lot to do with keeping the world alive. So far.
4
Silly piece. Animal communication is complex but it is not language. When animals communicate they are compelled to do so by means of innate associative sounds and gestures. There is no infinite use of finite means as in the case of real language. Every day even the dullest human makes utterances unique in the history of speech. The wonderful squawks of the prairie dog are fascinating but are compelled by nature and have nothing to say to us.
6
The issue discussed in the article is a scientific question, to be settled or not settled by experiment observation and analysis, but both GH above and Edwin here seem to think it's a matter to be settled by oracles--themselves. Bulletin: oracles went out a long time ago.
9
our language sounds are also compelled by nature. And I'm sure that most of the things we say every day have been said before, many times. They are learned sound patterns, differing from the calls of an animal like the prairy dog only in complexity and the amount of variation and the extent of the vocabulary. Nobody is arguing that prairie dogs are philosophers. They just talk about what they know (predators), and probably do that better than we could if we were hiding in those holes in the ground.
9
So, you're an expert in prairie dog nuance? And, by the way, EVERYTHING that exists is compelled by nature... There are NO exceptions.
3
No problem . . . Google translate . . . Why even bother trying to have a biologist figure it out?
3
One day humans will realize that non-human animals are worthy of life on their own terms and will be respected. For now, we manage, breed, manipulate and kill them all based on our own needs and perceptions.
12
Thank you, Lori ! I couldn't agree with you more. Every being wants to live. Let's honor that. Every day should be Earth Day, really.
My late mother used to say "animals are smarter than you think". Too many of us lack the empathy and awareness to see that we are not that unique.
11
Give these critters a Chromebook and OK Google. We'll find out sooner.
3
Of course animals have language. We have been conditioned culturally by the biblical concept that 'man' is somehow not an animal, that we are special. Science told us that it was because we use tools and have language. And oh yeah, opposing thumbs. Except now we know that animals use tools, and some even make their own tools. Now we have the ability to recognize non-human language in ways that acknowledge what it is but can't yet translate it.
Years ago, when my son was 11ish, we were in New Mexico and went to Living Desert Zoo and Gardens State Park near Carlsbad. We could not drag him away from the prairie dog colony. He sat there, for nearly an hour, chattering back and forth with the little guys. We asked him later what they talked about. All he could tell us was that they just talked. About stuff.
But if prairie dogs are sentient,(and all those other animals, too!) then what happens to the idea that humans are special because god made us sentient? Wait a minute? Maybe we're not so special - or - science is fake and reason is the enemy of faith.
It makes it hard to accept even for people in the scientific community, so don't expect it to be much accepted at all from a scientifically illerate populace.
Years ago, when my son was 11ish, we were in New Mexico and went to Living Desert Zoo and Gardens State Park near Carlsbad. We could not drag him away from the prairie dog colony. He sat there, for nearly an hour, chattering back and forth with the little guys. We asked him later what they talked about. All he could tell us was that they just talked. About stuff.
But if prairie dogs are sentient,(and all those other animals, too!) then what happens to the idea that humans are special because god made us sentient? Wait a minute? Maybe we're not so special - or - science is fake and reason is the enemy of faith.
It makes it hard to accept even for people in the scientific community, so don't expect it to be much accepted at all from a scientifically illerate populace.
19
Reason is not the enemy of faith. No reason for a person of faith to eschew science.
8
Man is the only animal that prays. Or needs to
Reason and faith are like the left and right hands. Different but not opposed.
5
So interesting an obsession; thanks for the report.
what about birds - the studies on crows for instance.. they have a wide range of communications, definitely recognize each other and individual people and react accordingly.
what about birds - the studies on crows for instance.. they have a wide range of communications, definitely recognize each other and individual people and react accordingly.
6
Can prairie dogs talk? Perhaps, if they could, they'd ask why the president's son enjoys killing them for entertainment? Humans are supposed to be the higher species, but it often does not seem so.
65
Why are humans the higher species? Because they invented jet planes and the atomic bomb and they are capable of destroying life on earth? The president's son enjoys the power of being able to destroy something by pulling a trigger. Some people are easily amused.
4
Can we really not have even one simple story without the injection of politics?
Well, look. Scientists told us that newborns see only in black and white and can't feel pain, and a wealth of other "facts" that any mother could refute in, like, three seconds.
Any pet owner can tell you that yes, Fluffy understands quite a lot more than the scientists think. Or thought. Can't keep up with the revisions in what we "know."
The world is a mighty complex place. Finding food, constructing a safe sturdy home, raising young and teaching them how to survive--these are not simple tasks and our co-inhabitants on the planet aren't just mindless little robots doing what their code is programmed for.
Glad that science is catching up to common sense...
Any pet owner can tell you that yes, Fluffy understands quite a lot more than the scientists think. Or thought. Can't keep up with the revisions in what we "know."
The world is a mighty complex place. Finding food, constructing a safe sturdy home, raising young and teaching them how to survive--these are not simple tasks and our co-inhabitants on the planet aren't just mindless little robots doing what their code is programmed for.
Glad that science is catching up to common sense...
19
The following observation resembles the bee language controversy. There is information in the bee's dance but it is controversial whether the recipient bees actually use this information.
Slobodchikoff’s playback experiments demonstrate that different predator-alarm calls trigger distinct escape responses, but so far he has not been able to link the acoustic variations that ostensibly encode color, shape and so on to any observable behavioral differences. Without such evidence, he cannot rule out the possibility that some of the discrepancies in the alarm calls are an inadvertent byproduct of prairie-dog physiology — an increased sensitivity to a certain color or shape invoking a more forceful rush of air through the vocal tract, for instance — and that the animals do not recognize such differences or use them to their advantage.
Massaro, D. W. (1992). Anatomy of a controversy: The question of a "language" among bees. American Journal of Psychology, 105, 652-659.
Slobodchikoff’s playback experiments demonstrate that different predator-alarm calls trigger distinct escape responses, but so far he has not been able to link the acoustic variations that ostensibly encode color, shape and so on to any observable behavioral differences. Without such evidence, he cannot rule out the possibility that some of the discrepancies in the alarm calls are an inadvertent byproduct of prairie-dog physiology — an increased sensitivity to a certain color or shape invoking a more forceful rush of air through the vocal tract, for instance — and that the animals do not recognize such differences or use them to their advantage.
Massaro, D. W. (1992). Anatomy of a controversy: The question of a "language" among bees. American Journal of Psychology, 105, 652-659.
4
All animals communicate somehow. Is it language? Maybe. But we underestimate our environment when we underestimate the communication ability of other sentient non-human beings.
13
These and countless other wonderful beings are being destroyed by the vicious animal agriculture industry. Boycott cruelty. Eat plants.
7
I never stopped eating meat, but I have been eating nearly all vegetables lately. This isn't for moral reasons but because I have diabetes it is healthier.
Meat is murder? What about herbicide!
Scientists are such dreamers.
Within the next 50 to 100 years thanks to human overpopulation, human-caused global warming and human-caused habitat destruction, most species of mammals, including prairie dogs, will be extinct in the wild...and we will never know much about them.
Some day soon, the Donald Trumps of the world will rewrite the history books...and most of human history will disappear forever.
Within the next 50 to 100 years thanks to human overpopulation, human-caused global warming and human-caused habitat destruction, most species of mammals, including prairie dogs, will be extinct in the wild...and we will never know much about them.
Some day soon, the Donald Trumps of the world will rewrite the history books...and most of human history will disappear forever.
7
Donald Trump is unlikely to re-write history because he hasn't read it, doesn't know any of it, and doesn't care about it as it won't make him piles of beautiful money. He might get somebody else to write it for him but more likely he will just steal it. More likely the person who does this will be a moron like he is so the rest of us don't really have much to worry about. The only people afraid of Trump are people who think they have something to gain from his good will. These people have to remember that he will turn on them in the blink of an eye. The Comey affair proves this.
3
Interesting, even ground-breaking work, but what Solobchikoff documents in prairie dogs is a surprisingly complex sign-trove, rather than language as such. There is neither syntax nor contextual ways that meaning is made and unpacked (at least in what is on offer here), for example, which are the main hallmarks of human language. Instead, a signalling system, one that can even cope with some novelty, has been discovered through painstaking, decades-long work. Given the brain size of this mammal, though, that itself is surprising.
Part of the problem is that some neuro-scientists and most animal behaviorists use both language and information, rather differently than do linguists and linguistic anthropologists (even "sloppily" some scholars from these and related disciplines would say). "Reference" (the coding of information indexically) is one of many functions in human languages and not the primary attribute of any of them. All human language can code information directly in a sign but the meaning of such signs is made by syntax and framing, amongst other extra-sign processes. I would prefer "signalling" to "language" in this case as it focusses attention of how the system works in the life of the colony (these are very social animals, for example, whose survival strategy is a collective one). Signalling would also avoid sterile debates (e.e., around "intelligence" or what any one prairie dog "means") which is unlikely to be answered through Solobchikoff's impressive work.
Part of the problem is that some neuro-scientists and most animal behaviorists use both language and information, rather differently than do linguists and linguistic anthropologists (even "sloppily" some scholars from these and related disciplines would say). "Reference" (the coding of information indexically) is one of many functions in human languages and not the primary attribute of any of them. All human language can code information directly in a sign but the meaning of such signs is made by syntax and framing, amongst other extra-sign processes. I would prefer "signalling" to "language" in this case as it focusses attention of how the system works in the life of the colony (these are very social animals, for example, whose survival strategy is a collective one). Signalling would also avoid sterile debates (e.e., around "intelligence" or what any one prairie dog "means") which is unlikely to be answered through Solobchikoff's impressive work.
5
Signalling as you describe it does seem closer to how animals use their sounds and bodies to communicate. Not a popular contribution, I notice, but a helpful way to clarify what we mean by language.
Living in the Southwest, I have many occasions to witness these fascinating creatures up close and have enjoyed their chatter. Unfortunately those of us who live in rural areas also know the ignorance and prejudice of our neighbors has resulted in extermination of many colonies. Coyote, bobcat, cougar, bear and wolf killers in our midst ruin the very thing that makes life special here -- nature. Mass slaughter of coyotes and bobcats allows more mice and rats to breed unchecked infecting humans with plague and hanta virus. Everything is connected in nature.
39
This article is an absolute relief. My cat and I have been carrying on sophisticated discussions about kibble, squirrels, and brushing for quite some time. He seems to have a dozens of different sounds at his disposal, and he even knows how to ask a question.
People go on and on about the danger of anthropomorphizing animals. They talk about how we mistakenly project our own world onto them. But it seems to me that the saddest belief we project onto animals, and the one getting in the way of scientific process (in the same way that the music of the spheres got in the way for newton) -- is the belief that animals cannot speak.
People go on and on about the danger of anthropomorphizing animals. They talk about how we mistakenly project our own world onto them. But it seems to me that the saddest belief we project onto animals, and the one getting in the way of scientific process (in the same way that the music of the spheres got in the way for newton) -- is the belief that animals cannot speak.
35
As a young kid on a farm, I used to mimic our matriarch barn cat's call for her kittens to come out of hiding when she wasn't around. It was also fun to watch her taking them hunting - motions and sounds let them know what to do. I don't know that cats have as full a range as these prairie dogs seem to have, but it isn't just a matter of random sounds.
10
People who don't think animals talk are anthropomorphizing their own stupidity onto animals. When someone comes into my house my cats look at me with terror and say, Christopher! There are strange humans in the house! You have to come with us right now and hide! The female makes strange vocal noises when she sees birds. Do you want to play with me, little bird? The birds are too smart to fall for that, plus she is inside and they are out.
2
The hunter-gatherers who were the top predators in the Americas before Europeans arrived usually killed only what they could eat before it spoiled, and uttered word of thanks to the animal that had given its life to feed them.
2
Not only will we understand what they have to say—soon we'll determine that prairie dogs' speech is far more advanced than that of the U.S. president.
12
Of course they can talk. The recording says: .22-.250 at 400 yards! Jerry is down!
I'm sure I heard one them say "I wish Gerald would take better care of his mound."
6
Prairie dogs... fellow sentient beings, wonderful exemplars of mindfulness and participants in highly differentiated communication. Donald Trump Jr. spent earth day with a guide in Montana shooting prairie dogs for fun (not for eating).... he's not the only sociopath in the family.
16
Of course they send signals, chipmunks do it like crazy. And other animals pick up on it as well. This has been verified.
The difference between language and signals is that signals are given out as a guide, and historically, language to deceive.
The difference between language and signals is that signals are given out as a guide, and historically, language to deceive.
3
My best wishes to Dr. Slobodchikoff. This is a great scientific project with enormous impact. To coexist peacefully and productively, it is necessary to understand other lifeforms more deeply.
10
We have Gunnison's prairie dogs where I live in southwestern Colorado. My HOA gases them because they can only think of them as "pests". Other landowners in the area get a kick out of shooting them and allow visitors in to do it for recreation, for a fee. If they thought the prairie dogs had a language, it probably wouldn't make a difference to them. I have advocated for them, but the board and most other residences don't hear my language either. The plague wiped them out a few years ago and ironically, killing them with gas and shooting may actually keep the population low enough that plague may not wipe them out.
5
Let's stop this large-scale killing of prairie dogs for entertainment and the government involvement in it. Why must humans keep killing them?
As someone who has studied birdsong for 40 years as an academic, I find that the endless debate about animal communication versus language largely comes down to "semantics" and who is commenting on this issue. For linguists, language is regarded as a uniquely human trait, with an emphasis on syntax, semantics, and learning. For those of use who study communication in insects, amphibians, and even songbirds who learn their songs, whether or not their signals qualify as language is often not the most interesting question. The classic studies of vervet monkeys by Seyfarth and Cheney show that animal signals can convey a semantic meaning, even if the signals themselves are not learned. The same may be true for prairie dogs, humpback whales, and numerous other animals. What constitues language is in the ear of the beholder.
12
The fact that for other prairie dogs there is no behavioral difference in response to identifications that are accompanied by 'adjectives' identifying a possible predator does not mean that is 'just chatter'.
One of the uses of the adjectives would be to make it possible for other sentinels to know whether a preying creature is the same one that the first sentinel saw or yet another predator of the same kind. Very useful information for flight strategies, but not tested for in these experiments
Michael Ryan
One of the uses of the adjectives would be to make it possible for other sentinels to know whether a preying creature is the same one that the first sentinel saw or yet another predator of the same kind. Very useful information for flight strategies, but not tested for in these experiments
Michael Ryan
2
Thanks for this. Especially liked the sound clips. I have lived for 11 years surrounded by a colony of Arctic Ground Squirrels in the woods in the Yukon, Canada. I have been trying to learn their language. I have learned sounds for different predators and different actions such as swooping or perching. It is a deeply rewarding feeling to hear an AGS vocalization and know that soon I will be seeing a fast-moving hawk come flying low through the trees. Or that a lynx is sneaking around burrows and if I just look in a certain direction I will eventually spot him. What is also very interesting is that other birds and small mammals seem to know what each of these vocalizations mean as well and react accordingly. AGSs even do things like fake alarm calls in order to steal food from others. Fascinating and charming little critters.
16
A 'native' rabbit lives in our house with us. She comes when we call her; she clearly, though "silently" communicates to let us know when she wants food, especially the little pieces of banana which she delights in above all else, when she wants us to open the door to let her out on the porch, and to come back in, and about lots of other things, simple things, to be sure, but clearly communicated with subtle gestures, certain looks, and in other ways.. It's also often obvious that she is thinking before she actually asks for or does something.
15
I did have a possum that came up through the wall and popped out into my bathtub last year. It wanted to stay there, but I had to take it outside because my cats were afraid of it. A vet I used to know had a baby deer that came to the door in the evening and when they let it in and it went to sleep on their son's bed. Then in the morning it got up and they let it out again. But animals who do this are usually killed because of disease. But the real reason is religion and the Bible, which tells humans they have to dominate nature and stay away from it.
2
The rabbit has been living with us for about 5 years, has her own bed, litter box, toys, etc.. When I opened the door to the back yard for her, she wouldn't go out and gave me her "you think I'm nuts?!" look. Guess she figures giving up organic parsley, dill, kale, etc., for pot luck in the yard, competing with other rabbits and dodging hawks would be pretty stupid. Dominate nature? Heck no! She's clearly the boss and we feel pretty darn good about it.
2
of course animals other than humans have language. The fact that we can't understand their language and therefore view them as lower species serves to illuminate how blinded we our by our own ethnospeciesm. It's amazing to me that homo sapiens have lived under the delusion of special superiority for all these millennia. We have a lot to learn, and other animals have a lot to teach us. If we can ever get over the canard of superiority.
17
This does not surprise me. I no longer hunt, but when I did the various degrees of communication, concern and cooperation between the members of a species amazed me. Over the years, more and more, I realized how much we have in common with the creatures of the earth, beyond just the desire to survive. Once I realized this I stopped hunting.
138
Your post made my day. I don't hunt and wouldn't, but have long admired the hunters of a very different past-Roosevelt, for instance-who lived in a different world with different values, but also realized and wrote with knowledge and sensitivity about the intelligence of the natural world's other species.
5
My first visit to N. Dakota was my introduction to these wonderful critters. Riding on a bicycle up a slope, there was no doubt in my mind: they speak to each other. Animals in a colony on one side of the road seemed to be communicating with their cousins on the other side. Some were paying attention to me-- while others were not.
5
I'd expect almost all language start(ed) with such topics as alarms, food, sex, pain, counting, descriptions, names/identity, plans, and maybe, later, recording information (story telling).
6
Can prairie dogs talk? We will likely not find out before The Unhinged Orange, Jr. and his host, the Greedpublican candidate for Congress, sadistically kill them all off. As the Killer Ape candidate for Congress said, "“As good Montanans, we want to show good hospitality to people,” Gianforte told the Associated Press Friday. “What can be more fun than to spend an afternoon shooting the little rodents?”"
16
ALL animals talk. It would be revolutionary if human beings actually honored what they have to say. I am sure - with certainty -- all animals are asking to be protected, provided habitat to live and raise their young and to feel the joy of life, not the bullets from hunters or the cages of industry. @johannaclear @freezuccotti @farmsanctuary @humanesociety
13
Humans CAN be nice, but like I said before they are unpredictable and dangerous, and it is prudent for animals to stay clear of them.
4
Right. All other creatures that can run for it, do so when they see humans because those that didn't are extinct.
My suggestion: Solobchikoff should change his anthropocentric thinking and stop referring to "animals" and thus perpetuating the us-versus-them divide. He should be referring to the language and communication skills and ability of other species.
11
I understand myself to be an animal. I do not consider myself a deliberate creation of a thinking deity.
7
The other way of thinking or speaking would be to refer to other animals. All of us here now (all living plants and animals) evolved on this planet with adaptations to our environment. Some species are better adapted (like dolphins) and don't need to change their environment in order to survive. Our species on the other hand,is poorly adapted and thus we need to change (radically) our environment in order to survive.
1
Not just survive, in order to reproduce without restraint, without bounds, like a lethal infection.
2
These animals build cities just like humans. Thousands of colonies of millions of prairie dogs have been plowed under.
10
A terrific article about a wonderful man on a scientific quest. I wish Dr. Slobodchikoff all the best with his research about this wonderful animal. And Mr. Donovan's photos are breathtaking. I'm cheering for the praire dogs & their supporters & against the humans who are slaughtering & dismissing them.
39
As a scientist, the worst thing one can allow to form is a personal belief. Robert Anton Wilson said, "Belief is the death of intelligence", which is a good guiding quote for a scientist. Once one has a belief, then one can no longer think about the subject of the belief. We are now finding that many animals have intelligence and communicative skills, now that we are looking. My own hound comes to one of us and says, "wa wa" when he is thirsty and his bowl is empty. He has a comprehension vocabulary of over 100 words, such that we have to be careful about what we talk about in front of him.
13
That's like an anti-tautology. Did you write what you don't believe?
No. It used to be scientific dogma that animals don't really communicate and also that they don't feel pain.
3
The first part, about belief. I don't think we can make any assertion without belief, even if it belief poses danger as a trap. So a grain of salt on the belief is good. We need more salt. Like you said.
1
"Based on a reanalysis of the original data and fresh experimentation, the two groups argue that the vervet calls are not as clear-cut as they have been viewed and that the monkeys ignore playbacks just as often as they respond to them appropriately."
And humans would be more consistent? If consistency is a necessary component for language, then only computers have language.
And humans would be more consistent? If consistency is a necessary component for language, then only computers have language.
18
Great point!
1
I wonder if the number of such articles will or even can reach a critical mass sufficient to stop us from treating animals so terribly. The wealth of evidence suggests the answer is no, but few people expected the Berlin wall to be knocked down. Hope springs eternal.
17
We can hope that prairie dog language now includes:
" God in heaven protect me and my kin from gun nut Don Trump Jr who kills us for sport "
May their knowledge spread to each other by some way, like elephants do, long distance...
" God in heaven protect me and my kin from gun nut Don Trump Jr who kills us for sport "
May their knowledge spread to each other by some way, like elephants do, long distance...
46
On a stay in a remote part of the Lake District the yard front and back was used by a sheep farmer. At the time there were lambs mixed in with their parents. When I walked into their field, the mother sheep would start bleating and the bleats would be directed at lambs maybe across the field from the mothers. I would stand still and the bleats continued directing the lambs in circuitous routes to avoid coming too close to me. I repeated this several times a day and each day I observed the same behavior. It seemed obvious to me that the sheep and lambs were in conversation. I found this mind boggling as I had always thought of sheep as stupid, as talk about behaving like sheep as a sort of crowd mentality. But the older sheep communicating to the lambs were communicating to individual lambs--in complicated series of bleats.
16
My dog could not only understand and convey a multitude of commands, she had the ability to actually tease me. She knew what she was doing, had that "look" in her eye when deliberately bringing me the wrong toy, for example, and immediately followed the "correct" command when I re-stated it.
8
I love prairie dogs. They are thoughtful, intelligent, social creatures capable of building complex, cooperative societies, complete with a whole hierarchy of characters from "nannies" and "janitors" to senior leaders. This article only scratches the surface of their rich and interesting lifecycle. I'm glad to see they and those dedicated to studying them are getting some recognition.
That PDs are being systematically eradicated, often in socially sanctioned brutal and inhuman fashion, is a disgrace. Why do we think it's ok to use them as "target practice"? Why do we allow people to gas or drown entire colonies? Why is it ok to lay out gallons of poison that not only kill them but also all other downstream species that depend on them? Prairie dogs are a foundation species in our plains ecosystem. Without them, the rest of the pyramid collapses. Now on top of that, we are learning that they way they communicate can also serve as a foundation for our understanding of language!
Please support the efforts to protect these small, yet mighty creatures. They are not vermin. They do not threaten livestock or farmers. Their colonies help keep the grasses healthy by constantly turning and aerating the soil, helping with pollination and fertilization, and managing growth. I would love to see a show like the old Meerkat Manor do the same for these little guys as it did for meerkats. They have an equally compelling story to tell, right in our backyard, if only we'd listen!
That PDs are being systematically eradicated, often in socially sanctioned brutal and inhuman fashion, is a disgrace. Why do we think it's ok to use them as "target practice"? Why do we allow people to gas or drown entire colonies? Why is it ok to lay out gallons of poison that not only kill them but also all other downstream species that depend on them? Prairie dogs are a foundation species in our plains ecosystem. Without them, the rest of the pyramid collapses. Now on top of that, we are learning that they way they communicate can also serve as a foundation for our understanding of language!
Please support the efforts to protect these small, yet mighty creatures. They are not vermin. They do not threaten livestock or farmers. Their colonies help keep the grasses healthy by constantly turning and aerating the soil, helping with pollination and fertilization, and managing growth. I would love to see a show like the old Meerkat Manor do the same for these little guys as it did for meerkats. They have an equally compelling story to tell, right in our backyard, if only we'd listen!
254
One of the main reasons "most people would be more than happy if we got rid of every single one" (prairie dogs) is not so much the vermin excuse as the fact that they aren't found in Europe/Asia/Africa/wherever. No one knows where they actually live. Everyone wants a lawn, everyone wants to pretend they are Somewhere Else. No one wants to see prairie dogs, reminding them that they are wrong.
8
my two dogs, canines, just reaacted to the recordings....prey reaction...not talking yet.
3
We seem to just be meeting our planetary co-voyagers at the same time we are annihilating them. A wider discussion of topics of animal thinking, emotion, and culture can be found in several new and recent books, including those reviewed here: http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2015/10/08/amazing-inner-lives-animals/
53
We just grew the prefrontal lobes to think through it all and express it abstractly to each other.
2
For readers who perhaps are not familiar with Carl Safina, his writings on animal behavior and the emotional intelligence of animals are stunning. They reflect deep scientific research, but elucidate the rich emotional lives of animals. After reading his works one cannot help but be more empathetic to other animals.
There was another recent paper on dogs processing human speech. Dogs can process both meaning and emotion, and imaging showed they used the corresponding regions of the brain as humans use to process these different elements. That shows that dogs come equipped with the neural machinery to process speech. Most likely this evolved to serve some canine function before humans came along. We just don't follow their lingo. The more we study, the more similar we find ourselves to our animal brethren.
20
Horse whispering is real. They may not understand the words, but they feel the empathy.
5
I think that anyone who spends a massive amount of quiet, observant time with an animal will eventually learn to discern the meaning of that animal's vocalizatioms, body language and signals.
True story: I have two dogs that sleep in my bedroom. If I say "Good Night, X" to one dog, the other utters an "ahem" sort of sound that conveys a lot of expectation for response. When I then say "Goodnight, Y," that dog lets expels a long, contented sigh. No one can convince me the dogs don't know exactly what this is.
One dog has a specific bark for "big, black birds overhead" (he hates ravens specifically, but sometimes thinks turkey vultures are ravens). The other dog looks at the sky on hearing this bark. The first dog even uses that same bark if he hears raven vocalizations from indoors. A different bark is used for unknown humans at the gate, and another for deer outside the fence. An angry, frantic bark signals coyotes encroaching. A tentative bark with a question mark at the end means rattlesnake (and a "come fix this, please" message aimed at me). Clearly, I spend too much time with my canine companions, but we communicate effectively. It doesn't surprise me that the prairie dogs would have a similar vocabulary, most of it having to do with keeping trouble away.
True story: I have two dogs that sleep in my bedroom. If I say "Good Night, X" to one dog, the other utters an "ahem" sort of sound that conveys a lot of expectation for response. When I then say "Goodnight, Y," that dog lets expels a long, contented sigh. No one can convince me the dogs don't know exactly what this is.
One dog has a specific bark for "big, black birds overhead" (he hates ravens specifically, but sometimes thinks turkey vultures are ravens). The other dog looks at the sky on hearing this bark. The first dog even uses that same bark if he hears raven vocalizations from indoors. A different bark is used for unknown humans at the gate, and another for deer outside the fence. An angry, frantic bark signals coyotes encroaching. A tentative bark with a question mark at the end means rattlesnake (and a "come fix this, please" message aimed at me). Clearly, I spend too much time with my canine companions, but we communicate effectively. It doesn't surprise me that the prairie dogs would have a similar vocabulary, most of it having to do with keeping trouble away.
187
My pooch has two distinct barks for the FedEx and UPS trucks. She barks the first about 3 minutes before it pulls onto my street. She barks the UPS notification 4 or 5 minutes early - because the UPS driver usually has a treat for her, and she wants to make sure I get to the door in time.
And yes, I'm familiar with those contented sighs.
And yes, I'm familiar with those contented sighs.
42
no question domestic dogs talk to us and each other.....as a dog owner for my whole life and trainer I constantly talk to them...they understand a lot and so do I. Always learning with each dog
13
Response to Passion for Peaches: My current dog uses only body language to convey her needs, but my previous dog taught me to obey her different vocal signals. She had a very specific, high-pitched bark for "I want to play" -- which I learned to mimic to tell her when I wanted to play. She gave a small, quiet grunt when she needed someone to open the door so that she could go outside to pee, and she had different barks for "someone outside the house" -- one that indicated a family member and another that indicated a stranger. Had I been more perceptive, I probably would have picked up even more of her efforts at vocal communication.
4
A related question is "Does consciousness exist in the persons who use prairie dogs for target practice?" or "is intelligence compatible with killing creatures only for the fun of it?".
190
Observe the progeny of Trump. These people have no empathy.
12
There has never been any doubt in my mind that animals think, feel, talk and engage in non-verbal communication just as humans do, although there is certainly some variation between the many non-human animal species. Cats, I find, are very good at this. We had a cat who used to order our dog around like a drill sergeant with a short and testy "Maow!" and the dog, who accepted being outranked by the cat, dutifully stayed a step behind. We have a kitten who communicates so well with her tone of voice that we swear she thinks she's speaking English. She calls me "Ma-ma!" We have another less-verbal and older cat who shifts her weight back and forth, sighs, and gives us an arch look that clearly says, "I'm hungry. Why haven't you fed me yet? What are you, stupid?" They all have their own thoughts, their own feelings, their own personalities, their own communication styles, and their own right to be here, and to say otherwise reeks of human arrogance.
64
My animals have always ordered me around. The male cat scolds me when I go near the door. It's dangerous because sometimes strangers come in, and when strangers come in they both run into my bedroom and hide under the covers. Everybody calls them the undercover cats. The female comes up and bites my nose, and licks my face. They both stay near me all the time, and their favourite time is nap time. And all the animals come to collect me when it is time to go to bed. But the wild animals talk too. The turkeys sit on my porch railing and ask for food, the birds and the pileated woodpecker come and scold me. The bears expect their bird seed to be out there, and I try to put it in places where the bears can come out of the woods and eat and then go back into the woods without coming into conflict with humans. Humans are dangerous and unpredictable.
115
I always wondered when Elliot, by Labrador, gave me his long pleading looks whether he wanted to go to the Dog Park, or whether he wanted to discuss French Existentialism.
16
Labradors aren't into that stuff. Probably he wanted to be petted, then fed, then go to the dog park to meet his friends, then home for a nap.
15
Gas bubble.
1
Yea, you're probably right Christopher. French Existentialism is more of a Poodle thing.
11
It's wonderful to read such a piece - to see it out in the world. It is also amazing that it is taking us so much time to understand the subtleties of life and all living things. Is it so difficult to comprehend that everything living communicates on some level? We certainly live in a egocentric world when we believe that we are the exception and above all. If trees nurture their family members communicating unseen, it takes but a gentle nudge to appreciate that any living creature uses some form of "language" to communicate. I remember Heidegger's (?) instruction, ".... even a clam interacts with it's environment." One day we will see more clearly but without the use of our eyes.
87
Long time since grad school but it seems to me that if the vocalizations can be reduced to x-y plots (sonograms), there are algorithms to describe them as small sets of parameter values. Then if these sets can be fitted into statistically significantly different "bins" that correspond to what Slobodchikoff perceives as nouns / adjectives, then he has independent corroboration (as long as he doesn't cherry-pick from his data). He can't be unaware of this; yet, if he's done it (or attempted it) it's not mentioned here. I'm not saying prairie dogs don't have a vocabulary but if they do... what's the objective evidence?
3
I'm not saying Trump doesn't have a vocabulary, but if he does... what's the objective evidence? Just because you can make sounds, doesn't mean you are conveying useful information. I'll grant prairie dogs the gift of language, some humans I'm not so sure.
8
I've been reading Slobodchikoff's work for a long time. He certainly hasn't received the public recognition that other ethologists studying animal communication have received. However, most animal behaviorists I know are at least somewhat familiar with his studies.
I recently read a paper on language learning and sound discrimination in infant tamarins (new world primates) that demonstrated the same sort of language learning in humans and song learning in birds.
In terms of the evolution of language, this is what we would expect to see in animal communication. Language and vocal communication in animals is different in degree, but probably not in kind.
I recently read a paper on language learning and sound discrimination in infant tamarins (new world primates) that demonstrated the same sort of language learning in humans and song learning in birds.
In terms of the evolution of language, this is what we would expect to see in animal communication. Language and vocal communication in animals is different in degree, but probably not in kind.
37
Is the title of this a rhetorical question? Of course they can! Language is defined as any system of formalized symbols, signs, sounds, gestures, or the like used or conceived as a means of communicating thought, emotion, etc. And also defined as the means of communication used by animals. Language is not unique to humans, just as emotions are not.
20
Gorgeous. That photo is a keeper, the dogs personality shines. Thanks!
25
Humans have such overblown superiority complexes about their abilities, yet at the same time don't give animals credit for having any intellect at all. All animals have some way of communicating with each other, whether it be through body language, scent or vocalization. Just because we don't understand what they're saying doesn't mean it doesn't exist or have a purpose. Most of what comes out of humans' mouths are lies or idle chatter. If you want the truth from a human, study their body language.
Animals have been here much longer than humans so they must be doing something right. All the abilities humans have evolved might actually be detrimental to their survival. It is because of those abilities that we are destroying the planet that we and our animal brethren call home. A successful life form is one which survives for a long period of time because it doesn't upset the balance in nature.
I believe all life is sacred and should be respected. I also believe that life begets life, and we all must become food one day. This is what allows the cycle of life to continue. But killing animals for purposes other than for food or destroying a species because they're in your way is not only stupid, but a sin, and should be outlawed.
Animals have been here much longer than humans so they must be doing something right. All the abilities humans have evolved might actually be detrimental to their survival. It is because of those abilities that we are destroying the planet that we and our animal brethren call home. A successful life form is one which survives for a long period of time because it doesn't upset the balance in nature.
I believe all life is sacred and should be respected. I also believe that life begets life, and we all must become food one day. This is what allows the cycle of life to continue. But killing animals for purposes other than for food or destroying a species because they're in your way is not only stupid, but a sin, and should be outlawed.
166
Humans believe those things because of that book they seem to swear by.
5
Don't exclusively blame the book. Blame the people who exploit it for its power, without caring to understand it.
3
I agree with every word of this! And with what Einstein is often quoted as saying: "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe."
3
One of them told me he could once, but I didn't believe him.
1
But I was only kidding. I have always known that animals speak, just not in the same way that humans do. Actually, animals even swear.
11
Thank you for this well-written article. I especially enjoyed the sound bites. It was nice to get out of politics and into nature, where the chitter chatter actually has a purpose.
85
You should have listened to a six and a half hour programme on BBC Radio 4 and RTE (Ireland) which followed the dawn chorus across Europe. If you get up just before dawn you will know what the dawn chorus is. In upstate New York it starts out with the American robins and then extends to the cardinals, the doves, and everybody else. The blue jays are terrible scolds.
23
Thanks, Christopher! Sounds worthy of my bucket list.
2
Old school ethologist here. You know, the scientific discipline that was awarded a 3-way split Nobel Prize in 1973 - for workers describing complex communications in animals?
I like Slobodchikoff's work very much indeed. I think it needs pointing out, though, that his work was begun by many previous workers. My favorite example would be the detailed description of specific crow calls, and their meanings; by Ernest Thompson Seton - the co-founder of the Boy Scouts, and Chief Naturalist of Manitoba - published in the late 1890's.
Slobodchikoff might take heart that Seton's observations and hard data were also doubted and scorned by some of his fellow naturalists. Never mind that every time his work was tested- he was proven correct. In spite of the fact that radio trackers, trail cameras, recording tech of any kind - did not exist in 1895. So, Dr. Slobodchikoff; you're in good company.
I like Slobodchikoff's work very much indeed. I think it needs pointing out, though, that his work was begun by many previous workers. My favorite example would be the detailed description of specific crow calls, and their meanings; by Ernest Thompson Seton - the co-founder of the Boy Scouts, and Chief Naturalist of Manitoba - published in the late 1890's.
Slobodchikoff might take heart that Seton's observations and hard data were also doubted and scorned by some of his fellow naturalists. Never mind that every time his work was tested- he was proven correct. In spite of the fact that radio trackers, trail cameras, recording tech of any kind - did not exist in 1895. So, Dr. Slobodchikoff; you're in good company.
164
I have no trouble accepting that Prairie Dogs do, indeed, communicate with each other. What I wonder about is what goes on below ground in their burrows, besides the obvious.
23
This is the gentle, sentient creature that our president's son went killing for sport.
205
While that may be (I don't really know), as Alex said, it was nice to get away from politics for a while. So let's just leave it that way.
4
Give us a break. The article pointed out that "most" would be OK with wiping them out. I don't include myself in that cohort, by the way.
To try to drag politics into a nature article is about as low as a prairie dogs' burrow.
To try to drag politics into a nature article is about as low as a prairie dogs' burrow.
3
I read about a prairie dog hunt in Wyoming, where 1K were shot in a 4 day hunt by 2 old hunters. They set up tripods for their rifles and sat on the ground picking them off. The prairie dogs kept returning to their holes in spite of being under fire. Brave little creatures worried about their homes. They need protection against this barbarity.
Thanks to this story, it is consoling to know that many people do care about their survival.
Thanks to this story, it is consoling to know that many people do care about their survival.
7
Anthropologists have shown that "language" is not merely a means of conveying information; every society uses it to tie people together (or keep them apart) and to entertain, enchant, entice. All societies have verbal art and apparently "useless" talk that shows we are there and ready for interaction. ("It's raining.") We become human through language and through our linguistic, and other, interaction. We know that language must be learned through social transmission, though not teaching. Linguists have emphasized the generative, productive nature of "language." Though a definition of "language" is almost impossible to produce, it is exciting to have these debates and to see scholars patiently doing studies in the actual world. The line between "human" and "nonhuman" has been blurring over the last decades and is the location of some of the most exciting scholarship being done right now. Thanks for publishing this thought-provoking article.
51
Hopefully ongoing scientific investigation will prove it.
What would really be cool though is if other species of animals use curse words. You know, to disparage their predators and such.
Or if their young have the equivalent of human slang. You know, to drive their parents crazy.