Abstract
Trying to uncover the roots of human speech and language has been the premier motivation to study the signalling behaviour of nonhuman primates for several decades. Focussing on the question of whether we find evidence for linguistic reference in the production of nonhuman primate vocalizations, I will first discuss how the criteria used to diagnose referential signalling have changed over time, and will then turn to the paradigmatic case of semantic communication in animals, the alarm calls of vervet monkeys, Chlorocebus pygerythrus. A recent in-depth analysis of the original material revealed that, while the alarm calls could be well distinguished, calls of similar structure were also used in within- and between-group aggression. This finding is difficult to reconcile with the idea that calls denote objects in the environment. Furthermore, nonhuman primates show only minimal signs of vocal production learning, one key prerequisite for conventionalized and symbolic communication. In addition, the structure of calls in different populations or closely related species is highly conserved. In conclusion, any continuity between nonhuman primate and human communication appears to be found at the level of the processing of signals. Why and how the ancestors of our own species one day began to talk to each other continues to be an enigma. Future research should focus on changes in the neural structure supporting volitional control over vocalizations, the gene networks associated with vocal production, and the developmental processes involved in the integration of production and perception of vocalizations.
Highlights
Trying to uncover the roots of human speech and language has been the premier motivation to study the signalling behaviour of nonhuman primates for several decades
Are animal vocalizations just expressions of emotions (Darwin 1872) or do they perhaps have a symbolic component, as the eminent ethologist Peter Marler suggested (Marler, 1977)? Can we find rudimentary forms of what we consider to be prerequisites for—or instances of—linguistic abilities in animal communication (Fitch & Zuberbühler, 2013; Fitch, 2010)? Over the last decades, we have learnt a great deal about nonhuman primate communication
To understand how the field of primate communication developed, let me turn back the clock to the year 1980, when Robert Seyfarth, Dorothy Cheney, and Peter Marler published their seminal paper on the alarm-calling behaviour of vervet monkeys, Chlorocebus pygerythrus (Seyfarth, Cheney, & Marler, 1980a)
Summary
Trying to uncover the roots of human speech and language has been the premier motivation to study the signalling behaviour of nonhuman primates for several decades. To understand how the field of primate communication developed, let me turn back the clock to the year 1980, when Robert Seyfarth, Dorothy Cheney, and Peter Marler published their seminal paper on the alarm-calling behaviour of vervet monkeys, Chlorocebus pygerythrus (previously Cercopithecus aethiops) (Seyfarth, Cheney, & Marler, 1980a).
Published Version (Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have