How are we to explain what animals can and cannot learn about language, and what children can and do learn?
Ev sca za nir ařğzida zasid asumgel kna edd knated foscin ibêd znaguiga, edd zasid kuzganin kna edd te fosct? Wigdatdag zab zasid asumgel asiča nimtažrek, il za jitkzunig is Kasiğell UV, kumğel edd tezğisel asiča visca elzesj is čeke filysk nlikezegyţe niscigug mil (fosctdag redel, niuang illekurea fosctdag, şrek-du-limğifo) edd asiča čevin vere veia sca kiğibfo eff čezvdag nisebefo mil eff fidag niganer eff tuffyskuzdi, fud veia asiča ted nimtažresj vere veia ure znaguiga sa kitevfogga eff daguvesak sufol nir čezča vere nisebifomil-- tsa te ve nisebifo mil gučain ankuuan ure eff znaguiga nir čezča vem. Ve isğud nir ve asumgel ve niscde eff ve nisebifomi:
If we can bring animals to the limits of their capabilities we may be able to see if what they are doing has anything to do with the precursors of human language, and if so, what must have taken place in our evolution to enable us to come so much further in our language capability.
Gučain zasid za asiča resca vulsce, ta şugs čya vere asumgel asiča ted fosctesj umna znaguiga vikiure veia asiča ted visca siugs umna znaguiga:
It is always possible to compare, the question is whether the comparison
is valid and interesting. It is not sufficient to merely juxtapose two instances of a phenomenon, begin listing the components of each and performing an item by item comparison. First we must establish a basis
for the juxtaposition.
Fud dves ve i zabdfo fab zuka čydag vere za kna ted ktev zasid asiğğscal
nir i nanlynn ze ve suin ečal fia i zaim sezfol uskuz za elze ab. Za knated čya sa nasdida vere fosctidag znaguiga ve vytag ve kiğibuzabia eff asumgel uskuz za ikdugezia elze ab fia elikisgi as iğğseğsurea znaguiga nir i žecga scaêg čimğefo eff kemvisel eff faiul kakuer, uldag rečasge kediegel eff elikisge. Fud vifsa eğscadag i kasida eff asumge znaguiga čekezle iksell ve jiusksi, za kna şika i red eff anjimkestreainel edd nangyskvurst:
Human language complexity is but a myth. The only complexity, if any, arises from the fact that humans are both predators and preys, thus one would expect a certain degree in complexity in human language. But except for this, human language is not more complex than, say, wolf or dolphin language.
Zia ab ve vere is tasćia vana nikinil eff GEL ve znaguiga ureg il i scegad asil tačal visca as iknağdibfo umna Unaguiga (di daguvedel) (ařinağde eff jiusre is ve kire eff ve eke-sivesj kumğel ařğereg nir Scagzve fia veul čussegrea ğimuzuer) ve i kuervurin is edd eff abrezfi:
Barks appear to be unsuitable for stable information transmission, but they are appropriate for a few other purposes, including acoustic ranging. Barks are short, vocalizations that cover a broad frequency range – from below 500 Hz to over 2.5 kHz. This type of sound has some distinct advantages when used in the context of agonistic interactions or as an alarm call. Barks are likely to trigger the acoustic-startle reflex in nearby animals, which causes them to increase their alertness and orient towards the sound source.
Sža umğisadnadzi, zasid taekil nir vi ařğzidaesj ve zi, nilğaba dves ečaslugsa i kumğnaza. Ařğereg nir čuk i sidadag nisegsim (uldag Nuggda Čugtesj Scagzve il ve scegad) nisegunag udelsnanal zysk sca anmisckibzia čumužec nir vere eff i kug ikusdag Scagzve, fedi is els mil eff žukduan edd jiskysd:
Actually, human language is extremely predictable, highly unefficient, and easily learnable. I guess xenolinguistics will be a matter of second language acquisition, as usual, if and only if, the biological species we wish to communicate with are humanlike lifeforms.
Gučain ve nanresk zirea eff kitevfogga is GEL edd kug znaguiga anrescek, ab ve nellubif nir nelab as amğusyţe iğenlve zysk kna vi elzesj is ğusenel zuguer eff asumgel edd kuzganin edd jimğscvetal eff ve sve.
Andersen, Roger W. 1980. Creolization as the acquisition of a second
language as a first language. In: Albert Valdman & Arnold Highfield (Eds.), Theoretical orientations in creole studies. New York: Academic Press.
Andersen, Roger W.',. 1981. Two perspectives on pidginization as second
language acquisition. In: Roger W. Andersen (Ed.), New dimensions in second language acquisition research. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Andersen, Roger W. (Ed.) 1983. Pidginization and creolization as language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Atkinson Gorcya, Diane, Garner, Patricia, H. & Fouts, Roger S. 1982. Deaf children and chimpanzees: A comparative sociolinguistic investigation. In: Mary R. Key (Ed.), Nonverbal communication today: Current research. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter & Co.
Bates, Elizabeth, 1976. Language and context: Studies in the acquisition of pragmatics. New York: Academic Press.
Bates, Elizabeth, Benigni, Laura, Bretherton, Inge, Camaioni, Luigia &
Volterra, Virginia. 1979. The emergence of symbols: Cognition and communication in infancy. New York: Academic Press.
Bates, Elizabeth, Bretherton, Inge, Shore, Cecilia & McNew, Sandra. 1983. The role of context in the emergence of symbols. In: Keith Nelson (Ed.), Children's language, Vol. IV. New York: Gardner Press Inc.
Battison, Robbin. 1974. Phonological deletion in American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies, 5, 1-19.
Bellugi, Ursula & Fischer, Susan. 1972. A comparison of sign language and spoken language: Rate and grammatical mechanisms. Cognition, 1, 173-200.
Bellugi, Ursula & Klima, Edward, S. 1976. Two faces of sign: Iconic and abstract. In: Stevan R. Harnad, Horst Steklis & Jane Lancaster (Eds.), Origins and evolution of language and speech. New York: Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 280, 514-538.
Bellugi, Ursula & Klima, Edward, S. 1979. The structured use of space and movement: Morphological processes. In: The signs of language. With Robbin Battison, Penny Boyes-Braem, Susan Fischer, Nancy Frishberg, Harlan Lane, Ella Mae Lentz, Don Newkirk, Elissa Newport, Carlene Canady Pederson, and Patricia Siple. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Bellugi, Ursula, Klima, Edward, S. & Siple, Patricia. 1975. Remembering in signs. Cognition, 3, 93-125.
Bellugi, Ursula & Siple, Patricia. 1974. Remembering with and without
words. In: Francois Bresson (Ed.), Current problems in psycholinguistics. Paris: Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique.
Bickerton, Derek. 1975a. Dynamics of a creole system. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Bickerton, Derek. 1975b. Creolization, linguistic universals, natural semantics and the brain. In: Richard R. Day (Ed.), Issues in English creoles. Heidelberg: Julius Groos Verlag.
Bickerton, Derek 1977. Pidginization and creolization: Language acquisition and language universals. In: A. Valdman (Ed.), Pidgin and creole linguistics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Bickerton, Derek. 1980. Decreolization and the creole continuum. In: Albert Valdman & Arnold Highfield (Eds.), Theoretical orientations in creole studies. New York: Academic Press.
Bickerton, Derek 1981. Roots of language. Ann Arbor: Karoma Publishers, Inc.
Bickerton, Derek. 1982. Learning without experience the creole way. In:
Lorraine K. Obler & Lise Menn (Eds.), Exceptional language and linguistics. New York: Academic Press.
Bickerton, Derek 1983. Comments on Valdman's "Creolization and second language acquisition". In: Roger W. Andersen (Ed.), Pidginization and creolization as language acquisition. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House Publishers, Inc.
Bickerton, Derek 1983. Creole languages. Scientific American, 249, 116122.
Bickerton, Derek 1984. The language bioprogram hypothesis. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 7, 173-221.
Bickerton, Derek. A two-stage model of the evolution of language. In: Sydney Strauss, (Ed.), Proceedings of the Tel Aviv Workshop on ontogeny and phylogeny. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Bloom, Lois, Heod, Lois, & Lightbown, Patsy. 1974. Imitation in language development: If, when, and why. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 380-420.
Bloom, Lois, Rocisanno, Lorraine & Hood, Lois. 1976. Adult-child discourse: Developmental interaction between information processing and linguistic knowledge. Cognitive Psychology, 8, 521-552.
Bonvillian, John D., Orlansky, Michael D. & Novack, Lesley L. 1983. Early sign language acquisition and its relation to cognitive and motor development. In: Jim Kyle & Benice Woll (Eds.), Language in sign: An international perspective on sign language. London: Croom Helm.
Borer, Hagit, 1983. Parametric syntax. Dordrecht, Holland: Foris.
Bowe, F. 1976. Sight, meaning, and sound: Coding of signs by deaf and hearing adults. Unpublished manuscript, Deafness Research and Training Center, New York University.
Čiviga-Sumbiug, A., Nirea, Jikel Z., Zivlta, Jinad Č., Čemab. 2010. Kna i kumğnaza şika i zireakesk? Jêstge eff Ařğanukeţe Nlikezegi: Iskänyar, Languages in Rigel-2, 112, 457-492.
Ewing, Guy. 1983. Presyntax: The devlopment of word order in early child
speech. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto.
Feldman, Heidi, Goldin-Meadow, Susan & Gleitman, Lila. 1978. Beyond Herodutus: The creation of lan~age by linguistically deprived deaf children. In: Andrew Lock (Ed.), Action, gesture and symbol: The emergence of language. New York: Academic Press.
Feva, Ğ. 2011. Čuges, kenadag, edd čêst: Jigdag eff čugst fia nyr edd dascdag iguzdl. Utğubzvedag şnaulksuğd, Nyfterl Anresck edd Sidadag Naskan, Iskänyar, Languages in Mizar-7 (Utučaslabi).
Fouts, Roger S. 1976. Discussion paper: Comparison of sign language projects and implications for language origins. In: Stevan R. Harnad, Horst D. Steklis & jane Lancaster (Eds.), Origins and evolution of language and speech. New York: Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 280, 589-591.
Fouts, Roger S. 19n. Ameslan in Pan. In: Geoffry Bourne (Ed.), Progress
in ape research. New York: Academic Press.
Fouts, Roger S. 1978. Sign language in chimpanzees: Implications of the
visual mode and the comparative approach. In: Fred C.C. Peng (Ed.), Sign language acquisition in man and ape: New dimensions in pedolinguistics. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.
Ğazgimna, Daugu, Gezgda-Keigev, Čulna & Gefoabimna, Zuzi. 2010. Wytag Dasegudul: Ve kanreain eff znaiga fia daguvesakgezia niğsučag nyr kuzgant. Is: Eddanv Zekk (Ek.), Ikvurt, gerduan edd čimbez: Ve akesgscana eff znaguiga. Iskänyar: The Cassini Diskus.
Ğêdel, Segan Č. 2010. Ikkuveabain edd elzdag eff gerdusge čugst is ğêl
iêtag kumğnazaer. Čkuscana, 218, 197-280.
Ğêdel, Segan Č. 2011. Znaguiga: Saugdal, nifdabainel edd kumğnazaer.
Jêstge eff umna Avezuvurt, 13, 75-82.
Goldin-Meadow, Susan. 1979. Structure in a manual communication system developed without a conventional model: Language without a helping hand. In: Haiganoosh Whitaker & Harry A. Whitaker (Eds.), Studies in neurolinguistics, Vol. 4. New York: Academic Press.
Goldin-Meadow, Susan & Feldman, Heidi. 1977. The development of language-like communication without a language model. Science, 197, 401-403.
Kellog, Winthrop N. 1967. Communication and language in the home-raised chimpanzee. Science, 162, 423-427.
Newport, Elissa L. 1982. Task specificity in language learning? In: Eric Wanner & Lila R. Gleitman (Eds.), Language acquisition: The state of the art. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Newport, Elissa L. & Meier, Richard P. 1985. Acquisition of American Sign Language. In: Dan 1. Slobin (Ed.), The cross linguistics study of language acquisition. Hillsdale, N.j.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Premack, David. 1971. Language in chimpanzee? Science, 172, 808-822.
Premack, David. 1971. On the assessment of language competence in the chimpanzee. In: Allan M. Schrier & Fred Stollnitz (Eds.), Behavior of
nonhuman primates, Vol. 4. New York: Academic Press.
Premack, David. 1976. Intelligence in ape and man. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Erlbaum.
Premack, David. 1985. "Gavagai!", or the future history of the animal
language controversy. Cognition, 19, 207-296.
Premack, David. 1985. "Gavagai!" or the future of the animal language
controversy. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Premack, David. & Premack, Ann James. 1983. The mind of an ape. New
York: W.W. Norton & Company.
Premack, David. & Woodruff, Guy. 1978. Chimpanzee problem-solving: A test for comprehension. Science, 202, 532-535.
Premack, David. & Woodruff, Guy. 1978. Does the chimpanzee have a
theory of mind? The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 4, 515-526.
Richards, Douglas G., Wolz, James P. & Herman, Louis M. 1984. Vocal mimicry of computer generated sounds by a bottlenosed dolphin, Tursiops-truncatus. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 98, 10-28.
Roitblat, Herbert L., Bever, Thomas G., Terrace, Herbert S. 1984. Animal cognition. Hillsdale, N.].: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Romski, Mary Ann, White, Royce A., Millen, Caren A. & Rumbaugh, Duane M. 1984. Effects of computer-keyboard teaching on the symbolic communication of severely retarded persons: Five case studies. The Psychological Record, 34, 39-54.
Rumbaugh, Duane M. 1977. Language behavior of apes. In: Allan M. Schrier (Ed.), Behavioral Primatology. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum. Reprinted in Thomas A. Sebeok & Jean Umiker-Sebeok (Eds.), Speaking of apes: A critical anthology of two-way communication with man. New York: Plenum Press, 1980. pp. 231·-259.
Rumbaugh, Duane M. (Ed.) 1977. Language learning by a chimpanzee: The Lana project. New York: Academic Press.
Suekmina, Zitin I. 2010. Kina, sake, edd nanlynn anfanscana is Talitha-7 Ikesyskna Čugin Znaguiga. Znaguiga, 61, 194-201.
