Human and Non-Human Languages - Essay Example

? Human and non-human languages Thesis: human language and non-human languages can be differentiated on the basis of anatomic peculiarities of human brains and non-human brains. Moreover, human cognitive abilities and social context of human communication makes human language differ from non-human language to the greatest extent. Critical literature review “The difference between human and other animals communication” by Mano Singham is focused on consideration about the differences between human and non-human communication. The discussion is centered on the specific nature of human brains and its ability to produce or reiterate immense volumes of information in comparison with other non-human beings or machines. The author presents a universal perspective while explaining abilities of children to distill syntactic patterns from the speeches of their parents or people around them. On the example of citations taken from other well-known linguists, such as Chomsky and Pinker, human language is differentiated from non-human language by means of design features of the language. Thus, the nature of the human language is finite in a set of calls/signals/variations for different phenomena etc. In other words, it is claimed that human language is designed by means of definite tools and reaches indefinite scope of influence. Moreover, in-born peculiarities of human brains are responsible for language “location”, while among non-humans the vocal calls are located in other parts of brains. The author also makes a hypothesis that human communication has been developed in accordance with the special needs of humans and as a response to a changing reality. Non-humans did not need such kind of adaptation to the environment and thus their language abilities were not developed as much. Still, the author does not consider non-human disabilities to communicate the same way as humans do, but he underlines that communication among humans and non-humans should not be equal, the same way as human hands should not be equal to the bird’s wings. Another article by Ulla Hedeager “Is language unique to the human species?” provides quite another perspective. The author intends to claim that language is universal both for humans and non-humans. Nevertheless, the main difference between human and non-human communication is considered by the author in terms of predictability of animals in the process of communication and unpredictability of human language. Moreover, she refers to design features developed by Charles Hockett (1967) when talking about human language. Nevertheless, claims by Hockett and Chomsky are considered to be improper in terms of natural social context. The most appealing approach for Hedeager is to consider language on the basis of biological foundation. Therefore, language comes from the human brains. But, the controversial claims appear in the second part of the article, when the nature of non-human language is considered. In this section Hedeager claims that there are common stages of language acquisition among birds and humans. There is also a common “melody of language” relevant to humans and non-humans. Moreover, the author claims that chimpanzees can not only reiterate sounds produced by humans, but can also categorize parts of speech, create new words, use questions etc. Nevertheless, the author claims that primates do not develop their language abilities to the level humans can. There is no need for them to communicate like humans, because their environment does not require that thing from them. Therefore, the main emphasis of the article is made on contextual usage of human/non-human language. Though in the sections of the article the author differs between human and non-human languages, in the end of the article it is clearly seen that language is considered by the author as a general unity consisting of a set of communication tools that are required by humans and non-humans. In the article “A defining difference between man and non-human primates” (2001) the difference between human and non-human languages is provided from the medical perspective. A structural approach is applied by physical anthropologists and for them language is just a means to explore the structural difference of human and primates’ brains. Human ability to communicate, to understand different concepts etc is explained by the scientists by left-side differences of the human brains in comparison with primates’ brains. Nevertheless, the article provides an unprejudiced perspective on the human and non-human language difference. This can be explained by the fact that the author further provides arguments of similarity between individual’s brain cells. Still, the author discards this claim further and underlines a difference of brain’s organization in the language section. Therefore, though this article provides a biological perspective on differences between human and non-human languages, it is clearly seen that the author differentiates and does not unify human and non-human languages. He wants to show the way these differences are set, but he does not deny that they really exist. James Keightley in the article “To What Extent Does Language Make Humans Distinctive To Other Animals” underlines that communication is relevant to humans and non-humans and human language is just a tool for humans to communicate. The author gives examples of the way bees or animals communicate, but he underlines that there are similarities and differences between the communication and language among humans and non-humans. The author provides claims by Aitchinson (1983) who identified four basic features relevant to human language: these are structure dependency, creativity, semanticity and displacement. Further on, the author underlines that apes have some of these abilities. Still, other non-human species cannot differentiate between past and present and can communicate only about current events. The author also provides ideas of cognitive linguists, who assign the important role of communication to previous experience and further interpretation of the acquired meaning is dependant of the previous experience as well. From the perspective of Social Constructionists the language is considered in the social context serving for the purpose of communication among people. The author provides a broad consideration about human language, but he talks not so much about non-human language as a means of communication. He underlines the main difference between human and non-human languages on the basis of anatomic differences between humans and non-humans and limited cognitive abilities among non-humans. Consequently, the main advantage of the article is human language consideration from the perspective of cognitive linguistics and socio-constructivism. Still the main drawback is a lack of attention paid to what role non-human language plays in communication among non-humans. Therefore, on the basis of recent studies on peculiarities of human and non-human languages, the difference between them is seen on the basis of different design features and the role language plays as a means of communication. Human language and non-human languages can be differentiated on the basis of anatomic peculiarities of human brains and non-human brains. The main difference between these languages should be found from the perspective of biological, cognitive and social sciences. This is a perspective for multifaceted consideration about the given phenomenon. References “A defining difference between man and non-human primates”, September 5, 2001. Retrieved from: “The difference between human and other animal communication”, 27 June 2008. Retreved from: Hedeager, U. “Is Language Unique to the Human Species?” Retrieved from: Keightley, James. “To What Extent Does Language Make Humans Distinctive To Other Animals”. Retrieved from: Read More