Re: LUNATIC again

On Sat, 7 Nov 1998 17:51:04 -0600 Eric Christopherson <eric@...>
writes:
>Nik Taylor wrote:
>> Animal communication wouldn't be language because, first
>> off, they typically only communicate emotions, and not information,
>and
>> they are also not built on a finite number of building blocks.  A
>cat
>> may have several different meows, but those meows can't be combined
>into
>> words.  If conlangs can fulfil these requirements, what does it
>matter
>> *where* it came from?
>
>Science has shown that some animals convey information to each other.
>A
>good example is bees. Bees do a certain dance to tell other bees where
>good flowers are. Among mammals, one species of animal can have
>several
>different sounds, used for different purposes. Some animals have a
>distinct cry when predators approach, for instance. (Of course, one
>might say this is conveying fear, an emotion.)
In a recent issue of Discover magazine, there's a very interesting
article about language and the evolution of language capability in
humans.  It mentions that vervet monkeys have different calls that they
use as warnings for different predators - one for "leopard", and one for
"eagle", for instance.

-Stephen (Steg)

___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]