contextual variation in chimpanzee pant hoots and its implications for referential communication...
Post on 20-Dec-2015
218 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Contextual Variation in Contextual Variation in Chimpanzee Pant Hoots and its Chimpanzee Pant Hoots and its
Implications for Referential Implications for Referential CommunicationCommunication
Hugh NotmanHugh Notman¹¹
Biological AnthropologyBiological Anthropology
Athabasca UniversityAthabasca University
Drew RendallDrew Rendall²²
Department of PsychologyDepartment of Psychology
University of LethbridgeUniversity of Lethbridge
The “referential” paradigmThe “referential” paradigm
Call structure is Call structure is arbitrary with respect arbitrary with respect to referentto referent
Receivers attending to Receivers attending to acoustic structure for acoustic structure for cues to context cues to context
Information-transfer Information-transfer functionfunction
““Semantic” utterances? Semantic” utterances?
Photo: Cheney & Seyfarth
Shortcomings of referential Shortcomings of referential and syntax modelsand syntax models
Assumes caller and receiver attend to the Assumes caller and receiver attend to the same referent(s)same referent(s)
Syntax model ignores function of calls used Syntax model ignores function of calls used singularlysingularly
Problems assigning context to calls: Problems assigning context to calls: assumes static link between call and assumes static link between call and contextcontext
Notman and Rendall 2005 Notman and Rendall 2005 . . Animal Behaviour, Animal Behaviour, 7070, 177-, 177-
190.190. Analyzed chimpanzee pant hoots Analyzed chimpanzee pant hoots
from Budongo forest, Ugandafrom Budongo forest, Uganda 201 calls from 7 males201 calls from 7 males
INDIVIDUAL INDIVIDUAL MALEMALE
AGE CLASSAGE CLASS NUMBER OF NUMBER OF CALLSCALLS
JmJm AdultAdult 3131
MuMu AdultAdult 3636
DnDn AdultAdult 3030
BkBk AdultAdult 3333
NkNk Young adultYoung adult 2525
ZfZf Young adultYoung adult 3030
MaMa AdultAdult 1616
TOTALTOTAL 201201
Results summaryResults summary
Most salient variation in chimpanzee Most salient variation in chimpanzee pant hoots is between pant hoots is between individualsindividuals, , not contextsnot contexts..
Pant hoots show structural Pant hoots show structural differences between “travel” and differences between “travel” and “non-travel” contexts“non-travel” contexts
Results summaryResults summary
Most salient variation in chimpanzee Most salient variation in chimpanzee pant hoots is between pant hoots is between individualsindividuals, , not contexts.not contexts.
Pant hoots show structural Pant hoots show structural differences between “travel” and differences between “travel” and “non-travel” contexts“non-travel” contexts
Subtle structural differences evident Subtle structural differences evident between some contexts reflect different between some contexts reflect different effects on vocal production introduced by effects on vocal production introduced by variable arousal and the physical demands variable arousal and the physical demands on vocal effort associated with calling in on vocal effort associated with calling in those contexts.those contexts.
This, in part, dependent on elevation of caller, This, in part, dependent on elevation of caller, social circumstance (arriving at food, looking to social circumstance (arriving at food, looking to join others, etc) and physical activity join others, etc) and physical activity (running/walking/resting) of caller.(running/walking/resting) of caller.
Ie., source of variation Ie., source of variation incidentalincidental to caller to caller activityactivity
3. “Embedded context” 3. “Embedded context” modelmodel
Ground vs. treeLocation in range Knowledge of area resourcesDirection of travel (if >1 call)Current social relationship
Implications for referential Implications for referential communicationcommunication
Any referential function for pant hoots likely Any referential function for pant hoots likely based in mechanisms involved in the based in mechanisms involved in the inferential abilities on the part of listeners inferential abilities on the part of listeners
NOT mechanisms underlying the production NOT mechanisms underlying the production of referential contrasts in callers of referential contrasts in callers
This “production/comprehension” This “production/comprehension” asymmetry also evident in signaling asymmetry also evident in signaling systems of other animals AND in language systems of other animals AND in language trained apes.trained apes.
Advantages of embedded Advantages of embedded context modelcontext model
Helps explain lack of contextual specificity Helps explain lack of contextual specificity (as well as inconsistent receiver response) (as well as inconsistent receiver response) to specific call types to specific call types
A more “holistic” approach to A more “holistic” approach to understanding communication (involves understanding communication (involves dimensions associated with acoustic dimensions associated with acoustic structure, receiver perception and structure, receiver perception and cognition as it relates to prior knowledge cognition as it relates to prior knowledge and experience).and experience).
AcknowledgementsAcknowledgements
Natural Sciences and Engineering Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC)Research Council of Canada (NSERC)
University of CalgaryUniversity of Calgary Calgary ZooCalgary Zoo The Budongo Forest ProjectThe Budongo Forest Project Drew Rendall; Mary Pavelka; Vernon Drew Rendall; Mary Pavelka; Vernon
Reynolds; John Vokey. Reynolds; John Vokey.
top related