Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id MAA05855 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Thu, 1 Jun 2000 12:04:04 +0100 Message-ID: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101745893@inchna.stir.ac.uk> From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk> To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: grammatical expressions by chimps Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 12:01:51 +0100 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> > Until someone speaks fluent "native" chimpanzee we will not be
> >able to determine the structure of the language.
>
> This would probably require leaving a human infant with a wild chimp
> foster
> mother. Do you want to speculate on the ethics of such an experiment?
>
Tarzan anyone?
> ----------
> From: Mark M. Mills
> Reply To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Sent: Thursday, June 1, 2000 12:04 am
> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Subject: grammatical expressions by chimps
>
> Bruce,
>
> At 12:05 PM 5/31/00 -0500, you wrote:
> > [BJ] Who says there is no grammatical construction in a chimps
> >language?
>
> Most people start with that opinion.
>
> First, we ought to be clear about 'language' and 'grammar.' Many would
> say
> that language is the 'gloss' on grammar, the culturally dependent
> symbols. Grammar is the foundation upon which the 'language' is built.
> Many would argue there is no 'chimp' language because there is no
> 'grammar'
> to their vocalization. Grammar is the 'unique' human ability.
>
> The big debate is over the source of grammar. Is grammar an instinct? Is
>
> grammar purely logical with many unique expressions? Is the human brain
> like a computer, ready to solve any logical problem (using disembodied
> logic)? Is the brain uniquely organic, unlike a computer, relying on
> instinct and emotion (embodied logic)?
>
> Debating the existence of an inborn human grammar seems very
> popular. Debating the existence of an inborn chimp grammar has been
> proposed, but only makes sense in terms of supporting/discrediting various
>
> arguments regarding the human grammatical condition.
>
> > Grammatical syntax is culture and language dependent. English
> >differs from German, Russian, Arabic, etc. based on the culture of the
> >language.
>
> This is the focus of the debate. Languages are culturally dependend. Is
> grammar? Chomsky and Pinker argue that grammar is UNIVERSAL, not
> cultural. They have powerful datasets supporting their position.
>
> > Until someone speaks fluent "native" chimpanzee we will not be
> >able to determine the structure of the language.
>
> This would probably require leaving a human infant with a wild chimp
> foster
> mother. Do you want to speculate on the ethics of such an experiment?
>
> > When you learn a new language do you always get the syntax
> correct?
>
> Chomsky argues that children make surprisingly few errors, far fewer than
> pure memorization of logical structure would require.. thus the language
> instinct.
>
> >Probably not because you are building your interpretation of the language
> on
> >your own languages syntax .... same with chimps.
>
> Ah, now you are arguing for the grammar instinct ("your own language"
> contrasted against culture's input). I agree with you.
>
> I think the grammar instinct is well displayed in various chimp language
> acquisition studies, but the work is attacked for two reasons:
>
> 1) The issue of a human grammar instinct is far from settled, chimps
> studies add confusion.
> 2) Those advocating a human grammar instinct see no evolutionary model for
>
> its emergence. Instead, they seem to rely on divine intervention or the
> brain size passing some threshold.
>
> This is were memetics comes in. The Lynch definition for meme (L-meme =
> an
> instantiated pattern on a neural substrate) seems particularly good when
> these arguments are considered.
>
> 1. It provides a framework for testing ideas regarding neural
> evolution. Few question the notion that the brain stores data, nor the
> idea that it comes with a predisposition dataset (instinct).
> Additionally,
> a 'beginners pattern' of L-memes can be established during embryonic
> developments, providing the building blocks for culturally established
> L-meme patterns. If the 'grammar instinct' exists, it must be an
> expression
> of these L-memes. It makes no sense to argue that we check with our DNA
> when learning to talk.
>
> 2. It seems easy to argue that all primates express these L-memes.
> Interaction of L-memes will require some processing rules (grammar) at
> neural levels. These cellular neural processing rules will produce
> organism level processing rules which we can observe in cultural
> interactions. Even if there isn't a grammar instinct (no genetically
> established L-meme rules), L-memes would be required to facilitate pure
> logic.
>
> Do you find memetics suggests anything about human neural evolution?
>
> Mark
>
>
> ===============================================================
> This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
> Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
> For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
> see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
>
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jun 01 2000 - 12:04:49 BST