Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Animal Cognition
- The Cambridge Handbook of Animal Cognition
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures, Tables, and Boxes
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- Introduction
- Part I Communication and Language
- 1 Animal Communication Overview
- 2 Communication in Ant Societies
- 3 Symbolic Communication in the Grey Parrot
- 4 Communication in Dogs and Wolves
- 5 Semantic Communication in Primates
- Part II Memory and Recall
- Part III Social Cognition
- Part IV Social Learning and Teaching
- Part V Numerical and Quantitative Abilities
- Part VI Innovation and Problem-Solving
- Index
- References
5 - Semantic Communication in Primates
from Part I - Communication and Language
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 July 2021
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Animal Cognition
- The Cambridge Handbook of Animal Cognition
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures, Tables, and Boxes
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- Introduction
- Part I Communication and Language
- 1 Animal Communication Overview
- 2 Communication in Ant Societies
- 3 Symbolic Communication in the Grey Parrot
- 4 Communication in Dogs and Wolves
- 5 Semantic Communication in Primates
- Part II Memory and Recall
- Part III Social Cognition
- Part IV Social Learning and Teaching
- Part V Numerical and Quantitative Abilities
- Part VI Innovation and Problem-Solving
- Index
- References
Summary
Semantic communication is about transmitting mental representations of reality. Three research questions address the nature of this process in primates. Can primates produce signals that are meaningful in a lexical sense? Are they capable of compositional semantics? Can they create and infer meaning by integrating context and intention? There is good evidence that, as recipients, primates have capacities at all three levels, whereas for signallers the evidence is less compelling. This difference may have cognitive roots, due to the fact that primate signallers are typically engaged in the here-and-now and, unlike humans, less able to refer to memory content. Future research will have to clarify what mental structures primates can take into account during communication, including entities that are not physically present.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of Animal Cognition , pp. 100 - 114Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2021
References
Adams, F. & Beighley, S. M. (2013). Information, meaning and animal communication. In Stegmann, U. E. (Ed.), Animal Communication Theory: Information and Influence, (399–420), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrieu, J., Penny, S. G., Bouchet, H., Malaivijitnond, S., Reichard, U. H., & Zuberbühler, K. (2020). White-handed gibbons discriminate context-specific song compositions. PeerJ, 8, e9477. doi: 10.7717/peerj.9477CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arnold, K. & Zuberbühler, K. (2006a). Semantic combinations in primate calls. Nature, 441(7091), 303.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arnold, K. & Zuberbühler, K. (2006b). The alarm-calling system of adult male putty-nosed monkeys, Cercopithecus nictitans martini. Animal Behavior, 72, 643–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnold, K. & Zuberbühler, K. (2008). Meaningful call combinations in a non-human primate. Current Biology, 18(5), R202–R203. https://doi.org/Doi 10.1016/J.Cub.2008.01.040Google Scholar
Arnold, K. & Zuberbühler, K. (2012). Call combinations in monkeys: Compositional or idiomatic expressions? Brain and Language, 120(3), 303–309. https://doi.org/Doi 10.1016/J.Bandl.2011.10.001CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arnold, K. & Zuberbühler, K. (2013). Female putty-nosed monkeys use experimentally altered contextual information to disambiguate the cause of male alarm calls. PLoS One, 8(6), Article e65660. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0065660Google Scholar
Berthet, M., Neumann, C., Mesbahi, G., Casar, C., & Zuberbühler, K. (2018). Contextual encoding in titi monkey alarm call sequences. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 72(1), Article Unsp 8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-017-2424-zGoogle Scholar
Caesar, C., Byrne, R., Young, R. J., & Zuberbühler, K. (2012). The alarm call system of wild black-fronted titi monkeys, Callicebus nigrifrons. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 66(5), 653–667. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-011-1313-0Google Scholar
Caesar, C., Byrne, R. W., Hoppitt, W., Young, R. J., & Zuberbüehler, K. (2012). Evidence for semantic communication in titi monkey alarm calls. Animal Behaviour, 84(2), 405–411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2012.05.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheney, D., Seyfarth, R., & Silk, J. (1995). The responses of female baboons (Papio cynocephalus ursinus) to anomalous social interactions: Evidence for causal reasoning? Journal of Comparative Psychology, 109(2), 134–141.Google Scholar
Clarke, E., Reichard, U., & Zuberbühler, K. (2006). The syntax and meaning of wild gibbon songs. PLoS One, 1(1), e73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clay, Z. & Zuberbühler, K. (2009). Food-associated calling sequences in bonobos. Animal Behaviour, 77(6), 1387–1396. https://doi.org/Doi10.1016/J.Anbehav.2009.02.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clay, Z., Archbold, J., & Zuberbühler, K. (2015). Functional flexibility in wild bonobo vocal behaviour. PeerJ, 3, e1124. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1124Google Scholar
Coye, C., Ouattara, K., Zuberbühler, K., & Lemasson, A. (2015). Suffixation influences receivers’ behaviour in non-human primates. Proceedings of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 282(1807), 50265.Google Scholar
Crockford, C., Gruber, T., & Zuberbühler, K. (2018). Chimpanzee quiet hoo variants differ according to context. Royal Society Open Science, 5(5), Article 172066. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.172066Google Scholar
Engesser, S., Crane, J. M. S., Savage, J. L., Russell, A. F., & Townsend, S. W. (2015). Experimental evidence for phonemic contrasts in a nonhuman vocal system. PLoS Biology, 13(6), Article e1002171. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engesser, S., Ridley, A., & Townsend, S. (2016). Meaningful call combinations and compositional processing in the southern pied babbler. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(21), 5976–5981. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1600970113CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Engh, A. L., Hoffmeier, R. R., Cheney, D. L., & Seyfarth, R. M. (2006). Who, me? Can baboons infer the target of vocalizations? Animal Behaviour, 71, 381–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fedurek, P., Zuberbühler, K., & Dahl, C. D. (2016). Sequential information in a great ape utterance. Scientific Reports, 6, Article 38226. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep38226Google Scholar
Kaminski, J., Call, J., & Fischer, J. (2004). Word learning in a domestic dog: Evidence for “fast mapping.” Science, 304(5677), 1682–1683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kersken, V., Zuberbühler, K., & Gomez, J.-C. (2017). Listeners can extract meaning from non-linguistic infant vocalisations cross-culturally. Scientific Reports, 7, Article 41016. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep41016CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Laporte, M. N. C. & Zuberbühler, K. (2010). Vocal greeting behaviour in wild chimpanzee females. Animal Behaviour, 80(3), 467–473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2010.06.005Google Scholar
Manser, M. B. (2016). Referents and Semantics in Animal Vocalizations. In Bee, M. A. & Miller, C. T. (Eds.), Psychological Mechanisms in Animal Communication, (Vol. 5, 223–249). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48690-1_8Google Scholar
Oller, D. K., Buder, E. H., Ramsdell, H. L., Warlaumont, A. S., Chorna, L., & Bakeman, R. (2013). Functional flexibility of infant vocalization and the emergence of language. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110(16), 6318–6323. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1300337110CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ouattara, K., Lemasson, A., & Zuberbühler, K. (2009). Campbell’s monkeys use affixation to alter call meaning. PLoS One, 4(11), e7808.Google Scholar
Palmer, M. S. & Gross, A. (2018). Eavesdropping in an African large mammal community: Antipredator responses vary according to signaller reliability. Animal Behaviour, 137, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2017.12.018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Price, T. & Fischer, J. (2014). Meaning attribution in the West African green monkey: Influence of call type and context. Animal Cognition, 17(2), 277–286. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-013-0660-9Google Scholar
Price, T., Ndiaye, O., Hammerschmidt, K., & Fischer, J. (2014). Limited geographic variation in the acoustic structure of and responses to adult male alarm barks of African green monkeys. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 68(5), 815–825. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-014-1694-yGoogle Scholar
Price, T., Wadewitz, P., Cheney, D., Seyfarth, R., Hammerschmidt, K., & Fischer, J. (2015). Vervets revisited: A quantitative analysis of alarm call structure and context specificity. Scientific Reports, 5, Article 13220. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep13220Google Scholar
Rendall, D. & Owren, M. J. (2013 ). Communication without Meaning or Information: Abandoning Language-Based and Informational Constructs in Animal Communication Theory. In Stegmann, U. E. (Ed.), Animal Communication Theory: Information and Influence, (151–188), New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Rescorla, R. A. & Wagner, A. R. (1972). A Theory of Pavlovian Conditioning: Variations in the Effectiveness of Reinforcement and Nonreinforcement. In Black, A. & Prokasy, W., (Eds.), Classical Conditioning II: Current Research and Theory, (64–69), New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
Ristau, C. A. (2013). Cognitive ethology. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews-Cognitive Science, 4(5), 493–509. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1239Google Scholar
Schamberg, I., Wittig, R. M., & Crockford, C. (2018). Call type signals caller goal: A new take on ultimate and proximate influences in vocal production. Biological Reviews, 93(4), 2071–2082. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12437CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schel, A. M. & Zuberbühler, K. (2009). Responses to leopards are independent of experience in Guereza colobus monkeys. Behaviour, 146, 1709–1737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schlenker, P., Chemla, E., Schel, A. M., Fuller, J., Gautier, J. P., Kuhn, J., Veselinovic, D., Arnold, K., Casar, C., Keenan, S., Lemasson, A., Ouattara, K., Ryder, R., & Zuberbühler, K. (2016a). Formal monkey linguistics. Theoretical Linguistics, 42(1–2), 1–90. https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2016-0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schlenker, P., Chemla, E., Schel, A. M., Fuller, J., Gautier, J. P., Kuhn, J., Veselinovic, D., Arnold, K., Casar, C., Keenan, S., Lemasson, A., Ouattara, K., Ryder, R., & Zuberbühler, K. (2016b). Formal monkey linguistics: The debate. Theoretical Linguistics, 42(1–2), 173–201. https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2016-0010Google Scholar
Schlenker, P., Chemla, E., & Zuberbühler, K. (2016c). What do monkey calls mean? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(12), 894–904. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2016.10.004Google Scholar
Seyfarth, R. M. & Cheney, D. L. (1980). The ontogeny of vervet monkey alarm calling behavior – a preliminary-report. Zeitschrift Fur Tierpsychologie-Journal of Comparative Ethology, 54(1), 37–56.Google Scholar
Seyfarth, R. M., Cheney, D. L., & Marler, P. (1980a). Monkey responses to three different alarm calls: Evidence of predator classification and semantic communication. Science, 210, 801–803.Google Scholar
Seyfarth, R. M., Cheney, D. L., & Marler, P. (1980b). Vervet monkey alarm calls: Semantic communication in a free-ranging primate. Animal Behaviour, 28(4), 1070–1094.Google Scholar
Seyfarth, R. M. & Cheney, D. L. (1990). The assessment by vervet monkeys of their own and another species’ alarm calls. Animal Behaviour, 40(4), 754–764.Google Scholar
Seyfarth, R. M. & Cheney, D. L. (2017). The origin of meaning in animal signals. Animal Behaviour, 124, 339–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2016.05.020Google Scholar
Seyfarth, R. & Cheney, D. (2018). Pragmatic flexibility in primate vocal production. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 21, 56–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2018.02.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sievers, C. & Gruber, T. (2016). Reference in human and non-human primate communication: What does it take to refer? Animal Cognition, 19(4), 759–768. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-016-0974-5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Slocombe, K. E. & Zuberbühler, K. (2005). Agonistic screams in wild chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes schweinfurthii) vary as a function of social role. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 119(1), 67–77.Google Scholar
Slocombe, K. E. & Zuberbühler, K. (2006). Food-associated calls in chimpanzees: Responses to food types or food preferences? Animal Behaviour, 72, 989–999.Google Scholar
Slocombe, K. E., Townsend, S. W., & Zuberbühler, K. (2009). Wild chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes schweinfurthii) distinguish between different scream types: Evidence from a playback study. Animal Cognition, 12(3), 441–449. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-008-0204-xGoogle Scholar
Slocombe, K. E., Kaller, T., Call, J., & Zuberbühler, K. (2010). Chimpanzees extract social information from agonistic screams. PLoS One, 5(7), Article e11473. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0011473CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, W. J. (1977). The Behavior of Communicating: An Ethological Approach. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Stephan, C. & Zuberbühler, K. (2008). Predation increases acoustic complexity in primate alarm calls. Biology Letters, 4(6), 641–644. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2008.0488CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stephan, C. & Zuberbühler, K. (2014). Predation affects alarm call usage in female Diana monkeys (Cercopithecus diana diana). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 68(2), 321–331. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-013-1647-xGoogle Scholar
Stephan, C. & Zuberbühler, K. (2016). Social familiarity affects Diana monkey (Cercopithecus diana diana) alarm call responses in habitat-specific ways. Royal Society open science, 3(2), Article 150639. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.150639CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suzuki, T. N., Wheatcroft, D., & Griesser, M. (2016). Experimental evidence for compositional syntax in bird calls. Nature Communications, 7, Article 10986. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms10986Google Scholar
Szabó, Z. G. (2017). Compositionality. In Zalta, E. N. (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2017 Edition ed.). Available at: https://plato.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/encyclopedia/archinfo.cgi?entry=compositionalityGoogle Scholar
Thorndike, E. L. (1898). Animal Intelligence: An Experimental Study of the Associative Processes in Animals. London: The Macmillan Company.Google Scholar
Townsend, S. W., Engesser, S., Stoll, S., Zuberbühler, K., & Bickel, B. (2018). Compositionality in animals and humans. PLoS Biology, 16(8), Article e2006425. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2006425Google Scholar
Wegdell, F., Hammerschmidt, K., & Fischer, J. (2019). Conserved alarm calls but rapid auditory learning in monkey responses to novel flying objects. Nature Ecology & Evolution, 3(7), 1039–1042. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-019-0903-5Google Scholar
Wittig, R. M., Crockford, C., Langergraber, K. E., & Zuberbühler, K. (2014). Triadic social interactions operate across time: A field experiment with wild chimpanzees. Proceedings of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 281(1779). https://doi.org/Artn 20133155 Doi 10.1098/Rspb.2013.3155Google Scholar
Zuberbühler, K. (2000a). Causal knowledge of predators’ behaviour in wild Diana monkeys. Animal Behaviour, 59, 209–220. https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.1999.1296Google Scholar
Zuberbühler, K. (2000b). Interspecies semantic communication in two forest primates. Proceedings of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 267(1444), 713–718. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2000.1061Google Scholar
Zuberbühler, K. (2009). Survivor signals: The biology and psychology of animal alarm calling. Advances in the Study of Behavior, 40, 277–322. https://doi.org/Doi 10.1016/S0065–3454(09)40008-1Google Scholar
Zuberbühler, K. (2016). Social Concepts and Communication in Nonhuman Primates. In Bee, M. A. & Miller, C. T. (Eds.), Psychological Mechanisms in Animal Communication, (Vol. 5, 251–270). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48690-1_9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zuberbühler, K., Cheney, D. L., & Seyfarth, R. M. (1999). Conceptual semantics in a nonhuman primate. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 113(1), 33–42. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7036.113.1.33Google Scholar
Zuberbühler, K. (2000). Causal cognition in a non-human primate: Field playback experiments with Diana monkeys. Cognition, 76, 195–207.Google Scholar
Zuberbühler, K. (2002). A syntactic rule in forest monkey communication. Animal Behaviour, 63, 293–299.Google Scholar
Zuberbühler, K. (2019). Evolutionary roads to syntax. Animal Behaviour, 151, 259–265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2019.03.006Google Scholar
Zuberbühler, K. (2020). Syntax and compositionality in animal communication. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 375(1789). doi: 10.1098/rstb.2019.0062Google Scholar