Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T01:27:31.291Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Quotidian cognition and the human-nonhuman “divide”: Just more or less of a good thing?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 May 2008

Drew Rendall ,
John R. Vokey  and
Hugh Notman
Drew Rendall
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Lethbridge, Lethbridge, Alberta, T1K 3M4, Canada
John R. Vokey
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Lethbridge, Lethbridge, Alberta, T1K 3M4, Canada
Hugh Notman
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, Athabasca University, Athabasca, Alberta, T9S 3A3, Canada. [email protected]://people.uleth.ca/~d.rendall/[email protected]://people.uleth.ca/~vokey/[email protected]://www.athabascau.ca/anthropology/notman.htm
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We make three points: (1) Overlooked studies of nonhuman communication originally inspired, but no longer support, the blinkered view of mental continuity that Penn et al. critique. (2) Communicative discontinuities between animals and humans might be rooted in social-cognitive discontinuities, reflecting a common lacuna in Penn et al.'s relational reinterpretation mechanism. (3) However, relational reinterpretation need not be a qualitatively new representational process.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 31 , Issue 2 , April 2008 , pp. 144 - 145
Copyright
Copyright ©Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Brooks, L. R. (1978) Nonanalytic concept formation and memory for instances. In: Cognition and categorization, ed. Rosch, E. & Lloyd, B., pp. 169–211. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Cheney, D. L. & Seyfarth, R. M. (2005) Constraints and preadaptations in the earliest stages of language evolution. Linguistic Review 22:135–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, A. (1997) Being there: Putting brain, body and world together again. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Grice, P. (1957) Meaning. The Philosophical Review 66:377–88.Google Scholar
Griffin, D. (1978) The question of animal awareness: Evolutionary continuity of mental experience. The Rockefeller University Press.Google Scholar
Landauer, T. K. & Dumais, S. T. (1997) A solution to Plato's problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of the acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review 104:211–40.Google Scholar
Notman, H. & Rendall, D. (2005) Contextual variation in chimpanzee pant hoots and its implications for referential communication. Animal Behaviour 70:177–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Owren, M. J. & Rendall, D. (2001) Sound on the rebound: Returning form and function to the forefront in understanding nonhuman primate vocal signaling. Evolutionary Anthropology 10:58–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seyfarth, R. M., Cheney, D. L. & Marler, P. (1980) Monkey responses to three different alarm calls: Evidence of predator classification and semantic communication. Science 210: 801–803.Google Scholar