Animal Communication

[ysabetwordsmith]

Bonobo chatter shares a unique feature with human speech

The bonobo (Pan paniscus), humanity’s closest cousin, appears to communicate in a way scientists believed was exclusive to humans. Researchers from the University of Zürich and Harvard University said on April 3, 2025, that bonobos combine their vocalizations – peeps, grunts, whistles and more – to create more complicated meanings. The researchers said it’s similar to the way humans string words together to make unique sentences.

This is a communication pattern known as “nontrivial compositionality.” And the researchers said it’s widely used by bonobos. Combining these words or vocalizations is an advanced feature of communication, creating depth of meaning.


Humans are slowly figuring out that they aren't the only ones who can speak. Cetaceans and elephants take their own approach to it.  Parrots name their chicks.  And so on.  This will be useful in pursuing rights for nonhumans.

Comments

[crunchysteve]

Isn't it marvelous how decolonised thinking begins to allow better understanding of other species?! I read, 2 to 3 years ago, of research at Cambridge finding bees may be sentient. Ever since, as articles like this come up, I think, "If bees, everything." Whaddya know? Research starts to bear this out. There may yet be hope for all the species on the planet, even ours.

Adding the link to the original publication of the research...
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adv1170
(Although, the earthsky article is in a more accessible style than the usual formal language of research papers.)

Thank you!

[ysabetwordsmith]

I appreciate the extra link, as my audience is mostly nerds. I can follow text science well, but math will go over my head.

Re: Thank you!

[see_also_friend]

Another interesting link (& you can skip the add at the beginning) :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=drEfteACl-E

Re: Thank you!

[see_also_friend]

Oh, and this conversation reminds me of this book :
https://www.amazon.com/Planet-Past-James-Lincoln-Collier/dp/0027228606

[kengr]

This will be useful in pursuing rights for nonhumans.

Well, we need to finishing getting rights for *humans*. *sigh*

[see_also_friend]

Maybe adding a new type of personhood will bump all the human-persons up a notch? Like, no-one seriously argues that race or gender should disqualify someone from personhood (yes there are still stupid laws, but it isn't an acceptable 'fact' to state in political arguments and such like it was a hundred years ago).

[acelightning2]

I once found myself in a town where I'd never been, and I wanted to sit down and relax. The town had a park in its center, and the park had a duck pond. I sat there listening to the ducks quacking conversationally amongst themselves - it was a friendly, peaceful sound. There was a coin-operated dispenser for duck food (so idiots wouldn't feed the ducks Wonder Bread, which makes them very sick), so I fed the ducks to thank them for the conversation. Only female ducks quack; male ducks have longer necks, so their throats produce a lower-pitched sound that doesn't sound like a quack. And ducks and chickens are aware that humans find them funny.

[elinox]

Honestly, it's more surprising to me that so many humans think this information is "new". Of course other species communicate with language, just like humans. They're just not using human language to do it, duh. :P

Well ...

[ysabetwordsmith]

Many species have simple calls. Some can convey more information with more varied calls, like the species who have different nouns for different predators, or different verbs for "run" vs. "hide" vs. "rally," but they still don't mix and match the same sounds for separate meanings.

Then there are those with more sophisticated communication -- parrots, certain songbirds, wolves, dolphins, elephants, etc. And the main reason humans didn't spot that sooner is plain old speciesism. Me, I was learning what I could of them as foreign languages growing up, so I have ulterior resources.

[see_also_friend]

Well...

I think there is a line between communicating and full-fledged language, but where that line /is/, is actually a bit unclear, and indeed, might be like the 'line' between blue and green.

Also, while human language does have distinct features from alarm calls, it is possible that other species' languages are so alien that we might not be able to recognize those features.

Alternately, if 'language' means a sort of complexity rather than a list of qualities, it is possible that different languages may be both different enough to be unrecognizable and also complex enough that we may not be able to identify (or even perceive) all parts of them.

[kengr]

You know that is some cultures there *isn't* a line between blue and green. They are considered the same color.

Yes ...

[ysabetwordsmith]

And then there's glas in Irish. It can mean blue, green, gray, occasionally black or silver. It has connotations of change and potential danger.

The proper translation is "sea-colored." And then that mishmash makes perfect sense.

[see_also_friend]

Point. There's a lot of different metaphors.

But there is a demonstrable difference between 'has no language features' and 'has all the language features.'

And if we define languages as a threshold of complexity, like multicellular life or superorganisms, that wouldn't be a binary spectrum at all.

[kengr]

Of course other species communicate with language, just like humans. They're just not using human language to do it, duh.

At one several point(s) in history, similar comments were made about humans who spoke a different language from the "civilized" folks.

"Barbarian" comes from this. It was essentially saying that all they said was "bar-bar bar"