Teaching
Sign Language to a Chimpanzee.
R.A
Gardner and B.T. Gardner (1969).
Preliminary Considerations
The Chimpanzee
as a subject.
A chimp chosen
for this study because it is an intelligent and social animal. The main disadvantage
of using a chimp is that it does not possess vocal apparatus that would allow
the production of human speech. Hayes and Hayes (1951) tried this; their chimp,
'Vicki', produced only four sounds in six years! Chimps do use their hands
a lot in their natural habitat, so it was decided to build upon this natural
ability by training the author's chimp, 'Washoe', to use American Sign Language
(ASL).
American Sign
Language.
Each symbol will
vary in its degree of abstraction (e.g. sign for 'flower' involves putting
fingertips together and touching both nostrils. This is iconic, as the sign
mimes a flower being held to the nose. Other signs are quite abstract, for
example 'dog' is signed by slapping the thigh!). The performance of Washoe
can be compared with that of deaf children.
Washoe.
Caught in the
wild and received by the Gardners when she was between 8 and 14 months. Chimps
are completely dependent until two years of age, and semi-dependent until
the age of four. Full adult growth is reached between 12 and 16 years.
Laboratory conditions.
The Gardeners
tried to make Washoe's environment as similar as possible to a [deaf] human
infant. Many helpers were used. There was always somebody in attendance during
Washoe's waking hours. Every helper communicated with Washoe by using ASL,
rather than with the spoken voice (the use of which was minimised). Helper's
acted as friends and companions to Washoe, making use of various games and
activities to make the learning experience enjoyable.
Training Methods.
Imitation.
As with chimpanzees
in general, Washoe naturally imitated. Washoe signed the sign for 'toothbrush'
spontaneously upon entering the Gardener's bathroom and noticing toothbrushes.
There seems to have been no obvious motive, except to communicate.
Babbling.
'Babbling' here
does not mean vocal babbling, rather the untaught signs used by Washoe to
communicate a desire. Washoe used a begging gesture, which was not too different
from the ASL signs for 'give me' and 'come'.
Instrumental
conditioning.
Humans could not
learn a language, purely by instrumental conditioning, although it seems likely
that the 'trick vocabulary' of early childhood could be acquired in this way.
Instrumental conditioning was one strategy used with Washoe. Tickling was
used as a reward. The sign for 'more' was learnt by instrumental conditioning.
This sign was later applied to a variety of relevant situations.
Results
Vocabulary.
A Sign was added
to a checklist when reported by three independent observers. The sign had
to occur in an appropriate context and without prompting. The checklist was
used to record the frequency of a sign. A sign had to be used at least once
a day for 15 consecutive days, before it was deemed to have been acquired.
Alternatively a sign had to be used at least 15 days out of 30 consecutive
days. By the end of the 22nd month of the project, thirty-four signs had been
learnt.
Differentiation.
The sign 'more'
used in many different situations until a more specific sign had been learnt.
The sign for 'flower' used inappropriately for the idea of 'smell'. After
additional training eventually Washoe was able to differentiate between 'smell'
and 'flower'.
Transfer.
Although the same
object was presented for each learning trial (e.g. the same hat), Washoe was
able to use the sign for other similar objects (e.g. other hats).
Combinations.
Washoe was able
to combine two or three signs in an original way, examples being 'gimme tickle',
'open food drink' (meaning 'open the fridge'), 'please open hurry', etc.
Concluding observations.
We can not be
certain that Washoe has acquired 'language'. This is because it is difficult
to draw the line between what counts as 'possessing a language' and 'not possessing
a language'. If Washoe were to communicate information to an observer, whom
had no other source of information, then this would be strong evidence to
support the claim that Washoe possesses 'language'.
Commentary.
It is not just
the setting up of valid dependent variables that are important, perhaps what
is more important, is the interpretation of the dependent variables. Does
Washoe's use of signs constitute language? Chomsky (1957) believed that language
is unique to humans, claiming that we have a Language Acquisition Device that
enables us to appreciate readily the grammatical structure of language, enabling
the infant to make sense of what would otherwise be a chaotic mass of sound.
Although the chimpanzee's vocal apparatus can not produce speech sounds, this
does not mean that the animal can not communicate effectively non-orally.
Premack (1971) used plastic shapes. Savage-Rumbaugh et al (1980) used a special
computer that produced geometric shapes that represented words. Others have
used ASL (e.g. Patterson 1978 taught a gorilla, Terrace 1979 taught a male
chimp. In all these cases it has to be decided whether the animal concerned
possesses language. Aitchison (1983) proposes these 10 criteria for language:
- Use
of the Vocal-Auditory Channel
- Arbitrariness
(use of neutral symbols (i.e. words) to denote objects, etc.)
- Semanticity
(the use of symbols to mean or to refer to objects/actions)
- Cultural
transmission (handing down from generation to generation)
- spontaneous
usage
- turn-taking
- Duality
(a combination of different sounds and the order in which these sounds are
placed)
- Displacement
(references to things not present in time or space)
- Structure-dependence
(e.g. the structure of grammar and the relevance of word order)
- Creativity
An argument that
we meet when considering the work of Piaget is relevant here. The Discontinuity
theory of language considers the differences between human and animal language
as qualitatively different, rather than quantitatively different.
Evaluation
- Washoe
demonstrates semanticity (e.g. 132 signs learnt, able to generalise). There
is some evidence of displacement (e.g. 'all gone cup' and 'more milk').
Washoe combined words showing evidence of creativity. Regarding structure-dependence,
Washoe was not always consistent with word order. This could be due to one
or more of the following reasons:
a) the Gardeners rewarding Washoe for correct sign production regardless
of order,
b) sign order is not as consistent as word order, this is evidenced by deaf
people, who also produce signs in an inconsistent order,
c) this was an intermediate stage,
d) Washoe could not understand the importance of the correct ordering of
the signs she was producing.
- Sarah
and Lana were trained to use symbol order correctly and coped to a limited
extent. Koko did not use any particular order. Nim Chimpsky preferred certain
sign orders, but failed to demonstrate that he understood any rules.
- Petitto
and Seidenberg (1979) conclude that apes use repetitive, inconsistently
structured strings. Nim's longest recorded utterance is 'Eat drink, eat
drink, eat Nim, eat Nim, drink eat, drink eat, Nim eat, Nim eat, me eat,
me eat'.
- We
must question whether the apes demonstrated true semanticity. Are they really
using the signs as words? Also, are the apes being spontaneous? Chimps try
to 'acquire' objects rather than idly converse about them.
- Children
can understand that 'dog chase cat' has a different meaning from 'cat chase
dog', unlike apes. We could compare the Mean Length of Utterance (MLU) for
children with the MLU for apes. This comparison would be misleading owing
to the repetitive nature of the strings created by apes. Ignoring this,
children quickly move from a MLU of 11/2 to a MLU of 4 words. Nim's MLU
did not rise, holding steady at around 1.1 to 1.6. Nim did not sign spontaneously
on his own initiative. Trainer prompted most signings. Nim would often start
to sign before the trainer had finished signing; this suggests that he is
not having a genuine conversation.
- Gardener's
attack Terrace's upbringing of Nim, saying that he was subjected to routine
drills rather than being brought up as a child would be.
- Eysenck
(1984) points out that the Gardners concentrated on only one component of
an ASL sign, that being just the hand configuration. Movement, orientation
and location were neglected. ASL does not have the grammatical structure
of English, so we should be careful about equating signing ASL with speaking
a language. Nonetheless, deaf people are using ASL as a language, so we
should accept that if a chimp uses ASL then he or she is using a language
also. Brown (1986) suggests the chimp should use ASL in such a fashion that
would convince us that a human had the capacity to use ASL. However, we
must be wary of anthropomorphizing (viewing animal behaviour as if it were
acting as a human).
- Chomsky
(1980) believes that apes lack the capacity to understand the 'rudiments
of the computational structure of human language'. Aitchison (1983) believes
that the relative ease at which humans acquire language point to an innate
ability. Eysenck (1984) believes that language in its complete form is unique
to humans.
- Savage-Rumbaugh
believes that the difference between human and chimp language is quantitative.
She trained bonobo chimps to use a 'lexigram', in a naturalistic setting.
This consisted of a portable board that could be carried to wherever the
chimps were, and used regardless of whatever they were doing. Each time
a geometric shape on the board was pressed a word would sound. The board
was used to allow the chimp to communicate in much the same way as a child
would use spoken language. The board was used successfully, with the chimps
displaying relative ease of learning the symbols, and by their using the
symbols spontaneously.
- The
Gardners didn't see Washoe for 11 years, yet when she saw them Washoe immediately
signed 'Come, Mrs G.', and led her to an adjoining room and began to play
a game with her. Can we justify taking an animal away from its natural surroundings?
Should we try to teach them an unnatural language? We should consider the
possible psychological damage that might be caused by all of this teaching.
The Great Ape Project, supported by eminent people, believes that apes should
have many of the rights of humans.
Questions
- What
is anthropomorphism? [2 marks]
- Give
two other methods used by other chimps as alternatives to signing. [2 marks]
- What
is the differences between the chimp's and the children's use of language?
[8 marks]
- Can
apes acquire language? [7 marks]
- Discuss
the programme of teaching language to chimps from an ethical standpoint.
[6 marks]