Chargement de la vidéo...

Licence


Distributed under a Creative Commons Paternité - Pas d'utilisation commerciale - Pas de modification 4.0 International License

Partager

Lien
Intégrer la vidéo

Métriques

Consultations de la notice

220

Téléchargements de fichiers

134

Analyses

AAR Campus Archives Audiovisuelles de la Recherche (Campus AAR) est une plateforme communautaire destinée à l'analyse, la documentation la mise en valeur, et la publication de corpus audiovisuels numériques archivés sur MédiHal.

The International Communication of Great Apes.
Origins of Human Communication.

2006-05-15

Description : Lecture 1. The Intentional Communication of Great Apes
Ape gestural communication flexible, intentional, but not co-operative (no shared intentionality).

Biol. comm. = any physical or behavioral feature that evolved to influence others Need equilibrium of costs & benefits for Comm. (C) & Audience (A) EG: angler fish, duck mating displays Communicator = behavioral manipulation <=> Audience = information

1.1. Great Apes' Vocalizations and Gestures
Displays = genetically fixed <=> Signals = flexible, voluntary Vocalizations = displays Unlearned & inflexibly used no indiv diff; isolation exps; cross- fostering exps inflexibly used: particular situations and emotions do not learn new vocalizations (even w/ with humans) Goodall: "The production of a sound in the absence of the appropriate emotional state seems to be an almost impossible task for a chimpanzee" Broadcast to all: audience effects = presence/absence of kin (at best) e.g., call even when whole group is there (predator, food) Evolutionarily urgent functions ==> high emotions e.g., vervet alarm calls: [apes = no referentially specific calls] A = extract information (learn bird alarms) C = cause behavior: predator retreats; kin run to safety Seyfarth & Cheney (2003, p. 168): "Listeners acquire information from signalers who do not, in the human sense, intend to provide it." Vocal comm. basically same in all mammals (ground squirrels, dolphins) Gestures = signals Many genetically fixed postures & facial expressions But some: less evolutionarily urgent functions ==> relaxed emotions e.g., play, riding, nursing, begging, grooming Flexible Use [analogy: tool use] learned: individual differences; novel (idiosyncratic) gestures, new gestures with humans (see below) flexibly used: means-ends dissociation combinations/sequences ontogenetic ritualization, not imitation sequence: (i) C does X; (ii) A anticipates by doing Y at int. move.; (iii) C notices this, and just produces int. move. evidence: group comparisons; experiment no imitation: gestures = one-way, not shared (¿convention?) Attention to the attention of the partner Directed at individual recipients (not broadcast) much evidence: visual gestures only when A attending Visual modality: focus on attentional state of partner A: is it directed to me? C: Is she attending? Type I: Intention movements: und. others' goals e.g., arm-raise, touch-side: I want you to do X. imperative, dyadic (food-beg as exception; object 'offer') metonymic (no iconic) => function/meaning internal to activity supposed gorilla examples of iconic Type II: Attention getters: und. others' perception to obtain attention on displays: I want you to see me [do X] e.g., leaf clipping (erection), throw stuff (play face) function/meaning from display chimp and gorilla examples of hiding displays auditory attention getters: only African apes make noise without emotion to obtain attention to body part or object: groom, play, food I want you to see: ¿Gricean claim of attention? apes do not produce sequence: att-getter + intention-movement walk around (observations, experiment): esp. Pan Comparison: ape gestures more cognitively sophisticated (closer to language) than vocalizations => based on und. that others have goals & perceptions Learned, flexible, novel, creative combinations (vocal = no) Chosen w/r/t attentional state of the recipient (vocal = no) and use of attention getters, walking around More sophisticated in apes than in monkeys (vocal = opposite) But not conventions => not shared, only one-way (not imitated) But no pointing or iconic gestures: not even when want something Not collaborative (no requests for clarification)

1.2. Great Apes and Pointing
Approx. 60-70% of captive chimps point imperatively for humans to out-of-reach food, w/ persistence, when human looking - nothing systematic w/ vocalizations (auditory att-getters: yes) point to tool, so humans can use it to get them food [C&T, '94] so human can use it for self? (so far = no) point to where food was hidden many hours before Kanzi combines pointing with lexigram to specify who others: bring human to place where she can help; give human locked box for help; put human's hand on pocket => analogy = tool-use no declarative (sharing) pointing; no informative (helping) pointing no characterizing gestures; but can be taught ASL signs = imperative ¿What are these points? And why for humans, but not for conspecifics? conspecifics competitive <=> humans helpful human evol.: imperative pointing when others become helpful Comprehending pointing Apes can follow gaze or pointing gesture to, e.g., food (no inference) But apes terrible in object choice, w/ food hidden; Why? kids good at 12-14 mos. Hare & T competitive object choice experiment und. goal & perceptions of other (in competition) make inference about goal of reaching Herrmann & T => "Don't!" experiment => inference from prohibition ¿ und. indiv. imperatives? Next Lecture: not missing und. of intentionality [goal, percept, act] but missing shared intentionality: joint attention, communicative intention (relevance to JAF), cooperative motive to share info. Sidebar on domestic dogs (and foxes) => skills in obj choice wolves, undom. foxes => no skills Rico 'words': frame is always "Fetch!" (natural + trained) - new experiment w/icons

1.3. Summary: Ape Gestural Communication
Ape gestures => intentional communication: (i) flexible, (ii) audience design Based on und. goals & perceptions of others (vocal. = no!) Intention movements - function/meaning inherent if und. goals Attention getters - function/meaning inherent if und. displays (+percept) But not co-operative comm. b/c no skills & motivations of shared intentionality Gestures one-way (not imitated), not collab. (no reqs. for clarification) Helpful partner leads apes to indiv. imperatives, but not co-op. comm.

Some References
Call, J. & Tomasello, M. (1994). The production and comprehension of referential pointing by orangutans. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 108, 307-317 Call, J. & Tomasello, M. (Eds). (in press). The gestural communication of apes and monkeys. Erlbaum. Call, J. & Tomasello, M. (1996). The effect of humans on the cognitive development of apes. In A. Russon, K.A. Bard, S.T. Parker (Eds.), Reaching into Thought: The Minds of the Great Apes. Cambridge U Press. Hare, B., Call, J., & Tomasello, M. (in press). Chimpanzees deceive a human by hiding. Cognition Hare, B. & Tomasello, M. (2004). Chimpanzees are more skillful in competitive than in cooperative cognitive tasks. Animal Behaviour, 68, 571-81 Hare, B., Brown, M., Williamson, C., & Tomasello, M. (2002). The domestication of social cognition in dogs. Science, 298, 1634-36. Hermann, E. & Tomasello, M. (in press). Apes' and children's understanding of cooperative and competitive motives in a communicative situation. Developmental Science. Liebal, K. , Pika, S. & Tomasello, M. (2006). Gestural communication in orangutans. Gesture, 6, 1 - 38. Liebal, K., Call, J., & Tomasello, M. (2004). The use of gesture sequences by chimpanzees. American Journal of Primatology, 64, 377-396. Liebal, K., Pika, S., Call, J., & Tomasello, M. (2004). To move or not to move: How apes adjust to the attentional state of others. Interaction Studies, 5, 199-219 Pika, S. , Liebal, K., & Tomasello, M. (2003). Gestural communication in gorillas. American Journal of Primatology, 60, 95-111. Pika, S. , Liebal, K., & Tomasello, M. (2005). Gestural communication in bonobos. American Journal of Primatology, 65, 39-61. Pika, S. , Liebal, K., Call, J., & Tomasello, M. (2005). Gestural communication of apes. Gesture, 5, 41 - 56. Tomasello, M. (1996). Do apes ape? In J. Galef & C. Heyes (Eds.), Social Learning in Animals: The Roots of Culture. Academic Press Tomasello, M. & Call, J. (1997). Primate Cognition. Oxford University Press. Tomasello, M. & Camaioni, L. (1997). A comparison of the gestural communication of apes and human infants. Human Development, 40, 7-24. Tomasello, M. (in press). Why don't apes point? N. Enfield & S. Levinson (Eds.), Roots of Human Sociality. Wenner-Grenn. Tomasello, M., Call, J., & Gluckman, A. (1997). The comprehension of novel communicative signs by apes and human children. Child Development, 68, 1067-1081. Tomasello, M., Call, J., Nagell, K., Olguin, R., & Carpenter, M. (1994). The learning and use of gestural signals by young chimpanzees: A trans-generational study. Primates, 37, 137-154. Tomasello, M., Call, J., Warren, J., Frost, T., Carpenter, M., & Nagell, K. (1997). The ontogeny of chimpanzee gestural signals: A comparison across groups and generations. Evolution of Communication. 1, 223-253. Tomasello, M., Call, J., & Hare, B. (2003). Chimpanzees understand psychological states: The question is which ones and to what extent. Trends in Cognitive Science, 7, 153-156 Tomasello, M & Zuberbüler, K. (2002). Primate vocal and gestural communication. In M. Bekoff, C. Allen, & G. Burghardt (Eds), The Cognitive Animal: Empirical and Theoretical Perspecitives on Animal Cognition. MIT Press.


https://hal.campus-aar.fr/medihal-01660474
Contributeur : Peter Stockinger <>
Soumis le : dimanche 10 décembre 2017 - 19:39:14
Dernière modification le : lundi 12 novembre 2018 - 15:05:10