question: Considering how far science has progressed, why are we still unable to communicate with or perfectly understand animals?
comment: Possibly because other animals don't have language or the cognitive processes associated with it.
passages: There has been a recent emergence in animal language research which has contested the idea that animal communication is less sophisticated than human communication. Denise Herzing has done research on dolphins in the Bahamas whereby she created a two-way conversation via a submerged keyboard. The keyboard allows divers to communicate with wild dolphins. By using sounds and symbols on each key the dolphins could either press the key with their nose or mimic the whistling sound emitted in order to ask humans for a specific prop. This ongoing experiment has shown that in non-linguistic creatures brilliant and rapid thinking does occur despite our previous conceptions of animal communication. Further research done with Kanzi using lexigrams has strengthened the idea that animal communication is much more complex then we once thought.
   BULLET::::3. In contrast to human language, animal communication systems are usually not able to express conceptual generalizations. (Cetaceans and some primates may be notable exceptions).
  
  BULLET::::4. Human languages combine elements to produce new messages (a property known as creativity). One factor in this is that much human language growth is based upon conceptual ideas and hypothetical structures, both being far greater capabilities in humans than animals. This appears far less common in animal communication systems, although current research into animal culture is still an ongoing process with many new discoveries.
   BULLET::::- Herzing (2013) used an underwater keyboard in the open ocean which dolphins and humans could press to choose a plaything.
  
  BULLET::::- Herzing (2014) created 3 whistles for "play objects (Sargassum... scarf, and rope)", and found that wild dolphins understand them, but has not found if dolphins produce the whistles.
  
  Section::::Cetaceans.:Historical.
   Section::::Other aspects.:Linguistics.
  
  For linguistics, the interest of animal communication systems lies in their similarities to and differences from human language:
  
  BULLET::::1. Human languages are characterized for having a double articulation (in the characterization of French linguist André Martinet). It means that complex linguistic expressions can be broken down in meaningful elements (such as morphemes and words), which in turn are composed of smallest phonetic elements that affect meaning, called phonemes. Animal signals, however, do not exhibit this dual structure.
   There are other differences as well, including poor precision, as shown by Kanzi the bonobo used the lexigram for "chase" interchangeably with that for "get", though this behavior may not be the same for all animals. Research supports the idea that the linguistic limitations in animals are due to limited general brainpower (as opposed to lack of a specific module), and that words are created by breaking down sentences into pieces, making grammar more basic than semantics.
  
  Section::::Reported cases by species.
  
  Section::::Reported cases by species.:Birds.
   Section::::Cetaceans.:Other researchers.
  
  BULLET::::- Batteau (1964, video) developed machines for the US Navy, which translated human voices to higher frequencies for dolphins to hear and translated dolphin voices to lower frequencies for humans to hear. The work continued at least until 1967 when the Navy classified its dolphin research. Batteau died, also in 1967, before he published results.
  
  BULLET::::- Reiss + McCowan (1993) taught dolphins 3 whistles (ball, ring, rub), which the 2 dolphins produced, and even combined, when playing with the ball and/or ring, or getting a rub.
   Even fish, which lack a neocortex, have been taught to distinguish and respond differently to different human faces (archerfish) or styles of music (goldfish and koi).
  
  Molluscs, with totally different brain designs, have been taught to distinguish and respond to symbols (cuttlefish and octopus), and have been taught that food behind a clear barrier cannot be eaten (squid).
   Various ways in which humans interpret the behaviour of animals, or give commands to them, are consistent with the definition of interspecies communication. Skillful interpretation of animal communications may be critical to the welfare of animals that are being cared for or trained by humans. For example, behaviours indicating pain need to be recognized. Indeed, the survival of both the animal and its human caretaker may be at stake if, for example, a human fails to recognize a signal for imminent attack. It is also important to take into account that non-human animal species may interpret the signals of humans differently than humans themselves. For instance, a pointing command refers to a location rather than an object in dogs.
   There are two aspects to the required explanation:
  
  BULLET::::- identifying a route by which an animal that lacked the relevant feature or behaviour could acquire it;
  
  BULLET::::- identifying the selective pressure that makes it adaptive for animals to develop structures that facilitate communication, emit communications, and respond to them.
   Many researchers argue that animal communication lacks a key aspect of human language, that is, the creation of new patterns of signs under varied circumstances. (In contrast, for example, humans routinely produce entirely new combinations of words.) Some researchers, including the linguist Charles Hockett, argue that human language and animal communication differ so much that the underlying principles are unrelated. Accordingly, linguist Thomas A. Sebeok has proposed to not use the term "language" for animal sign systems. Marc Hauser, Noam Chomsky, and W. Tecumseh Fitch assert an evolutionary continuum exists between the communication methods of animal and human language.
   BULLET::::- Rapid fading (transitory nature): Signal lasts a short time. This is true of all systems involving sound. It does not take into account audio recording technology and is also not true for written language. It tends not to apply to animal signals involving chemicals and smells which often fade slowly. For example, a skunk's smell, produced in its glands, lingers to deter a predator from attacking.
   The capacity to acquire and use language is a key aspect that distinguishes humans from other beings. Although it is difficult to pin down what aspects of language are uniquely human, there are a few design features that can be found in all known forms of human language, but that are missing from forms of animal communication. For example, many animals are able to communicate with each other by signaling to the things around them, but this kind of communication lacks the arbitrariness of human vernaculars (in that there is nothing about the sound of the word "dog" that would hint at its meaning). Other forms of animal communication may utilize arbitrary sounds, but are unable to combine those sounds in different ways to create completely novel messages that can then be automatically understood by another. Hockett called this design feature of human language "productivity". It is crucial to the understanding of human language acquisition that we are not limited to a finite set of words, but, rather, must be able to understand and utilize a complex system that allows for an infinite number of possible messages. So, while many forms of animal communication exist, they differ from human languages in that they have a limited range of vocabulary tokens, and the vocabulary items are not combined syntactically to create phrases.
   Section::::Cetaceans.
  
  Section::::Cetaceans.:Lilly.
   Though animal communication has always been a topic of public comment and attention, for a period in history it surpassed this and became sensational popular entertainment. From the late 18th century through the mid 19th century, a succession of "learned pigs" and various other animals were displayed to the public in for-profit performances, boasting the ability to communicate with their owners (often in more than one language), write, solve math problems, and the like. One poster dated 1817 shows a group of "Java sparrows" who are advertised as knowing seven languages, including Chinese and Russian.
  
  Section::::See also.
  
  BULLET::::- Alex (parrot)
   In 2009 it was reported that affixation may play a role in the call meanings of Campbell's mona monkey.
  
  Section::::Errors in communication.
  
  There becomes possibility for error within communication between animals when certain circumstances apply. These circumstances could include distance between the two communicating subjects, as well as the complexity of the signal that is being communicated to the "listener" of the situation. It may not always be clear to the "listener" where the location of the communication is coming from, as the "singer" can sometimes deceive them and create more error.
  
  Section::::See also.
  
  BULLET::::- Animal consciousness
   Since the late 1990s, one scientist, Sean Senechal, has been developing, studying, and using the learned visible, expressive language in dogs and horses. By teaching these animals a gestural (human made) American Sign Language-like language, the animals have been found to use the new signs on their own to get what they need. The recent experiments on animal language are perhaps the most sophisticated attempt yet to establish human/animal communication, though their relation to natural animal communication is uncertain.
  
  Section::::Other aspects.
  
  Section::::Other aspects.:Evolution.
   BULLET::::- African forest elephants: Cornell University's Elephant Listening Project began in 1999 when Katy Payne began studying the calls of African forest elephants in Dzanga National Park in the Central African Republic. Andrea Turkalo has continued Payne's work in Dzanga National Park observing elephant communication. For nearly 20 years, Turkalo has spent the majority of her time using a spectrogram to record the noises that the elephants make. After extensive observation and research, she has been able to recognize elephants by their voices. Researchers hope to translate these voices into an elephant dictionary, but that will likely not occur for many years. Because elephant calls are often made at very low frequencies, this spectrogram is able to detect lower frequencies that human ears are unable to hear, allowing Turkalo to get a better idea of what she perceives the elephants to be saying. Cornell's research on African forest elephants has challenged the idea that humans are considerably better at using language and that animals only have a small repertoire of information that they can convey to others. As Turkalo explained on "60 Minutes"' "The Secret Language of Elephants," "Many of their calls are in some ways similar to human speech."
   The modeling of human language in animals is known as animal language research. In addition to the ape-language experiments mentioned above, there have also been more or less successful attempts to teach language or language-like behavior to some non-primate species, including parrots and great spotted woodpeckers. Arguing from his own results with the animal Nim Chimpsky and his analysis of others results, Herbert Terrace criticized the idea that chimps can produce new sentences. Shortly thereafter Louis Herman published research on artificial language comprehension in the bottlenosed dolphin (Herman, Richards, & Wolz, 1984). Though this sort of research has been controversial, especially among cognitive linguists, many researchers agree that many animals can understand the meaning of individual words, and that some may understand simple sentences and syntactic variations, but there is little evidence that any animal can produce new strings of symbols that correspond to new sentences.
   A harbor seal, Hoover learned to speak several phrases in understandable English as a pup from his human foster parent and used these in appropriate circumstances during his later life at the New England Aquarium until he died in 1985. Other talking animals have been studied, though they did not always use their phrases in meaningful contexts.
  
  Section::::Animal communication as entertainment.
   BULLET::::- Research done by Dr. Irene Pepperberg indicates that parrots are capable of speaking in context and with intentional meaning. One of Pepperberg's parrots, Alex, a grey parrot, demonstrated the ability to assemble words out of letters.
  
  Section::::Reported cases by species.:Dogs.
   Communication in animals is usually not symbolic, and the arbitrariness of signs is typically considered the distinguishing factor between human and animal communication. However, research into great ape language has involved teaching chimpanzees, bonobos, gorillas, and orangutans to communicate with human beings and with each other using sign language, physical tokens, and lexigrams (Yerkish), which contain some elements of arbitrariness. Some also argue that certain animals are capable of symbolic name usage.
   BULLET::::- It is not unusual for goats to make noises that sound like syllables from human words. Some videos of this behavior have ended up becoming popular on YouTube. An example from Tennessee of a baby goat seeming to say "what what what?" got over seven million views.
  
  Section::::See also.
  
  BULLET::::- Animal cognition
  
  BULLET::::- Animal communication
  
  BULLET::::- Animal language
  
  BULLET::::- Derek Bickerton – Animal Communication Systems researcher
  
  BULLET::::- Human–animal communication
  
  BULLET::::- Human speechome project
  
  BULLET::::- "Kinship with All Life" – book
  
  BULLET::::- Vocal learning
  
  Section::::External links.
   Researchers have attempted to teach great apes (gorillas, chimpanzees, and bonobos) spoken language with poor results as they can only be taught how to say one or a few basic or limited words or phrases or less, and sign language with significantly better results as they can be very creative with various hand signals like those of deaf people. However, even the best communicating great ape has shown an inability to grasp the idea of syntax and grammar, instead communicating at best at the same level as a pidgin language in humans. They are expressive and communicative, but lack the formality that remains unique to human speech.
   BULLET::::- In 1959 a German sheepdog by the name of Corinna living in Prague spontaneously developed a capability for limited human speech. According to the zoologist Hermann Hartwigg, published under the pseudonym 'Hermann Dembeck', Corinna 'holds the record in modern times for its talking prowess'.
  
  Section::::Reported cases by species.:Cats.
   Section::::Other aspects.:Cognitive aspects.
  
presuppositions: Modernized science would allow us to communicate with or perfectly understand animals.
corrections: Animals themselves are the limiting factor in communication and understanding since they don't have language or cognitive processes to understand it.
raw_presuppositions: Modernized science would allow us to communicate with or perfectly understand animals. Science would allow us to communicate with or perfectly understand animals.
raw_corrections: Animals themselves are the limiting factor in communication and understanding since they don't have language or cognitive processes to understand it. Animals themselves are the limiting factor in communication and understanding since they don't have language or cognitive processes to understand it.