416 Animal Memory and Cognition
If children are more or less totally deprived of language
experience when quite young, they exhibit serious deficien-
cies in language use later in life (Bickerton, 1998; Candland,
1993). On the other hand, if children are provided with mini-
mum language experienced they use language normally later
in life. Indeed, as Bickerton (1998) has described, children
deprived of normal language manage on their own to create a
fully functional language in a single generation. This has oc-
curred, for example, when people who speak many different
languages are thrown together (as on plantations) and com-
municate by means of what is called a pidgin. Pidgins are
very simple ways of communicating that consist of two to
three words. Children exposed to a pidgin, in the absence of
explicit instruction, create a much more sophisticated lan-
guage called a Creole. A similar thing happens when deaf
children are exposed to parents or others who may use sign
language badly. These facts and others (see Pinker, 1994)
have caused language experts to suggest that the language
gulf between humans and other animals is a matter of kind
and not of degree.
From an evolutionary standpoint, there is no particular
reason that our closest relative, the chimpanzee, should pos-
sess even a rudimentary language ability. Humans and chim-
panzees separated from each other—that is, no longer shared
a common ancestor—about 5 to 7 million years ago. Lan-
guage ability may have evolved in the human line after we
separated from the chimpanzee. Perhaps species more
closely related to ours, such as the extinct Homo erectus,pos-
sessed language, or at least something approximating human
language. Whatever the truth may be, the language gulf be-
tween humans and extant animals such as the chimpanzee is
very large and may be one of kind, not degree.
Pidgins, as indicated, are very simple ways of communi-
cating and consist of a few words being strung together like
beads on a string. Bickerton (1998) has suggested that ani-
mals such as chimpanzees and bonobos are capable, at most,
of acquiring a pidgin. According to Bickerton, children under
2 years of age use a pidgin, which is acquired on the basis of
general intellectual capacity. At above 2 years of age, chil-
dren begin to acquire language on the basis of a mechanism
specifically shaped by evolution for this purpose, and often
called a language acquisition device. In Bickerton’s view, the
language capacities of both mature apes and children under
2 years of age are on a par and do not represent true language.
Interestingly, as indicated before, Kanzi, a bonobo, was able
to follow verbal commands as well as Alia, a child, up until
Alia was 2 years of age, whereupon Alia increasingly sur-
passed Kanzi in comprehension.
Experts are not agreed on many important aspects of lan-
guage that may bear upon animal abilities along this line. To
consider merely one line of disagreement, Pinker (1994)
is of the opinion that language evolved slowly and in stages
over the 350,000 or so generations separating our species
from the chimpanzee. Bickerton (1998) believes that lan-
guage evolved in two stages, a pidgin stage followed by a
Creole-type stage. Pinker’s view allows that we might find
in animals some intermediate language stage(s) between that
of a pidgin and a Creole. Bickerton’s view does not allow this
and suggests we will never observe in animals a form of lan-
guage more complicated than a pidgin. Both Pinker and
Bickerton think that language is a hardwired capacity of our
species, independent of general intelligence. If, as some (e.g.,
S. J. Gould, 1987) think, language is a result of an increase of
intelligence in humans, then it should be possible to find in
animals increasingly better forms of language correlated with
better intelligence. Although these are interesting specula-
tions, definite and secure knowledge concerning animal lan-
guage ability lies in future research.
Still another view suggesting that language in humans is
fundamentally different from that in animals was suggested
by Dunbar (1993). Dunbar suggests that language evolved in
three principle stages. Australopithecus cines,an early ances-
tor, had a primate system of vocalization similar to that seen
in present-day apes such as chimpanzees. This could not be
calledlanguage. With Homo erectus,a close relative of our
species, a simple kind of language evolved that prompted
bonding between individuals. About 50,000 or so years ago,
our own species, Homo sapiens, developed fully modern
language that was employed for more than social boding. Es-
sential language developed into a useful means for communi-
cating abstract ideas. Thus Dunbar, like Bickerton and Pinker,
is of the opinion that as far as language is concerned, the gulf
between man and other animas is one of kind and not degree.Evolution and CognitionSeveral characteristics of the approach to animal and human
cognition currently employed within experimental psychol-
ogy are noteworthy. Workers in human cognition all but
ignore animal learning and cognition. Workers in animal cog-
nition, for the most part, employ a limited number of species,
most notably rats and pigeons. The cognitive capacities iso-
lated for examination in animal cognition are often those sim-
ilar to those possessed in abundance by humans. Do animals
possess numerical abilities? Can animals make inferences of
the sort If A= B and B = C, then A= C? To what extent do
human theories of serial learning apply to animals? Are ani-
mals, like humans, capable of self-recognition? By virtue of
examining these and other questions much useful informa-
tion has been provided for better understanding both animal