Re: Capacity for literacy
- From: "John Roth" <JohnRoth1@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 17 Jun 2006 09:00:34 -0700
deowll wrote:
"Lee Olsen" <paleocity@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1150041618.607675.152580@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Some of the experiments in chimp language used signs. The chimps learned
what they meant. That would suggest that the ability to learn to read to a
degree was around before the chimp human split.
Yesterday's news is that executive planning has been localized
to Broca's area, which is also associated with language
production. The two are inextricably linked.
Whether chimp and gorilla sign language is language in
the human sense is heavily disputed. I'm in the camp that
says that it isn't; it's simply a complex learned behavior
that isn't related to human language.
I have no doubt that a chimp could be trained to react
to signs. So can a dog (at least some varieties.) All
that it requires is the ability to distinguish the stimuli
and learn some responses. If you want to call that an
underlying capability for reading, go right ahead. I think
it's kind of like calling having a heartbeat an underlying
ability for language. It's probably true, but so what?
John Roth
Lee Olsen
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Capacity for literacy
- From: deowll
- Re: Capacity for literacy
- References:
- Capacity for literacy
- From: john0714@xxxxxxx
- Re: Capacity for literacy
- From: JohnRoth1
- Re: Capacity for literacy
- From: Lee Olsen
- Re: Capacity for literacy
- From: deowll
- Capacity for literacy
- Prev by Date: Re: Study shows apes can plan ahead
- Next by Date: Re: Terra firma hominids
- Previous by thread: Re: Capacity for literacy
- Next by thread: Re: Capacity for literacy
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|