Aspects of Repetition in Bonobo–Human Conversation: Creating Cohesion in a Conversation Between Species

Abstract

Ape language research has primarily focused on specific isolated language features. In contrast, in research into human language, traditions such as conversational analysis and discourse analysis propose to study language as actual discourse. Consequently, repetitions are seen as accomplishing various discursive and pragmatic functions in human conversations, while in apes, repetitions are seen as rote imitations and as proof that apes do not exhibit language. Tools from discourse analysis are applied in this study to a conversation between a language-competent bonobo, Pan paniscus and a human. The hypothesis is that the bonobo may exhibit even larger linguistic competency in ordinary conversation than in controlled experimental settings. Despite her limited productive means, the bonobo Panbanisha competently engages in co-constructing the conversational turns. She uses shared knowledge and repetitions to achieve compliance with a request. This reveals a knowledge about socio-linguistic interactions which goes beyond the pure informational content of words.

Bonobos modify communication signals according to recipient familiarity

“…If successful in obtaining the banana, subjects never continued to signal, but if unsuccessful they tended to elaborate their communicative efforts by switching to new signals, suggesting an apparent attempt to rectify an unsuccessful communication event and misunderstanding. With our third analysis, we showed that, similarly to human infants interacting with adults 7 52 and language-trained bonobos interacting with their caretakers 14 15 , subjects adapted their signal production according to whether or not they knew the recipient. In particular, they used more repetitions with a familiar recipient but elaborated more, by using new signals with an unfamiliar one.…”

“…Results of these studies have regularly been interpreted in terms of language-relevant capacities (e.g. 11 12 13 ), including the claim that bonobos are capable of taking into account shared knowledge when interacting with familiar humans 14 15 . A general conclusion from this literature is that key cognitive abilities necessary for language were already present in the common ancestor of modern humans, chimpanzees and bonobos.…”

Human–animal relationships in zoo‐housed orangutans (P. abelii) and gorillas (G. g. gorilla): The effects of familiarity

“…For example, apes who know researchers with whom they work may be more likely to take and understand task directions, remain on task longer, and engage in unfamiliar (and, to apes, sometimes meaningless or irrelevant) tasks, than apes who are tested with relative strangers with whom they have no relationship. Finally, familiar researchers who have positive individualized relationships with their subjects, based on shared experience and knowledge, will likely be able to better interpret ape behavior [e.g., Matsuzawa, 2006;Pedersen & Fields, 2009].…”

The origins of non-human primates' manual gestures

“…Pointing in great apes represents a flexible, intentional behaviour, since the use of this gesture is adjusted to the attentional state of the human and it occurs in combination with other signals such as facial expressions and vocalizations [19,57,62,63]. Pointing is also frequently used by language-trained apes [60,64,65], where it often resembles the form of the pointing gesture of Western cultures with the arm and index finger extended [66].…”