Re: Digest 3743 Posted by: "Dan Dugan" dandugan_1999 =
Tue Nov 27, 2007 10:06 am (PST) Michael Dalton wrote:
> The bird's site has been posted here before, the present
>NOT-up-to-date site is www.ParrotSpeech. com There are currently
>seven speech clips that show that people are not very good at
>discerning their own language when spoken by another creature (other
>than cliches).
Or how tempting it is to make up what you think she's saying!
Skeptically, Dan Dugan.
=85=85=85=85=85=85=85=85=85=85=85=85=85=85.
I welcome discussion about this topic and respectfully submit the followi=
ng in response to Dan=92s skepticism:
It is true that people are not very good at discerning their own language=
spoken by a bird. It is a problem between the ears, but not a hearing prob=
lem. Otherwise, listeners would not hear, =93Polly wants a cracker,=94 whic=
h is spoken by most birds in a distorted voice.
A bird=92s voice does not =93compute=94 for many people because they do n=
ot have the same type of vocal apparatus as humans. Yet, some listeners cle=
arly recognized my macaw=92s speech.
An analogous problem that most adults experience is distorted speech by t=
oddlers. One set of parents does not understand the speech recognized by a =
second toddler=92s parents. Does that imply that the second parents are =93=
making up=94 what the child communicates? Familiarity makes a great differe=
nce.
Linguists state that all speech perception is made up =93in the mind of t=
he listener,=94 because sonic communication is an indirect process. The mes=
sage must be generated within the listener=92s mind before it can be recogn=
ized; this is not a new idea. Recordings of Arielle=92s statements permit r=
epeated listening and electronic treatment to make them easier to recognize=
.
Skeptics need to address questions about understanding language. One ques=
tion was addressed during classic studies of speech by Pickett and Pollack =
during the =9260s. Why do most people NOT understand single words and short=
excerpts from speech spoken by another PERSON? (Does this mean that people=
who properly interpret speech samples are =93making it up?=94)
IF I am inventing what Arielle says, then one needs to explain why, for h=
undreds of samples, most people agree that the words correspond to my text.=
The idea is that others can hear the speech, but have no conception that a=
bird can say unusual words that are not within the experience of many list=
eners.
In many cases, Arielle speaks about things using referential speech. If s=
he says, =93Hot!=94 when I place heated food in her bowl. Am I making that =
up? (I know it is "associative learning.")
Please explain the following phenomenon. A person, who has never before h=
eard Arielle speak, transcribes only a few words from a recording. When you=
inspect the words, the transcription contains an extremely unusual 3-sylla=
ble word at precisely the place where my master list has the very same word=
. Is this a =93psychic=94 phenomenon caused by me?
There are many cases where SEQUENCES of speech spoken by Arielle deal wit=
h a topic. What is the probability that one could routinely manufacture suc=
h =93sound alike=94 progressions that happen to sound like the transcriptio=
n of her speech?
I will be interested to learn the explanations for the points I make in t=
his communication.
Looking forward to a stimulating reply, I remain,
Mike
|