Mike,
Hopefully your dedication and work fall into the category of a hobby, and y=
ou have gotten your own rewards for the effort. Some of the greatest ideas =
(discoveries) in history have been ridiculed, before being accepted by the =
"experts". You do make a very important point with regard to decoding and b=
ird song identification, and that is that "one has to want to accomplish so=
mething".
I think a lot of people who "want" to learn bird song, really want a magic =
bullet that immediately makes them proficient at bird song recognition. Rec=
ent claims of instant recognition programs will make these people very happ=
y I'm sure, but, for me, if they ever perfect it, it would take the fun and=
the challenge out of learning these songs, and then being able to pick the=
m out, when out for a walk, or on a birding trip.
Investing in an iPhone full of apps is not the answer, if the will is not t=
here to organize, study and take the time to "build" an understanding of bi=
rd song. As time goes on it becomes easier (not easy) to add to that base o=
f understanding.
All the best,
Ernie Jardine
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Dalton [naturerecordists] <naturerec=
>
To: Nature Recordists <>
Sent: Sat, Jan 24, 2015 7:57 am
Subject: [Nature Recordists] Re: Tool for learning species calls?
Ernie and others,
I also have spent 20+ years studying birds singing sounds; in my case it is=
the song we call speech. I understand Ernie's point well applied to langua=
ge.
There was no good word to describe a "sound alike" word or phrase to descri=
be what the parrot said, so I invented the word "sononym." An example of on=
e type of sononym is the name "Eric." It took me years to recognize that wr=
ile I heard the sound consistently that I was not decoding it properly. Thi=
s feature of discerning sounds explains some differences between what indiv=
iduals think they hear. In any event, my macaw was saying "egret, " a bird =
we commonly see here in Florida.
What is most surprising is how often people do NOT decode their own languag=
e. It reached the point where despite my book, I have given up. People do n=
ot wish to hear intelligent spontaneous speech by a parrot. Because they ha=
ve not learned how to listen, they believe that I am mentally ill. The iron=
y of the situation is that the ancients knew about what I described, but co=
ntemporary scientists and educated people know too much to listen.
Bird song identification is a similar problem. One has to want to accomplis=
h something and have a few years of experience before things are likely to =
click.
As a side note, I identify a couple of common bird calls for my parrot. Sh=
e knows crow, cardinal, blue jay, and a few others.
Regards,
Mike
Florida
www.ParrotSpeech.com/Another_Mind.html
Re: Tool for learning species calls? =
Fri Jan 23, 2015 9:26 am (PST) . Posted by: =
=
Chris and other interested members,
You make a very good point about starting "small" and locally. I've spent t=
he last 20 years writing books on learning bird song and recording bird son=
gs, by way of illustrating my descriptions. My website www.birdsongidentifi=
cation gives a glimpse into some of it. I have already brought it to Ben's =
attention off list. I would add one thing to what you say. Phonetics and mn=
emonics (what the bird is "saying"), are not just telling us "what" the bir=
d is saying. Those who have suggested that you can't describe bird songs in=
words, I would say, are missing this point. These tools don't have to repl=
icate our spoken language. I find them extremely helpful in the teaching an=
d the learning.
As well as representing what a bird "says", they also give us an idea of ho=
w long the song (or phrase) is, how fast or slow it is, or the emphasis on =
certain syllables, as well as other nuances of the specific song. The roost=
er does not say "COC-A-DOODLE-DOO", but it gives us a good idea of the leng=
th of the song, the general breakdown of syllables, and italics could tell =
us to emphasize the last syllable. A short description of its features woul=
d help implant this song in our memory bank.....a handle for future referen=
ce. Even if the particular representation doesn't make sense to us, we have=
learned a lot about the song.
Too often phonetics are offered as stand alone descriptions, with little ex=
planation, and the nuances of the song are left up to us to decipher. Even =
a questionable phonetic (one that "doesn't make sense" to us) may be more i=
nformative than we realize, at first glance. That's not to say that it can'=
t be personalized, after considering what it teaches us about that particul=
ar song, if that is going to help in the learning process. Meaningful descr=
iption and explanation are every bit as important as the actual phonetic pr=
esented, if we are going to understand what the bird is "saying".
Sorry if I rambled here. I do have a special interest in this topic.
All the best,
Ernie Jardine
|