Language Blog

Part 1: After engaging in a 15 minute conversation not being allowed to use any version of a symbolic language I discovered many things…

         1.   Did I find this experiment difficult or easy?

I found this experiment incredible difficult! I was basically one hundred percent unable to get anything across during my attempt to communicate. Not being able to use verbal language was close to impossible. Yes, I could point and use very minimal hand motions but it was a bit frustrating not being able to be understood and wanting to answer my partner’s (my mom’s) questions and make her understand me in return.

         2.   What were the impressions of partners in the conversation? Did they alter their way of communicating with me because of my absence of symbolic communication?

I’m going to admit there was much frustration but we actually ended up laughing about it most of the time. My mom told me I basically looked like a “baboon” ( those were her exact words…) and we couldn’t stop laughing at my attempts to tell her what I wanted to eat in the kitchen and how I wanted her to make it for me. She was not using very much speech back to me since she knew it wouldn’t really do anything since I was unable to communicate back in response using verbal speech. She felt like she had to slow down her mode of communication as if I did not understand because in fact, I did not understand at all and neither did she when I was trying to work with her.

`       3.   Imagine that me and my partners in the conversation represent two different cultures meeting for the first time. Which culture has the advantage in communicating complex ideas? What attitudes might the speaking culture have toward the culture that does not use symbolic language? Identify individuals in our culture that have difficulty communicating with spoken language and explore how that affects how those who do speak interact with those individuals?

If my mom and I were from two different cultures in this situation, I think that she would have the advantage because she was able to use symbolic language and I was unable. Even if both of us were able to speak the same language, she would still have the advantage. I do believe though that if we were to do this for a longer period and truly be in the situation of having no way of communication and not make-believe, then I would slowly start to understand and pick up on the symbolic language she was using. I think that the speaking culture is more likely to have impatience and bad attitudes thinking they communicate better and are more intellectual toward the one that cannot use symbolic language. Nowadays, there is a large range of people that cannot communicate like the rest of us. There are those that have the loss of hearing and are deaf, those that cannot see and are blind, those that have mental disabilities and handicaps and have difficulty with intellect, those with learning disabilities, and people with damaged vocal chords and loss of voice, etc. I think it is so difficult for every single individual that suffers with these disabilities and cannot imagine how hard it must be for them to live their everyday lives. What is neat is that those who are normal and have the ability to hear and see while communicating effectively have the resources to help those that cannot. Sometimes it’s sad to see “normal” people treat these people with communication disabilities differently and sometimes rudely and impatiently… I tend to get upset when I see it. But after going through this experiment I kind of understand why it can be frustrating, although that is no excuse to make it known to another who is not privileged with the gift of communication.

Part 2: After spending 15 minutes communicating without physical embellishments, I found that this was pretty much impossible.

1.     Was I able to last for the full 15 minutes of using only speech for communicating? What made this experiment difficult for me?

I was hardly about to last the full 15 minutes, in fact I cut it about a minute short since I could hardly take it. The most difficult part was not  necessarily being able to vocalize my communication but it was the hardest to not be able to use hand motions or body movements. I felt so uncomfortable and helpless trying to communicate.

2.     How was my mom in this part of the experiment affected by my communication limitations?

My mom was very inclined the first few minutes – I believe she liked the challenge and believed it was fun at the beginning kind of like a game getting to figure out the end goal of what I was trying to say…but about 7 minutes into it, she grew rather annoyed and frustrated since she was completely unable to get anything out of what I was trying to tell her. She got bored pretty quickly and had to “suffer” through the rest of the 15 minutes.

3.     What does this experiment say about our use of “signs” in our language? How important is non-speech language techniques in our ability to communicate effectively?

I developed an ever greater appreciation of the fact that the use of “signs” in the human language is in fact a blessing. Body communication apart from verbal communication is very helpful. It gets the point across when words or other ways of communication cannot. Many humans are visual people and visual learners (myself included) and it helps me a lot when I can see visually what someone is trying to communicate to me. It is very important in our ability to communicate effectively in that it helps those that cannot hear or understand in spoken communication understand fully visually through body/sign language.

4.     Are there people that have difficulty reading body language? Describe the adaptive benefit to possessing the ability to read body language. Can you describe environmental conditions where there might be a benefit to not reading body language?

I believe that there are many people who have difficulty being able to ready body language and body communication particularly when it comes to people who are auditory learners or people who may come from a different cultural background or foreign nature. The adaptive benefit to possessing the ability to ready body language is a better way of understanding communication altogether. Speech and body language provide the means for one to fully understand without getting confused. There may be a benefit to not being able to read body language in a situation such as when you’re giving a public speech that is significant to you individually (giving the speech). Not being aware of the lack of attention from the audience through body language will play off as a positive thing in this situation since the speech-giver would be unable to understand that their speech may be boring or of zero significance to those that are supposed to be listening and learning. 

"Missing Link" Extra Credit Assignment

All research in this article is from the source : http://io9.com/5954898/humanity-never-had-a-missing-link-to-apes and http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/03/100302131719.htm

The sources from both articles believe that the term and whole idea of a “missing link” between humans and apes is false. Humans never swung from tree branches or walked on all fours like monkeys did or leap from trees to find a new home to exist on ground. Over millions of years, the transition happened gradually and “instead of believing our transition to walking as a ‘missing link’, it would be more accurate to say the transition was a long chain, in which one kind of life shaded into the other very gradually.” The fossil record of the relations are discontinuous, so in the gaps between fossils are easy to fill saying they are “missing links” even though it is false and impossible to prove.

I personally agree with these sources and their beliefs. First and foremost, like every other human being it is very difficult to believe and even imagine seeing ourselves as coming from apes and having similar mannerisms as them. The fossil record for the time period of the apes is sparse and it is said to be impossible that we will ever find a specific fossil to be the “missing link” so I will not get my hopes about it or spend my life searching for or tracking it. But it is interesting how we do have similarities and I was curious to find out when exactly the transition took place.

The main idea is that the term “missing link” is inaccurate because in fact there are several missing links – not just one. 

The Piltdown Man

In 1912 in a pit near the English town of Lewis in the small village called Piltdown, a young archeologist named Charles Dawson found a piece of an old human skull. This was a new discovery of the sort and Dawson took this as an opportunity to first tell the London Natural History Museum. With the help of Sir Arthur Woorward, they discovered the remnants of the skull’s jawbone contained human teeth. They also discovered that the skull was only hundreds of years old which differed from their guess that it was millions of years old. Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution believed that England was the birthplace of early man and this discovery proved his point. They named the skull the Piltdown Man and many throughout the world were aware of the discovery. Many in the science community questioned how and when someone could do such a thing… many suspected Dawson, Woodward and Hinton.

There were some human faults that affected the reputation of the scientific process Those involved in the hoax allowed it to drag out for such a long period of time. Dawson was greedy and just wanted his name and reputation to excel. His ego and desire for fame and recognition sacrificed the reputation of his discovery in the first place. I believe the same thing happened to Woodward as well which made things worse since he was held on a higher pedestal than Dawson because of his great reputation. Neither men were the cause and creators of the fraud – Hinton was the prime suspect – but the question is … Why did so many scientists allow this case and discovery to go untested for so long? The prideful heart and desire for power is what’s to blame in all of this.

There were a few positive aspects of the scientific process with the revealing of the skull to be a fraud. One of which was that scientists must check over and over again the results and data to call it absolute truth. It is wise to be one hundred percent sure before revealing it to the public. The fluorine test revealed that the items were not millions of years old and they determined along with this discovery that the bones had been boiled and stained to make them look older and aged. Another positive discovery was that the jaw bone part of the skull was a female ape. I guess you learn from your mistakes and that was definitely the case in this situation.

It is not possible to remove the “human” factor from science to reduce the chance of errors like this one from happening again. As humans, we are able to educate ourselves in science and grow in knowledge so I would not want to remove the human factor. Because of the Piltdown Fraud, it shows that humans have faults and make errors but the scientific method does provide the missing key to preventing errors and making mistakes by being thorough and taking time.

The lesson that I can take from this whole historical event regarding taking information at face value from unverified sources is to never limit your beliefs and opinions by what you simply hear. It is wise to see with your own eyes the evidence and know the facts rather than simply absentmindedly believe. In this situation, I am clearly not a scientist so I could not have gone and examined the skull. But if I were, I would have wanted proof and I would have wanted to be hands-on rather than just believing what I was hearing through the grapevine. It is sometimes hard to decipher what is a fact and what is just a belief when someone of authority and higher status is telling me what they believe. But, it never hurts to use discernment!

Week 4: Primates

1. Lemurs:

A) Locomotor patterns: Lemurs have shorter arms so they have a bit of a hard time navigating on all fours but they are arboreal/terrestrial quadrupeds which means that they are creatures that walk on all fours. Lemurs have tails that help them balance while walking as well as helps them swing throughout the branches in the forests in which they live. 

B) Living conditions/environment – Lemurs spend a majority of their time living in trees in the area which they live – which is typically in a rainforest or some sort of forest.

C) Influence – What I found neat about the lemurs is the way they move about. It is interesting how they use their tails to swing from branches in trees and walk on all fours with their tails sticking straight up. Lemurs have not had much change in their make-up since they are in their own world in Madagascar and this has caused them to stay the same for many years.

 

2. Spider Monkeys

A)   Locomotor patterns: There is a reason why they earned the name “spider monkey” and this is mainly because of their locomotor patterns. Spider monkeys navigate from tree to tree like a spider by the way they hang from branches while dangling all of their limbs, but also move from tree to tree like monkeys do swinging using their arms, legs, and tails. At the end of the tail of the spider monkey, there is a patch of skin which is there to help them grasp and swing throughout the branches.

B)   Living conditions/environment: Spider monkeys live in forests where there are lots of trees. The majority of spider monkeys are said to be located in central and south America in the rainforests as well as Mexico.

C)   Influence: Spider monkeys are very experienced in the areas in which they live. They are smart enough to know to stay up high in order to avoid their predators and live in the trees. This gives them an advantage to flee and run if needed.

 

3. Baboons

A)   Locomotor patterns: Baboons prefer ground life, rather than swinging and living up in the trees. They do however climb trees and go up them for certain reasons like to gather food or hide from predators. They are built similar to the spider monkeys in that they have long arms and legs.

B)   Living conditions/environment: Baboons live on the ground and unlike spider monkeys, they prefer dry land, not rainforests. They are most common in Africa.

C)   Influence: Baboons are content living on the ground looking out for themselves. They do what is needed in order to survive like look for food and water, shelter, and staying clear of predators. They have made an easy way of life and are adaptable to their surroundings.

4.  Gibbons

A)   Locomotor patterns: Gibbons are unique and don’t fit your typical “monkey” appearance. Unlike others, gibbons do not have tails and use mainly their hands and fingers to swing from branches up in the trees. They live and make their homes in the trees. Gibbons do not have opposable thumbs and their arms are what keep them balanced, not their tails.

B)   Living conditions/environment: Gibbons live in the tropical rainforests and jungles, particularly in Asia and Africa. They live up in the trees and have an easy way of life that is good for survival.

C)   Influence: Gibbons are incredibly good and low maintenance when it comes to their surroundings. They do what is needed to survive and are adaptable to whatever they come into contact with.

 

5) Chimpanzee

A)   Locomotor patterns: Chimpanzees are big on the use of their arms and do not have tails. They typically have shorter legs and longer arms which is good for swinging. They balance their time up in the trees and staying on the ground. Their arms help them balance while walking on all fours or on their two feet since they do not have tails.

B)   Living conditions/environment: Chimpanzees live all throughout Africa and you can typically find them in rainforests, jungles, or grasslands throughout certain areas that possess lots of trees.

C)   Influence: Chimpanzees are strong-willed creatures and spend an equal amount of time on the ground and up in the trees. They are a very clever species and know what to do in order to survive.

 

In conclusion, after studying these certain types of primates, I have found that the larger and more aggressive/clever species are better off in terms of survival. There are many similarities between each primate, yet they are so different at the same time -- both physically and mentally. Primates know when to flee from their predators and how to survive, such as climbing the trees to get away or during heavy rainfall. Environment is key when it comes to the survival as well as development of primates. 

Week 3 Blog Post

Two species that possess the homologous trait are frogs and lizards. Both have a body structure with the same genetic bases, which was inherited from a common ancestor. The limbs may look pretty different on the outside and vary in function but they have similar skeletal structures. Since both have different functions, this makes them possess homologous structures. Because of their similar structures, this suggests that both species evolved from a similar/common ancestor.

Two species that possess the analogous trait are bats and birds. Not the species themselves, but their wings. They serve the same function in each species but evolved independently rather than from the same embryological material or even from the same structures in a common ancestor. Butterflies and bats are a product of separate evolutionary responses to roughly similar functional demands. When it comes to the ancestry of the bat and the butterfly, each developed their wings separately and independently. Therefore, the common ancestor of each species did possess the analogous trait and they are each a result of separate evolutionary responses.  The have the same function, but not necessarily the same ancestry. 

Protein Synthesis : Blog Post

ATTCTACACCTTAGAGGGGAACGTCTGAAGTGTTAGCTGCATCCGAA

The Influence of Alfred Russel Wallace on Darwin

Alfred Russel Wallace had the greatest influence over Charles Darwin through his developing theory of Natural Selection. By studying and taking notice of animals and their evolution, Wallace contributed a great deal to science. Darwin and Wallace together realized that existence and survival does not come down to pure chance and coincidence.

“Darwin and Wallace both realized that if an animal has some trait that helps it to withstand the elements or to breed more successfully, it may leave more offspring behind than others. On average, the trait will become more common in the following generation, and the generation after that.”  http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/history_14

The most important discovery that benefited the scientific community the most as Darwin wrestled with the idea of natural selection was when Darwin began to notice and spend time observing pigeons. Together, Wallace and Darwin found that natural selection can produce “new types of body parts, from wings to eyes” through the observing of these pigeons.

I believe that Darwin may have been able to develop the idea of natural selection on his own and without the influence of Wallace. They noticed that not only animals but plants also change over periods of time through evolution.

The Church and the people in it believed that God created the world and not science/evolution. They believed also that man did not come from animals but that they were created by God just like the rest of the world and the things in it. Darwin’s book “On the Origin of Species” proved that evolution could be proved through science and that humans are evolved forms of animals. The attitudes of the church did not discourage Darwin or force him to shut down his study. He kept his belief the same.