Background image

terug

The Observer, June 22 , 1980

 Can apes talk? This innocent question has given rise to a furiously entertaining scientific row in
 the United States. On one side are those who claim that they have taught apes to talk, or at least
 to use signs; on the other, sceptics who say that the evidence is as scanty as that which persuades
 some doting mothers that the first gurgles of their infants are intelligent conversation.
5 Angry words have been spoken - by the scientists, not the apes. The ape teachers, says one of
 the critics, have involved themselves 'in the most rudimentary circus-like performances' or at best
 have been the victims of self-deception.
 Such criticisms 'embarrassingly reveal (the critics') incompetence', the ape teachers have sniffed
 back. It is all splendid stuff for those who like scientists to behave like people.
10 The core of the argument is rather more profound. Those who claim success in teaching apes to
 talk point to the apes' ability to use words creatively , either to construct sentences (a key stage in
 the development of human speech) or to create new and often poetic images.
 Koko, for example, a gorilla trained by Francine Patterson at Stanford, is credited with having
 described a zebra as a 'white tiger'. Washoe, the original talking chimp who learned sign language,
15 called a watermelon a 'drink-fruit' and a swan a 'water-bird'.
 Such triumphs received extensive and mostly uncritical publicity until another ape teacher,
 Herbert Terrace of Columbia University, threw a spanner into the works. He had been trying to train
 a young chimpanzee called - a subtle academic joke, this - Nim Chimpsky. (The reference is to a
 famous scholar of language, Noam Chomsky, whose theories of how language is acquired by human
20 children is relevant to the debate.)
 For a while Terrace thought he was succeeding in teaching Nim to use the sign language Ameslan.
 But closer study convinced him that Nim's 'language' differed widely from the developing language
 of human children.
 For a lot of the time, Nim simply repeated the signs the trainer made. When he did create
25 'sentences' they tended to consist of the same few words repeated, as in: 'give orange me give eat
 orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you'.
 Some people believe that the ape-trainers have been taken in by a phenomenon almost as old as
 experimental psychology itself. This might be called the 'Clever Hans Syndrome'.
 Clever Hans was a horse who could do arithmetic. Asked a question by his master, he would tap
30 his hoof until he got to the answer, and then stop. He did it by watching his master's unconscious
 reactions and responding when a tiny movement of the head told the horse that he had reached the
 right number.
 So are Washoe and Koko just modem examples of Clever Hans? To say so implies that their
 trainers have been less careful than they ought to have been in eliminating unconscious cueing, which
35 may explain why they find the criticism so wounding.
 Most probably the chimps will have to do a lot better before the sceptics can be won over. But for
 the moment the animals have nothing to say; except for the chimpanzee quoted by Science as saying
 of the controversy that 'those who live in the academic jungle shouldn't ape the law of the jungle.'
 And even he asked for his name not to be quoted.
 
 The Observer, June 22, 1980