J
Jomann
Guest
Parrots can talk.
- Status
B
Benadam
Guest
Hi, Jomann:slightly_smiling_face:
yeah, I would say they can make sounds that sound like words.
yeah, I would say they can make sounds that sound like words.
H
HarryStotle
Guest
I guess that does show that you don’t need a human brain to make sounds that sound like words.
The question is whether donkeys have the capacity to make such sounds that apparently parrots do.
B
Benadam
Guest
I don’t think they have the physiology for speech but maybe the brain can form words?
pianistclare posted some info that suggests it
pianistclare posted some info that suggests it
- God did not endue it with understanding on this occasion, but only formed, by its mouth, such sounds as might serve to repress the cruel folly of Balaam. But he was more stupid than the ass
Last edited:
B
Benadam
Guest
I thought perhaps if Balaam’s donkey was using it’s own lungs throat vocal chords …obviously now that I’m thinking it out, it couldn’t speak even if the brain could form the words. imo
Peter said here that “speaking with a man’s voice” so I counted the brain out.
Some one else thinks it possible for the donkey brain to be able to form words.
M
Medawlinno
Guest
I totally agree - animals can indeed “speak”; just not in anything that resembles human language. This may sound a bit off the deep end, but it is something that we can learn to recognize a little of, if we are patient and know what to look for.
It’s always been a sort of interest, particularly as a linguist. I noticed this many years ago with a cat of ours that had kittens. The mother cat exhibited several specific patterns of meowing - each was used with the kittens to convey a very specific ‘concept’ - greeting, play, follow me, listen to me (behavioral), ‘meal time’, etc. After a while, I could tell what the cat essentially wanted just by the meowing pattern. Many years, and several cats later, these meowing patters seem to be rather consistent, as all our cats (as well as most other cats I’ve come across) have used/use virtually the same ones.
Animals do have their own “languages” -
honeybees have “dances” they do which tell their hive-mates not only where a source of pollen is, but how far away it is, direction and (I believe) even type.
A flock of birds will fly as one.
Animals have been around millions of years longer than us - I’ve always been of the opinion that their form of communication/language, if you will, is likely advanced to the point that it’s beyond anything we can even begin to comprehend (with respect to how it works, etc.) - think of what human language/communication was like a mere 10,000 years ago, what it’s like now, and what it might be like another mere 10,000 years from now.
Kind of puts it into better perspective.
No offence, but anyone who does not think an animal can feel abuse has never been around an abused animal.
My experience is that animals do feel and can express emotion; it’s just not always expressed in a way that we humans can easily recognize, but it’s there if you look for it.
Tis_Bearself
Patron
Those I know who study bears have identified a lot of bear sounds or bear body language behaviors that mean specific things for bears too.
T
TheLittleLady
Guest
Higher mammals can be taught sign language, most mammals communicate in some way.
M
Medawlinno
Guest
yes - that’s true - totally for got about that. I remember talking about it to a professor of mine back in college way back - always wondered why they taught them ASL instead of something more simpler like signing Pidgin English. A simplified grammar and way of putting simple words together to form more complex ones.
@tis Bearself - Interesting info on bears!
yes, that’s true - most do. Songs of humpback whales, clicking patterns (and I believe some song as well) of porpoise/dolphin, etc.
Last edited:
S
SuperLuigi
Guest
Maybe Dr. Doolittle is there. 
B
Benadam
Guest
Thnk you all for posting. After reading the thread it seems there is conversation among animals, if not speech. It doesn’t seem intellect was infused into the donkey of Balaam. What Pianistclare posted indicates it was included in the possibilities.
B
Blue_Horizon
Guest
Lets not overthink these things.
Its a story is a perfectly acceptable answer.
The ancients thought Scripture had to be literally true in these small things. The Church now acknowledges that is not necessary.
Ochkams razor may be used in this exam.
Its a story is a perfectly acceptable answer.
The ancients thought Scripture had to be literally true in these small things. The Church now acknowledges that is not necessary.
Ochkams razor may be used in this exam.
Last edited:
J
JamalChristophr
Guest
Do you think bears ever use profanity?
G
goout
Guest
A couple of things.
Nothing in the Bible is “just” a story. The prodigal son is not a factual piece of literature either, but it is not “just” a story.
Genesis is not a piece of scientific literature or journalism, but it is not “just” a story.
The bible conveys God’s inspiration, and so everything contributes to that as a whole. (Some passages are less moving than others for sure.)
The other thing is the oft repeated notion that our ancient ancestors were literalists and now we understand nuance and spiritual meaning much better.
This is not true at all.
B
Blue_Horizon
Guest
You are grinding an axe that isnt mine.
I suggest you read JPIIs posthumous reinstating of Galileo 1992.
G
goout
Guest
I’m not grinding an axe, I’m responding to your post.goout:
You are grinding an axe that isnt mine.
I suggest you read JPIIs posthumous reinstating of Galileo 1992.
Not sure what the Galileo issue has to do with this?
We were speaking about the ancients and the misconception that they were literalists.
B
Blue_Horizon
Guest
When you care to provide authoritative sources for your objections, or are prepared to follow up on mine, perhaps we can discuss things further.
G
goout
Guest
It’s a generally accepted principle in Catholicism that ancient authors of scripture wrote in various literary genres. What the ancient mind did not subscribe to is literalist retelling of history or science. This was obviously not possible, as there were no printing presses or tape recorders. That apparatus for recording history was harder to come by than we are accustomed to. The ancient Israelites were not “factualists”. Genesis for instance in considered Inspired story, or poetry, not science or literalist history (it’s historical, but not literalist history…there is a difference).
This is a long but worthwhile article to gain the Catholic lens of scripture interpretation.
https://www.ewtn.com/library/curia/pbcinter.htm#4
This is a long but worthwhile article to gain the Catholic lens of scripture interpretation.
https://www.ewtn.com/library/curia/pbcinter.htm#4
Last edited:
Tis_Bearself
Patron
I’m CERTAIN of it. If you get several of them eating from a trough at once they look exactly like large men eating peanuts or chips at a bar. Probably throwing in a swear word from time to time in their conversation.
Last edited:
D
discobot
Guest
Hi! To find out what I can do, say
@discobot display help.- Status