Language in Primates
阅读材料
Language in Primates
Language has traditionally been considered a uniquely human trait; however, this assumption has been increasingly challenged. Research involving chimpanzees and bonobos reveals rudimentary linguistic abilities: symbolic communication, basic grammar, and even sentence formation. Kanzi, a bonobo, famously used lexigrams (symbols that stand for specific concepts) to convey desires and even to learn to comprehend grammar, suggesting a grasp of syntactic rules.
Yet, such abilities in nonhuman primates emerge only through intensive training and do not naturally evolve in primate communities. This distinction underscores a critical contrast: while humans spontaneously develop intricate language systems, other primates' communication remains tethered to immediate needs and lacks the generative structure necessary for producing novel sentences and ideas.
Some theorists propose that individual cognitive capacities are what constrains language development; others argue that social complexity plays a pivotal role. Language, they contend, may have coevolved with the demands of maintaining social hierarchies and alliances. While all primates, including humans, are social creatures, the fact remains that no known communication system among nonhuman primates rivals human language. Comparative linguistic studies may blur the boundaries between species, but they ultimately reaffirm the singularity of human linguistic capacity.
Question 1查看单题
The passage suggests that Kanzi's ability to communicate through language was limited in that it did not
查看答案
正确答案：C
Question 2查看单题
According to the passage, nonhuman primates can do each of the following EXCEPT
查看答案
正确答案：B
Question 3查看单题
The phrase "tethered to" in the passage is closest in meaning to
查看答案
正确答案：D
Question 4查看单题
The author notes that "all primates, including humans, are social creatures" primarily to
查看答案
正确答案：B
Question 5查看单题
There are four locations █ in the passage that indicate where the following sentence could be added.
Yet social organization alone does not seem sufficient to explain the emergence of a fully generative language ability.