I just finished Everett’s book Don’t Sleep, There are Snakes, and a more thought-provoking book I can’t imagine. As I mentioned in my earlier blog, the author spent much of his life over the last 30 years with a hunter-gatherer tribe, the Piraha, in the Amazon basin. Everett began his work as a missionary and a linguist; his work with the Piraha changed his faith, but not his dedication to studying language.
What makes the book so interesting is his discussion about what the Piraha culture has to say about the derivation of human language. Everett is very clear: he argues persuasively that both Chomsky and Skinner got it wrong (in relation to language). In brief, Chomsky argued that language is innate in humans, and that there are universal ‘laws’ of grammar that are passed down genetically. Skinner argued that all language is learned and that genetics had nothing to do with it.
Everett argues that neither are correct. He presents a compelling case that language and culture can not be separated. He suggests that culture and environment play a significant role in shaping not just language, but how individuals see the world. From this perspective, grammar (a major focus on linguists for decades) is far less important than “culture-based meanings and constraints on talking of each specific culture in the world.” He says that studying linguistics apart from anthropology and field research is like studying chemistry apart from chemicals and the laboratory.
It is not surprising that I am impressed with this argument, given that it fits into my world view as an ethologist: that arguments about “nature versus nurture” are as meaningless as arguments about which is more important, the ingredients or the recipe, to the success of an omelet. (Starting with hard boiled eggs wouldn’t work out too well.)
Speaking of ethology, I’m reminded of how the sensory system of each species creates a different reality than that of other species. For example, because bees see colors that we don’t (we even call colors we can’t see variants of ones we can–“ultra violet” for example), their visual reality is completely different from ours. While we might admire the pure yellow petals of a composite flower, bees see a far more complex bloom with lines and stripes pointing like arrows to the nectar within. Thus, there really is no such thing as one “reality,” and Everett’s work reminds us that that is true within our own species.
The Piraha are only interested in events that were personally witnessed by the speaker, are unable to interpret two dimensional photographs, (practice and training helps a bit, but not much), use no numbers, love to talk but talk about a narrow range of subjects, and most amazingly, seem never to worry. They don’t even have a word for “worry.” This does not mean they live an idyllic life, not by a long shot. They can suffer terribly from disease, predation and romantic entanglements gone sour.
And this is why I’m writing about them here: Everett’s work brings up the question of “what is unique about being a human?” and “what do we share, and not share” with other animals, like our dogs? The lines are getting more and more blurry, aren’t they? Surely dogs live more in the present than most of us.. but how much of that is innate, and how much is cultural? I’d argue that most dogs are a LOT happier than most people… how much of that is innate, and how much cultural? And has living with humans affected dogs such that our culture has influenced their behavior? You’re probably aware of Brian Hare’s work on communication between people and dogs in which he argues that dogs are innately better at reading ‘pointing’ signals from humans than non-domestic canids and even chimpanzees. (I’ll write more about this some time, I have some questions about it.). Could it be that dogs learned to worry from living within a western culture? (Can dogs worry? Do they? Is “worrying” different than experiencing anxiety?)
Lots to think about. Meanwhile, it’s New Year’s Eve morning and I’d better get back to my pathetic attempts to keep up with my email before I take a few days off. We got a lovely light snow last night, the sun is shining, and I’m yearning to get back home to Jim, Will and Lassie. We are awaiting (at least Jim and I) an unplanned set of lambs from Snickers and Truffles, who were bred by some ram lambs when they scrambled over a fence downed by a fallen tree. I’ve been worried the lambs would be born when it was brutally cold and we’d go out to the barn to find frozen baby lambs. But I’m going to take a page from the Piraha… worry? What’s that?
I hope you have a thoughtful and loving New Year. It’s been quite a year, hey? I hope, whatever is happening in your life, that you are able to be ‘in the present’ as much as you can, and to savor the beauty that surrounds us all. Here’s a detail of the barn door in the snow . . .
Jim Priest says
Interesting post! It would be interesting to take dogs from around the world living in different cultures and put them together to see how they would interact?
Jeff says
How can I savor the beauty of the world when you keep recommending books? After finishing Bekoff’s book on play, which lead me to Burghardt’s book on play which just arrived from Amazon, I have now started Power’s book on play. In addition, I have Temple Grandin’s new book coming upon release and Alex and Me reserved at the library. I “need” to reread “For the Love of the Dog” and Panksepp’s “Affective Neuroscience”. I am rereading Miklosi’s “Dog, behaviour, evolution and cognition.”
My point is that when my wife and I acquired our first dog 5 years ago, I never imagined what a journey into the study of human and other animal biology would ensue. The questions of the differences between and among species is now one that perpetually fascinates me. I have come to believe we human primates are less unique than we might like to think. I don’t think that diminishes us, I think it makes the continuum that is existence even more interesting. I prefer the feeling of being included in the complex weave of nature to feeling apart from it.
On the subject of inter-species communication there is a study published in the current edition of Animal Behavior finding that the socialized wolves at Wolf Park outperform canis familiaris in the pointing test. I suggest that may support the proposition that culture does matter in acquiring communication methods/styles. Socialized (I believe we would say “enculturated” if speaking of primates) wolves perform differently than wolves raised under different circumstances. What other behaviors change when species become closely affiliated? Interesting, I think.
Jennifer says
Very, very interesting questions. I’m gonna have to take some time to do some serious thinking on these. Fortunately, with the break btwn semesters I’ll have time to give them some thoughts. I am intrigued.
Sang says
This is really interesting Patricia. I just finished reading Alex and Me, by Irene Pepperberg. I’m sure you are probably familiar with her work with Alex, the Grey parrot. Through her work with Alex, she discovered and shared with all of us amazing new insights into the way animals think, at least the way the avian mind works. Alex was able to not just learn words, but the meanings of those words, and the concepts behind them. It has been the predominate belief that the human brain was the only one capable of learning and communicating through verbal language. That this ability separates us from the rest of the animal world. But Irene’s work with Alex opened up incredible insights into the capabilities of the animal mind. According to common scientific wisdom, without a cerebral cortex, a parrot should not be able to make the kind of mental connections that Alex did. An example of this would be how Alex was able to grasp the concept of none, or zero. Or how he was able to come up with his own words to describe certain items. I can’t and won’t get into too much detail here, as I don’t think my explanations would do Alex justice. But I do recommend reading the book to anyone interested.
But this really highlights how much we don’t know about animals and how they think. And this of course applies to our dogs. We make a lot of assumptions about what our dogs can and can’t do mentally. But how do we really know? After all, when Irene started her work with Alex, everyone thought she was crazy. But the world has changed dramatically, and I think it’s naive and egotistical for us to assume that we are above the animals we live with. That we are somehow disconnected from animals and nature, when more and more we see that we are not.
At any rate, I know that’s not directly related to your original post. But I wanted to share that since we are talking about communication. And your post definitely makes me want to read Don’t Sleep, There Are Snakes. I’ll have to look for it on my next book run:)
Happy New Year!
Betsey says
Just a quick comment on the lambs–I used to have a flock of 200+ ewes, all scheduled to lamb in early March (for my pasture-based system). I went to the barn (actually an open shed) one morning in January when the temperature was 6 degrees and found a ewe with twins, both dry and nursing. I never stop being amazed at the wonders of this world.
Kaiser Soze says
Keep those great reading suggestions coming!
I always considered that what made us humans different was the ability to handle abstract concepts (like number operations). Now, the Piraha demolished my theory… 🙂 They are obviously the living proof that several of those concepts are not innate.
Happy new year!
Rosana Hart says
This article reminds me of when I majored in anthropology, back in the 60s, and got fascinated by how language shapes our realities and vice versa. I remember one article which questioned whether the straight line existed if a language didn’t describe it. As I recall, other anthropologists snorted at the very question.
I later raised llamas and wrote about them. I found my anthropology background helpful in observing their interactions, and I found my sense of what was unique about being human began to shift and blur, much as you describe. Now I only live with dogs and cats, and even there I find so much more kinship with them than with a lot of people I know… hmm, guess I’m veering off in another direction there!
Arukiyomi says
Just linked to your great review of this book on my own. As I say in my own review, the claims that Everett makes about culture and language being in a hierarchy with culture very much the determiner is not news to anyone who has recently entered linguistics as the last ten years have seen much growth in this area.
Anyway, my review is at
http://johnandsheena.co.uk/books/?p=435
Maggie says
Hello Trisha!
I enjoyed reading your post about the book Don’t Sleep, There are Snakes by Daniel Everett. I too, have just recently finished reading this book for a linguistics course at Michigan State University. I thought that there were a lot of interesting, and strange, things to learn about the Pirahã language and culture through the stories of Everett. One thing that I really liked about their culture is what you mentioned in your post: they generally do not worry. I think we could all learn a little something from these people in this regard. I was also intrigued by the point you made about Daniel Everett’s arguments about the origins of human language. He argues that you cannot have language without culture, and visa-versa. I think that this shows through a lot with the Pirahã language and culture. These people live in the present tense, and never seem to worry or think about the past or the future, and this is reflected in their language in that they don’t have words or “tenses” to talk about these things. But it makes me wonder about which influenced which. Did the people have this language structure first, and because they had no way to talk about past or future, they stopped worrying about it so much? Or did they care little about the events outside of the present, so they felt no need to incorporate this into their language? I think that this is the exact point that Daniel Everett is trying to make. He is trying to say that you can’t have one without the other, and they both influence each other simultaneously. All of these claims clash with those linguists who believe that language is innate, and that we are born with all of the necessary information to be able to speak a language. After reading Don’t Sleep, There are Snakes, I am becoming more and more convinced that Everett is on the right track with his theories. So much of ourselves is influenced on what is happening around us, and the environment that we are in from the time we are born. In my opinion, culture and language really do go “hand-in-hand” and they work with each other to create the human “product” we see today.
Kaitlyn F says
I, as well just recently finished the book “Don’t Sleep, There Are Snakes” and came to many of the same realizations you have. I had the privilege from a class that I read this book for, to have a live Skype interview with him. Daniel, in both the interview and his book, spoke much about the happiness of the Piraha and their welcoming and friendly personalities and lifestyle. Because of this great happiness the Piraha culture had, our class was wondering if Daniel felt that the culture was invaded when outsiders came in, and if this happiness changed. In the interview, Daniel said that he believes that the culture was invaded because other people were studying it, but again he was not the first person there. The Brazilian government had previously avoided the Piraha, but once the reporters started entering, Brazil got involved and this is now why the Piraha culture currently has some newer technology – such as electricity and TVs, new canoes, medical physicians, etc. Daniel spoke that the Piraha are a resilient culture, but now that Brazil has gotten involved, this is the beginning of some major changes, yet the Piraha remain happy. The Piraha were happy before these new advancements and they are happy with them. I also find it interesting that anther aspect of the Piraha life that Daniel spoke about was that there was no surplus in their culture. Every individual had to work for everything and that is just the way it was, from children to adults. No matter how hard the work was, the Piraha remained happy and thankful for what they did have. They are used to this and this is just their way of life. Another point about what you mentioned above is that Daniel really emphasized that language and culture work together as one and it is not just one or the other. So, the Piraha “no worry” and present tense language really works with their culture which is a potential reason why they have this completely different happy, worry free attitude from what we are used to.