Animal Communication: From Human to Monkey, from Insect to Systematics

This article critically examines sociology’s anthropocentricity and its current limitations in research on nonhuman beings, using animal communication and interspecies interaction as examples. The paper demonstrates, drawing on several key theoretical strands, how the focus of traditional sociology on human sociality can be extended to include nonhuman beings. To understand the state of such sociology, the notion of anthropomorphocentrism is introduced as an explanation of the field’s current position, reflecting a desire to go beyond the study of humans, but a reluctance to explore non-human entities without human-like attributes. The author describes existing limitations, proposes methodological steps, and explicates the epistemological and ontological features to be considered when including animals as objects of study in sociology. It is proposed, following the example of convergence analysis as a rigorous empirical method, to replace the transfer of existing human taxonomies with the creation of new taxonomies based on data on each interaction, be it between humans and animals, between animals of the same species or between species. The author thus stresses the need for an empirical approach to research on species and interspecies taxonomies. The article concludes that a move away from anthropocentrism and anthropomorphocentrism towards an expansive study of living creature communication is necessary to generate valid data, formulate conclusions, and construct theories in sociology. However, in making this move, one must be mindful of the limitations of borrowed human concepts and mechanisms in interpreting non-human interactions, which also impinge on the process and outcome of non-human interaction research.

1. Belov M.D., Erofeeva M.A. (2022) Epistemics Strikes Back: Situationality and Interaction Orders in Conversational Analysis. Sociology of Power, 34 (3-4): 50-71. — in Russ.

2. Klowait N. (2018) Reflexive anthropomorphism: ignorant ontology or ignorant ontology? Journal of Sociology, (1): 8-33. doi: 10.19181/socjour.2018.24.1.5711. — in Russ.

3. Latour B. (2007) On interobjectivity. Sociological Review, 6 (2): 79-98. — in Russ.

4. Latour B. (2014) Reassembling the social: an introduction to actor-network theory, Higher School of Economics Publishing House. — in Russ.

5. Chomsky N. (1962) Syntactic structures. In V.A. Zvegintsev (Ed.) New in Linguistics, Vol. II: 412-527. Publishers of Foreign Literature. — in Russ.

6. Arathoon J. (2023) Using ethnomethodology as an approach to explore human– animal interaction. Area, 00: 1–7.

7. Beisel U., Kelly A.H., Tousignant N. (2013) Knowing Insects: Hosts, Vectors and Companions of Science. Science as Culture, 22(1): 1–15.

8. Boyden S., Miller S., Newcombe K., O’Neill B. (1981) The Ecology of a City and its People: The Case of Hong Kong, Canberra: Australian National University Press.

9. Bronfenbrenner U. (1979) The Ecology of Human Development, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

10. Call J., Tomasello M. (Eds.). (2007) The gestural communication of apes and monkeys, New York: LEA.

11. Cartmill E.A., Beilock S., Goldin-Meadow S. (2012) A word in the hand: action, gesture, and mental representation in humans and non-human primates. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, Series B., 367: 129-143.

12. Cartmill E.A., Byrne R.W. (2010) Semantics of orangutan gesture: Determining structure and meaning through form and use. Animal Cognition, 13: 793–804.

13. Chomsky N. (1986) Knowledge of Language: Its nature, origin and use, Praeger.

14. Chomsky N. (1972) Language and mind. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

15. Chomsky N. (2008) “On the Myth of Ape Language.” Interview by Matt Aames Cucchiaro. available from: https://web.archive.org/web/20150930045521/http://www. chomsky.info/interviews/2007----.htm de

16. Waal F. (2000) Chimpanzee Politics: Power and Sex Among Apes, Revised ed. Baltimore: JHU Press.

17. Duranti A. (1997) Universal and Culture-Specific Properties of Greetings. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 7: 63-97.

18. Frisch K. von (1966) The Dancing Bees: An Account of the Life and Senses of the Honey Bee, New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.

19. Fröhlich M. (2017) Taking turns across channels: Conversation-analytic tools in animal communication. Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews, 80: 201-209.

20. Frhlich M., Kuchenbuch P., Müller G., Fruth B., Furuichi T., Wittig R.M., Pika S. (2016) Unpeeling the layers of language: Bonobos and chimpanzees engage in cooperative turn-taking sequences. Sci. Rep., 6: 25887.

21. Genty E., Breuer T., Hobaiter C., Byrne R.W. (2009) Gestural communication of the gorilla (Gorilla gorilla): Repertoire, intentionality and possible origins. Animal Cognition, 12: 527–546.

22. Goodwin C. (2018) Intertwined knowing, In Co-operative Action (pp. 93-104). Cambridge University Press.

23. Heritage J. (2012) The epistemic engine: Sequence organization and territories of knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 45 (1): 30-52.

24. Kita S. (Ed.). (2003) Pointing: Where language, cognition, and culture meet, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

25. Kohn E. (2013) How Forests Think: Toward an Anthropology beyond the human, Berkeley: University of California Press.

26. Lawrence Wieder D. (1980) “Behavioristic operationalism and the lifeworld: chimpanzees and chimpanzee researchers in face-to-face interaction”, Sociological Inquiry, 50(3-4): 75–103.

27. Levinson S.C. (2006) On the human “interaction engine”. In N. J. Enfield, & S.C. Levinson (Eds.) Roots of human sociality: Culture, cognition and interaction (pp. 39-69). Oxford: Berg.

28. Logue D., Stivers T. (2012) Squawk in interaction: a primer of conversation analysis for students of animal communication. Behaviour,149: 1283-1298. 10.2307/41720615.

29. McNeill J.R. (2010) Mosquito Empires: Ecology and War in the Greater Caribbean: 1620–1914. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

30. Mondada L. (2018) Multiple Temporalities of Language and Body in Interaction: Challenges for Transcribing Multimodality. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 51(1): 85–106. doi:10.1080/08351813.2018.1413

31. Mondada L., Meguerditchian A. (2022) Sequence organization and embodied mutual orientations: openings of social interactions between baboons. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 2022: 377 (1859).

32. Mondémé C. (2016) Extension de la question de “l’ordre social” aux interactions hommes/animaux. une approche ethnométhodologique. L’Année sociologique, 66: 319- 350. https://doi.org/10.3917/anso.162.0319

33. Mondémé C. (2022) Why study turn-taking sequences in interspecies interactions? Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 52(1): 67– 85. https://doi. org/10.1111/jtsb.12295

34. Mller M. (2015) Assemblages and actor-networks: Rethinking socio-material power, politics and space. Geography Compass, 9(1): 27-41. doi:10.1111/gec3.12192

35. Patterson F. (2019) Linguistic Capabilities of a Lowland Gorilla. In Sign Language And Language Acquisition In Man And Ape (pp. 212-258). doi:10.4324/9780429306020-8.

36. Patterson F., Linden E. (1981/2002) The Education of Koko, The Gorilla Foundation.

37. Ramsden E., Adams J. (2009) Escaping the Laboratory: The Rodent Experiments of John B. Calhoun & Their Cultural Influence. Journal of Social History, 42: 761-792. 10.1353/jsh.0.0156.

38. Rheinberger H.-J. (1997) Toward a History of Epistemic Things: Synthesizing Proteins in the Test Tube, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

39. Rheinberger H.-J. (2010) An Epistemology of the Concrete: Twentieth Century Histories of Life, Durham: Duke University Press.

40. Rossano F. (2013) Sequence organization and timing of bonobo mother-infant interactions. Interaction Studies, 14: 160-189.

41. Rossano F., Liebal K. (2014) Requests’’ and “offers” in orangutans and human infants. Requesting in social interaction. Studies in Language and Social interaction, 26: 333-362.

42. Sacks H. (1984) Notes on methodology. In J.M. Atkinson, J. Heritage (Eds.) Structures of Social Action, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 21-27.

43. Sebeok T.A. (1988) “Animal” in biological and semiotic perspective. In T. Ingold (Ed.) What is an Animal? (pp. 63-76). London: Unwin Hyman.

44. Speer S.A., Stokoe E. (2011) Conversation and gender, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

45. Stivers T., Sidnell J. (2013) Introduction. In J. Sidnell, & T. Stivers (Eds.), Handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 1-8). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

46. Suchman L. (1987) Plans and situated actions: The problem of human-machine communication, Cambridge University Press.

47. Tecumseh Fitch W., Hauser M.D., Chomsky N. (2005) The evolution of the language faculty: Clarifications and implications. Cognition, 97: 179-210.

48. Thomas E.L. (2016) Anthropocentric rhetorical discourse in popular science writing about human evolution. Theology and Science, 14(3): 340-360. doi:10.1080/14746700.201 6.1191882

49. Tomasello M. (2008) Origins of human communication, MIT Press.

50. Tomasello M., Hare B., Lehmann H., Call J. (2007) Reliance on head versus eyes in the gaze following of great apes and human infants: the cooperative eye hypothesis. Journal of Human Evolution, 52: 314-320.

51. van Dooren T. (2019) The wake of crows: living and dying in shared worlds, Columbia University Press.

52. Ward B. (1999) Koko: Fact or Fiction? American Language Review, 3(3): 12-15.

53. Yount-André C. (2016) Snack sharing and the moral metalanguage of exchange: Children’s reproduction of rank-based redistribution in senegal. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 26(1): 41-61.