ANIMALS THAT TALK.

Hawera Star, Volume XLV, 22 August 1925, Page 11

ANIMALS THAT TALK.

SCIENTISTS “ LISTENING-IN ” AN ENDEAVOUR TO UNDERSTAND.

Both in America and on the Continent. new attempts are being made to investigate the speech of annuals, anu a nil inner of tho newer scientific instruments are now to be mobilised for the campaign—(writes Air-- William Beach Thomas in Oversea*). The phonograph was tried some years ago by an American investigator, who recorded on it the chief “words” used by monkeys; and lie attempted by reproducing the sounds to extract from tho monkeys (an animal always ready enough to “talk”) definite replies. The second part of the experiment was not altogether a success; but the inquiry helped to bring out the number of monkey “tones” and suggested that, apart from the more, obvious cries ot alarm or anger or pain or pleasure, thp monkeys were capable of noises meant .to indicate, for example, the discovery of dry food a.s distinguished from wet. Since that attempt, win was popular rather than scientific, the men of science, especially in America, have been pooling their knowledge oi the sounds of all sorts of animals, insects, fishes, bird* and mammals. ■ It is worth while recording some oi their more general conclusions before coming to the speech proper of the higher animals that we hunt or cage or tame. Most insects make mechanical vibrations in lieu of speech, and perhaps none of them .speak* by means of the mouth. Pairing beetles call by tapping wood (a* the well-known death beetle). A queen bee can stir a whole hive to a sort, of madness by a rapid scraping of the base of the wing against the sides of the hole in which she i. net. ' The cricket* scrape togeihe their coat* of mail, blit, as with tlr noisy grasshoppers, it is only the male who* have this power, though it seems that the note is not only a love note. Some fish almost certainly delivei sound messages, according to the anatomists, who claim that tho fist which have the best means of speaking have also tlie best eys.. More than thi*, observers claim that tin shoals a.re kept together by sound, a.nc that fish swim through thick water U meet one another on hearing the summons.

Birds have a considerable repertory of words. It is a liberal education t watch the young of the lapwing o' green plover. Immediately they- hea." one particular note every- baby instantly. squats, and, eo far as it can. disappear* into it* environment. Th sound is even more distinct than ili chuckle ot a lien calling her chicks o the fussy summons of the cock wher he lias found a, tit-bit. If all these animal* can comnutni cate by sounds that, are at any rate very near akin to speech, wo shcuh surely expect the bigger mammals, o-so-called, higher animals, to be able U talk in a more real sense. it is noonly little children in popular senti mental pictures who look up to a. bn dog and a*L “Can you talk?” Few subjects are more often discussed, io example, by the keepers of animals in zoological gardens; ami almost everyone who own* a, dog at least half believe* that the mem and the dog ear understand on- rr-.iolhei- s upeecn.

Ic is generally held that the mod ah)!)!' of almost nil domestic, animals h“the eat tlmib walks by himself’’; but l know one person who may ho. said t< he able to talk wi.tli cabs, and to tallwith docs about cabs. To the ordinary “miaou,” how over mimetic it mat sound, neither eat nor dog responded Indeed. neither showed the slighto.y sigzi of having heard the noise. Bn' one person had the poculiai' gift p 1 making a more vibrant “miaou ’ in. the throat, almost ventriloquially. and the word instantly produced jealous j retort from the spaniel and a friendly movement from the cat. Some naturalist's have learned the art of animal .speech with remarkable success. One of the best is Mr, Thompson, Setoe . He can ne*.v ojih rrumicj hiauv anima.ls, such its wolf c.b: mhose. with a fideli tv tied persnauea the human ear, hut deceive tlm vo’-v elect, or, in other' word'd call and challenge the animals whose speech he has learnt. Tlie art of this .sort- of speech is not uncommon among naturalists

and hunters, especially m North America. Mo-sb Canadian hunters of the Noiith-wost can call a bull moose if the conditions are right. Without any effort at shouting a skilled mimic can. -mater the bull hear —so acute are his senses—at a. distance of five miles or more, and bring him up close by repetition of .a gradation of plaintive whines and cries. One ot tho greatest observers or foxes lays it down that the principal means of intercommunication are by the voice, and lie described its various “yaps” and barks and “churns.”, and “shrill squalls.” Whereas in bird* (which have a most elaboiu-te singing and talking machine —the syrinx—in the throat) most of the calls and all the songs are male, on the other hand, the male and female of the greater mammals are both labout equally talkative, as we all know who have kept dogs. But though a dog’* range of sounds is very considerable, and his understanding of human mentality' startling, he does not really attain to what wet may call speech. Sometimes you would swear that ho strains to •speak and is painfully affected by hks inability. How a favourite dog will wrestle and struggle in attitude and manner and voice to respond to your speech! and if you go on talking he will whine with growing emotion 'that becomes almost too much for him.. He appear* to* be conscious of his failure to reach vour height and to express hi* utter disappointment. He cannot quite penertate the veil that .separates dog and man, or lift the weight off his own brain. “Or wouldst thou rather that 1 underistand Thy will to help me? like the dog I found O'nc© pacing sad this solitary- .strand Who would not take my food, poor hound, But whined and licked my hand?” The whine and the lick take the place of .speech as a means of communication between the two genera, though doubtless the whine and churr and squall and bark have a rather more real and articulate meaning as between dog and dog. it '*om©ti;nei'i strikes one with regret that a clop; should have the will bo understand speech and with simple instruction* tho skill to understand, and the bird only- the instrument to make .speech. In many a lonely Australian ixtation (he yellow-crested white cockatoo .speaks so clearly u> his owner that the sound almost serves for the reason ah ie response of another human being. And the cockatoo or parrot is a d Istinobly less perfect artist at the production of .speech than the % Nepaukee inir.ah, which 1 should put - at tho head of ail the animals' that can. utter human words. The rniiiah has the transmitter ; the clog (and, indeed. the elephant, seal, bear, horse, or even mongoose or squirrel) has tho receiver; but we cannot say- that any non-human animal has both, at least in relation to .us. Articulate speech remains, man'* prerogative. Nevertheless-, the interpretation of the sounds and noises bywhich animals eoinaminioa.te with one another is a subject very well worth study, and it is a department of biology’ that is now arousing no little curiosity. We ought to possess a record, for example, of the more diss tiiKitivc Simian words, as g preliminary to a deeper penetration into the creature’s montali:ty-. “All tho talk wo ever have heard Uttered by bat or beast or bird— Hide or fin or scale or feather— Jabber it quickly and all together! Excellent! Wonderful! Once .’.gain! Now we are talking just like men.'’ Aro they? Not perhaps quite like men, but very likely mucK more articulately than most of us have hitherto believed. After all, some animal voices the microphone can hear, but file human oar cannot. Most of u.s an we grow older fail to hear either tho Irak or that meet, talkative race the shrew; and it is tolerably certain that the ear coninually vibrates with insect noises to which all cf u.s are stone- ■ deaf.