Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)
Monday, November 5, 2007 | Science : In the News | print version Print | Comments

Document Washoe, the sign-language chimp dies

by CNN

Thanks to Zachary Kroger for the link.

Reposted from:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science/10/31/signing.chimp.dies.ap/index.html

STORY HIGHLIGHTS
- Washoe was said to be the first non-human to acquire human language
- Keepers said she had a vocabulary of about 250 words
- Critics say she imitated sign language, but didn't really have language skills

washoeSPOKANE, Washington (AP) -- Washoe, a female chimpanzee said to be the first non-human to acquire human language, has died of natural causes at the research institute where she was kept.

Washoe, who first learned a bit of American Sign Language in a research project in Nevada, had been living on Central Washington University's Ellensburg campus since 1980. Her keepers said she had a vocabulary of about 250 words, although critics contended Washoe and some other primates learned to imitate sign language, but did not develop true language skills.

She died Tuesday night, according to Roger and Deborah Fouts, co-founders of The Chimpanzee and Human Communications Institute on the campus. She was born in Africa about 1965.

She was taken to the veterinary hospital at Washington State University on Wednesday for a necropsy. Her memorial will be November 12.

"Washoe was an emissary, bringing us a message of respect for nature," Dr. Mary Lee Jensvold, assistant director of the nonprofit institute, said Wednesday.

The Fouts went to Central Washington from Oklahoma in 1980 to create a home for Washoe and other chimps.

"The entire CWU community and the Ellensburg community are feeling the loss of our friend, Washoe, one of our daughters," said CWU President Jerilyn S. McIntyre.

Washoe also taught sign language to three younger chimps who remain at the institute, Central Washington spokeswoman Becky Watson said. They are Tatu, 31, Loulis, 29, and Dar, 31.

Washoe was the only chimpanzee at the institute born in Africa and was the matriarch of the chimpanzee family. She was named for Washoe County, Nevada, where she lived with Allen and Beatrix Gardner of the University of Nevada, Reno, from 1966 to 1970.

Primate researcher Jane Goodall, in Roger Fouts' book "Next of Kin," noted the importance of the work with Washoe.

"Roger, through his ongoing conversations with Washoe and her extended family, has opened a window into the cognitive workings of a chimpanzee's mind that adds new dimension to our understanding," Goodall was quoted as saying.

In 1967, the Gardners established Project Washoe to teach the chimp ASL. Previous attempts to teach chimpanzees to imitate vocal languages had failed. Roger Fouts was a graduate student of the Gardners.

For Washoe to be considered reliable on a sign, it had to be seen by three different observers in three separate instances. Then it had to be seen 15 days in a row to be added to her sign list.

The Gardners tried to make Washoe's environment as similar as they could to what a human infant with deaf parents would experience. Researchers communicated with Washoe by sign language, minimizing the use of spoken words.

The Gardners said, for example, when Washoe entered their bathroom, she made the sign for "toothbrush" when she saw one.

But there was controversy over whether the chimp was really using ASL. Among those who doubted chimps could use language were MIT linguist Noam Chomsky and Harvard scientist Steven Pinker.

Chomsky contended that the neural requirements for language developed in humans after the evolutionary split between humans and primates. Pinker argued that primates simply learn to perform certain acts in order to receive rewards, and do not acquire true language.

Comments 1 - 16 of 16 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #85382 by Mango on November 5, 2007 at 4:16 pm

 avatarThis chimp used language like any trained parrot. Just because it's a primate and not a bird doesn't mean it's actual abstract language.

Other Comments by Mango

2. Comment #85406 by NakedCelt on November 5, 2007 at 6:43 pm

Not so; Washoe never mastered complex grammar and never discussed abstractions, but she was quite capable of conversing in simple sentences about her immediate world. Read Roger Fouts' Next of Kin. He does draw some possibly unwarranted conclusions, but if Washoe was no more than a trained parrot then he's not just jumping to conclusions, he's lying through his teeth.

Chomskyan linguists objected on the basis of their own signing chimp, Nim Chimpsky — but, as Fouts points out, Washoe was brought up like a child whereas Nim was trained like a dog. There's a difference.

Other Comments by NakedCelt

3. Comment #85409 by aquilacane on November 5, 2007 at 6:51 pm

 avatar"Washoe also taught sign language to three younger chimps who remain at the institute, Central Washington spokeswoman Becky Watson said. They are Tatu, 31, Loulis, 29, and Dar, 31."

If Washoe was just looking for reward as Pinker argues, what was the reward of teaching other chimps how to use sign language?

And if there was a reward, was it not gained through the use of language?

I believe it was.

Other Comments by aquilacane

4. Comment #85438 by Inferno on November 5, 2007 at 9:46 pm

 avatar
learned to imitate sign language, but did not develop true language skills


What is the difference between these two?

Other Comments by Inferno

5. Comment #85471 by eric.malitz on November 6, 2007 at 1:33 am

I think people make too large a deal over the line between imitation and full grammer usage. The chimp made appropiate gestures at appropiate times and combined those to describe things and situations.

Other Comments by eric.malitz

6. Comment #85508 by Diacanu on November 6, 2007 at 3:25 am

 avatarMango-

This chimp used language like any trained parrot.


Funny you mention the trained parrots, because it turns out they're not just little tape recorders after all.
They can be taught to associate words with concepts, and identify shapes, and colors, and the materials of things they haven't seen before, like wooden things, and plastic things.

Seems like abstract reasoning to me.

So, so much for "parroting", meaning blind mimicry.

Other Comments by Diacanu

7. Comment #85536 by prettygoodformonkeys on November 6, 2007 at 5:26 am

 avatarYes, but she typed and typed intermittently for 40 years and never came up with even a single sonnet, only limericks and haiku, and then it was 5-6-5 and with far too many spelling mistakes. And they were all about: "you nice", "want food", and "poo" - which I admit gave her some similarity with Postmodernists after Warhol, but doesn't confirm her work as Art.

Shakespeare, OUR monkey, was WAY better than Washoe. Complexity, after all, is the indication of a soul, and if there's no "soul", there's nobody inside.

;)

Other Comments by prettygoodformonkeys

8. Comment #85594 by JFHalsey on November 6, 2007 at 10:34 am

I admit that I don't know anything about Washoe, but I've watched documentaries on Koko, the gorilla who learned sign language, and I assure you she understood what she was signing. She even learned to make up new words to describe things she was unfamiliar with ("Finger-bracelet" for a ring, for instance).

Other Comments by JFHalsey

9. Comment #85604 by Zakie Chan on November 6, 2007 at 11:41 am

 avatarHey article submitted by Zachary Kroger... thats me!

Anyway, I was fortunate enough to actually "meet" Washoe and some of the other chimps a few years ago. I attended CWU, and took a class with Dr. Fouts. It was by far one of the most interesting classes I have ever taken.

If you havent, I HIGHLY reccommend you read Next of Kin. Its one of the best books I have ever read. He deals a lot with Chomsky's claims that they werent using actual language. According to Fouts, Chomsky would just change the definition of language so that whatever the chimps did, didnt fit into his definition. Sort of like "that not my MY God you are talking about" changed into "thats not MY language they are using."

Other Comments by Zakie Chan

10. Comment #85610 by arogop on November 6, 2007 at 12:03 pm

 avatarHaving two young girls, I beleive that if someone (or something) is able to tell you what it wants by either pointing, grunting, speaking, or signing, then it is communicating.

Other Comments by arogop

11. Comment #85650 by Corylus on November 6, 2007 at 3:34 pm

 avatarBlimy this takes me back. I remember hearing about Washoe as a baby psychology student.

I am not going to comment on the language abilities. Sodding complicated and I am not up on the literature.

However, I will note how animals can become a part of your life and your world. No matter in what way they chose to make their feelings known.

My sympathies to all those who dealt with Washoe. A loss - I'm sure.

Other Comments by Corylus

12. Comment #85714 by eric.malitz on November 6, 2007 at 11:29 pm

Prettygoodformonkeys- hilarious picture.
Corylus-well put about animals

Zakie Chan- It doesnt suprise me about chomsky, I havent read the book but I plan to. He seems to often redefine things to his liking, not just in this instance.

Other Comments by eric.malitz

13. Comment #85819 by lpetrich on November 7, 2007 at 9:17 am

 avatarAlthough chimps and gorillas can make lots of individual signs, and can use multiple signs to describe objects, they do not seem capable of constructing coherent sentences. Can they make subject-verb-object constructions?

I've read Koko's AOL transcript, and Koko did not even come close to constructing coherent sentences, and Koko's handlers did a lot of creative interpretation. I remember arguing about this with a believer in ape-language ability, and he claimed that Koko had been having a bad day. I was never able to get him to point out a well-documented example of Koko making full-scale language on a good day.

Other Comments by lpetrich

14. Comment #86211 by troyreynolds86 on November 8, 2007 at 5:47 pm

One wouldn't expect for a chimpanzee or a gorilla to be able to construct complex sentences or abstract ideas through sign language, and deeming this as being the core of language is both inaccurate and unjustified. The primary purpose, though not the extent, of language is communication. The ability of these other primates for such communication is at its most basic language, in much the same way as a dog is capable of communication by scratching a door or peering into an empty dish with pained eyes. Our language is our evolved trait, as is our brain's capacity for abstraction, but where we miss the lesson of Washoe and Koko is that thoughts, desires and emotions, and a contructive way of relaying them, is not ours alone. I think, in my most humble opinion, that to dismiss such, if in fact it is communication, as not being language we again fall victim to self-centered elevation of our species as being of the most regal design. Such plays well into the hands of those who trace their lineage to Adam.

Other Comments by troyreynolds86

15. Comment #86337 by fiagottpf on November 9, 2007 at 2:09 am

I found this video on the TED website.
It looks at the work Susan Savage-Rumbaugh has done with bonobos...

Enjoy!

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/76

Other Comments by fiagottpf

16. Comment #117676 by Y-bloc on January 29, 2008 at 11:09 am

 avatarWhen we speak of language we speak of human language. Human language that has no relevance in the life of a chimp or a gorilla. Language that humans designed over thousands of years with the aid of tools and vocal chords. When you try to teach a chimp to sign you are not just teaching it a word, an idea, a physical gesture that relates to these...you are trying to teach it to translate non-language experiences into language, or trying to pass it a language based experience and convince it to associate it with a non-language experience of its own and to commit that to memory. Not amazing?! Besides repetition and mimicry are how we all learned language, how we learned to social skills...We mimic and our minds respond to the reactions of those (parent/adult(s) we have mimicked, we repeat and confirm. So does a chimp. Sure seems to be the basis of thinking to me. People shouldn't get so spooked by the idea that chimps can think and sign. A cat can think. That doesn't mean one is going to come along and give y'all competition in the quantum physics department any time soon. And thinking and language don't have to be limited to the type of thinking language possessing humans are acquainted with. That would be like saying "it doesn't contain words so it can't be thought or communication."
Farewell Washoe. You were probably a pretty cool chimp.

Other Comments by Y-bloc
Reload Comments | Back to Top

Comment Entry: Please Login

Register a new account

Username:

Password: