Talk:Sue Savage-Rumbaugh

Attribution

A note to point out that, although this article is from Wikipedia, I wrote the second paragraph there and the rest has been completely changed. See the Wikipedia history. John Stephenson 03:25, 24 April 2007 (CDT)

Partial revert

I reverted　much of this edit because it introduced one factual inaccuracy and, in my view, went too far in making a claim that non-human apes have true linguistic ability. In detail: (1) bonobos are not closer to us than common chimps - they are equally related to us; (2) the claim that Kanzi's use of the keyboard constitutes linguistic communication, not just communication, is disputed; (3) I don't think the controversy just boils down to different definitions of language and evolution because, for example, Savage-Rumbaugh works in different theoretical frameworks from mainstream linguists, e.g. behaviorism. I will try to fill in some gaps in the article. John Stephenson 07:34, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I have reverted part of your revert, addressing all three of your points and correcting the inaccuracy that he is no longer alive. Yes, please add more material, and I will see to do so too. --Daniel Mietchen 08:23, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. The point you make about evolution needs expansion, I think. I removed the bit about the definition of language as I believe that is covered by the quote about behaviour (i.e. S-R sees language as a form of behaviour). John Stephenson 08:42, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

John, can you please try to link to the sources you cite? This would facilitate the evaluation of the statements derived from them. As an example, I paste here the link for "all it really is". Thanks! --Daniel Mietchen 10:39, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I took the page numbers in the article footnotes and the links to Google Books on the bibliography subpage to be sufficient, and didn't bother with the kind of linking you use above because that's a link to a search term rather than an exact, specific use of the term. For example, I put a reference in to Savage-Rumbaugh, Shanker & Taylor (1998: 63; 69; 77; 191) regarding "simple language". That link produces three pages - 63, 191 and 18 (in that order), which is not what I was referring to. See also the forums. John Stephenson 02:40, 17 September 2009 (UTC)