Talk:Nim Chimpsky

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Primates Nim Chimpsky is part of WikiProject Primates, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use primate resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
It is requested that a picture or pictures be included in this article to improve its quality.

Can anyone enlighten me as to the ape's relation to Noam Chomsky?Atheistrabbi 6 July 2005 15:25 (UTC)

So far as I know, the the name was chosen as a joke on the part of Herb Terrace, at the expense of Chomsky because of the latter's ideological commitment to the impossibility of a non-human animal acquiring language. seglea 6 July 2005 19:41 (UTC)

God, he got fat huh? I thought it was a pic of a gorilla. Marskell 14:24, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Multiple articles on great ape language

This article is one of at least 16 articles on Wikipedia primarily about the fascinating but controversial subject of Great ape language. These articles have been created independently and contain much interesting but uncoordinated information, varying levels of NPOV, and differences in categorization, stubbing, and references. Those of us working on them should explore better coordinating our efforts so as to share the best we have created and avoid unnecessary duplication. I have somewhat arbitrarily put the list of 16 articles on Talk:Great ape language and would encourage us to informally coordinate efforts there. Martinp 18:02, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pepperberg on Parrots

If the text insists on mentioning operant conditioning on pigeons, the article should at least provide a link or xref to Irene Pepperberg's recent work with parrots.

[edit] "Retirement" section needs cites

This "strong indication" remark at the end of this section needs a cite:

The fact that Nim's owners were going to discard the animal to a research lab is a strong indication of the level of nurturing that Nim was given during Terrace's studies which helps to explain the animal's lack of development in comparison to more successful examples.

Otherwise it just looks like a parting shot by someone who disagrees with the research. Touchstone 16:12, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree it needs citation, but the comment does represent the opinion of numerous linguists. The thing is to find a written opinion and cite it. Let's leave it there for now. I'll see if I can get the citation or a citation of something similar. Lisapollison 03:24, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Nim was never "owned" by Herb Terrace. And his possible disposal to a medical research center came several years after Project Nim had ended. Finally, part of the reason that this possible relocation didn't happen was because Terrace, among others, campaigned against it. Consequently the potential relocation is completely uninformative with regards to "the level of nurturing that Nim was given during Terrace's studies" - the opinion of "numerous [unnamed] linguists" notwithstanding. See Eugene Linden, Silent Partners: The Legacy of the Ape Language Experiments, New York: Times Books, 1986.

Linden also says that Terrace was aware of the plans to sell Nim to the research lab for many months before it actually happened, and only became galvanized to action when a media outcry had already been raised. Though I do agree that Nim was being sold because he was very costly to take care of and funding to Terrace had been cut off, not because of any nurturing problems. In fact, Nim was very well taken care of while a scientific subject. Complaints about how he was brought up have more to do with the fact that he had 60 teachers in less than 4 years.

[edit] Quotes

Amazing that the most quotes on wikipedia is given to a monkey. My favorite is "Llama eat llama duck" It's a llama-eat-llama-duck world out there.

It's not particularly amazing actually. Most people mentioned on wikipedia cannot be given a full quotation of everything that they've said. Nim Chimpsky however was carefully studied and monitored throughout his progress. Nearly everything he ever signed was recorded. In particular, one and two word quotes would likely be excessive, and show little evidence of a lack of grammatical skill, but the three and four word quotes show particularly key evidence of a lack of innate grammar in Chimpanzees that is automatically available to the vast majority of humans. The repetative nature of the quotes, the lack of any particular ordering, and inconsistent use of any language structures except for atomic signs with relationship expressed solely by association... Nim Chimpsky's skills at language are surpassed in most cases simply by a four year old, and without any necessary forced study. --Puellanivis 19:48, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Source for the Quotes?

Considering that we had hoax quotes from Nim Chimpsky... is there any possible way that we would be able to substantiant and support these quotes? I believe I spotted the "llama" quotes before and found them to be dubious, but without any real background or familiarity of the issue, it's not something that I felt was appropriate for me to alter. --Puellanivis 19:43, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Should just delete this section. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. — Omegatron 23:46, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure that this is really the most useful information in the world, but it does make up part of the Science (1979) paper on Nim. If it's good enough for Science, why isn't it good enough for wikipedia? One thing that might be nice to do, though, is to make it into columns. There's no need for this to take up that much space. BTW, you can find the original paper here Nim Chimpsky Science paper. I think the quotes that are currently on the page are correct (I didn't see any llama quotes). In addition, reading the original article explains the apparent contradiction noted below, in terms of longest quotation (purely number of words) and longest "sentence" which does not count repeated words in the same way. Edhubbard 18:01, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The longest quote

Article is self-contradictory. In the body of the article: "Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you", but in the quotes list "Orange eat me orange orange me eat orange eat orange me me me me orange eat orange orange me eat eat orange me eat me" - which is correct? --24.86.195.69 03:24, 25 March 2007 (UTC)


[edit] consistency and theory

Too many quotes from Nim for such a slenderly theorized article! As a reader familiar with some of these controversies but far from expert, I found the article inconsistent, poorly or hastily written and, as stated above, self-contradictory. Would love to see some elucidations. I tried to clean up the grammar and assertions somewhat but the article should be shorter, imo, and more concise, and with better references as suggested by others. For an example of lack of clarity, it is not at all clear whether the article is on the one hand asserting that Nim and Washoe were raised in isolation and therefore failed to meet the standards of "educators" as cited or were raised in warm loving family environments...


Also the writer is apparently insufficiently familiar with Chomsky and generative grammar. Actio (talk) 18:00, 5 April 2008 (UTC)