↓ Skip to main content

Contextual correlates of syntactic variation in mountain and western gorilla close-distance vocalizations: Indications for lexical or phonological syntax?

Overview of attention for article published in Animal Cognition, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
Title
Contextual correlates of syntactic variation in mountain and western gorilla close-distance vocalizations: Indications for lexical or phonological syntax?
Published in
Animal Cognition, October 2014
DOI 10.1007/s10071-014-0812-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daniela Hedwig, Roger Mundry, Martha M. Robbins, Christophe Boesch

Abstract

The core of the generative power of human languages lies in our ability to combine acoustic units under specific rules into structurally complex and semantically rich utterances. While various animal species concatenate acoustic units into structurally elaborate vocal sequences, such compound calls do not appear to be compositional as their information content cannot be derived from the information content of each of its components. As such, animal compound calls are said to constitute a form of phonological syntax, as in the construction of words in human language, whereas evidence for rudimentary forms of lexical syntax, analogous to the construction of sentences out of words, is scarce. In a previous study, we demonstrated that the repertoire of close-distance calls of mountain and western gorillas consists of acoustic units that are either used singularly or non-randomly combined. Here, we investigate whether this syntactic variation provides indications for lexical or phonological syntax. Specifically, we examined the differences between the potential information content of compound calls and their components used singularly through investigating the contexts in which they are used. We found that the gorillas emitted compound calls in contexts similar to some but not all components, but also in a context rarely found for any of their components. As such, the investigated compound calls did not appear to be compositional as their information content cannot be derived from the information content of each of their components. Our results suggest that combining acoustic units into compound vocalizations by gorillas constitutes a form of phonological syntax, which may enable them to increase the number of messages that can be transmitted by an otherwise small repertoire of acoustic units.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Netherlands 1 2%
Switzerland 1 2%
Unknown 51 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 20%
Student > Master 9 17%
Researcher 6 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 13 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 41%
Psychology 6 11%
Environmental Science 5 9%
Unspecified 1 2%
Linguistics 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 16 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 October 2015.
All research outputs
#13,971,422
of 24,364,603 outputs
Outputs from Animal Cognition
#1,096
of 1,534 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#121,082
of 260,692 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Animal Cognition
#12
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,364,603 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,534 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.3. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 260,692 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.