The differences between Koko and Keller in terms of language
Gorillas are similar to humans in many ways. Their sight, sense of hearing, and smell are closely relative to us, we share approximately 98 to 99 percent of the same genetic DNA, and they perceive the world in very much the same way as we do. They live in large groups, similar to how we live with our families, we have very similar life expectancies, and we even share some kind of sign language. Yet, in terms of language, gorillas and humans express emotions differently, signal phenomena differently, and think different. Therefore, even though Keller and Koko can communicate, and Koko appears to be a lot more intelligent than ones of her species, they are still different in terms of language.
Koko was able to understand more than a thousand signs based on the American Sign Language, and also approximately two thousand words of the spoken English, which is amazingly impressive for a gorilla. Yet, for Koko to be compared with human language, she must be able to signal and symbolize, rather than do signaling. Language labs are ran over and over on animals to find out what they are thinking about when making signs to implicate something. From the article “…”, the author talks about how animals can only sign and cannot symbolize. Koko can only respond to questions or imply something at the current moment, with one phenomenon, while human are able to do multiple. Humans can talk about other subjects that are not physically seen by them, while animals are not able to. Koko can answer direct questions, but can’t discuss with Patterson about someone else who is not present.
Some might argue that gorillas and humans are alike in language since gorillas like Koko could signal, recognize words, and communicate with humans. Yet, in my opinion, I consider it false. For primates to be able to be compared with Homo sapiens, they lack the one most important aspect of human language, the ability to speak. Koko could...