TIL that in 1800 Alexander von Humboldt found a pet parrot in Amazonia that was the last "speaker" of an extinct language. He documented what it said, and his notes are the only trace of this language
https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/66479/parrot-kept-language-alive
15 Comments
Nepenthe@kbin.social · 22 pts · 3y
If the only remaining speaker is a bird and no one can understand the bird, I don't think this counts as saving a language from destruction. I don't see even a whole 2% chance we'll ever regain that knowledge. It's just noises now.
tal@kbin.social · 7 pts · 3y
Strictly-speaking, the article just claimed that the parrot was the last speaker of the language. It is possible for someone to be able to understand a language without being able to speak it themselves.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_speaker_(language)
So theoretically, the parrot could be speaking to someone else. They just wouldn't be able to respond in the same language. Though I suppose that if the parrot was bilingual, maybe they could use that language.
Nepenthe@kbin.social · 2 pts · 3y
The wording of the article does directly blame Humboldt once, and the parrot three times (if we count the headline).
Parrots do have some understanding of what they're saying, so I would be willing to accept that it was the last true speaker on those grounds, but they lack much (if any) ability to teach humans those words. At the very least, I'm not aware that it taught Humboldt anything. It may have, but if so, it really should have mentioned that.
So I'm left to assume the understanding of the words are gone, and it's the understanding that's the point. The turkish word for "milk" sounds very close to the English word for "suit," but that doesn't mean you've been speaking turkish all your life. All we're left with in the case of the Atures is mimicking sounds I have no proof we've defined.
The subject of passive bilingualism is a super interesting one, though, and I've never heard of it before. It does make sense and having very little command, I could see. You do tend to understand the words of others more/faster than you can speak them yourself, but you gradually get there through repetition. By contrast, grammar is the hard part and not liable to be picked up at all without work.
But they're...including no understanding in this? One can live their life with a fluent situational understanding and not retain a single often repeated word? How? Why?? Your brain would have to squirrel away one single word, surely, even if that word is "hello" or "shut up," or "come here."
Jesse@lemmy.ca · 18 pts · 3y
Even if it's just an apocryphal story, it's at least a crazy-interesting concept that I hadn't even considered before.
Akasazh@feddit.nl · 15 pts · 3y
Great TIL, however flawed:
They do continue on to make it seem more truthfull, failing, however, to diminuish the apocryphality. I mean they even link to an article that basically disproves what they claim ffs.
Zoroastyyr@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 3y
Birds are awesome.
DemSpud@lemmy.fmhy.ml · 6 pts · 3y
Lmao the other two comments in this thread are hilarious next to each other
Vilian@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 3y
lmao
TonyTonyChopper@mander.xyz · 3 pts · 3y
Goofy headline, incredibly doubtful that this wasn't fabricated
mikkL@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 3y
Great read! Thank you for sharing. It's incredible that they trained two parrots to recall some of the 40 words almost 200 years later. 🧠💥