|
C o m m u n i c a t i o n a n d M u s i c
Some issues of non-human animal communication. Kairi Kosk 1.
Introduction. In this essay I want to explore non-human animal communicative behaviour generally to see how much is musical behaviour part of their way of communicating and survival. For example: how much is a dog that howls with the radio trying to communicate or is that just his way of amusing himself or perhaps it's both? Or - are the orcas really having a "concert" or are they instead driven by their instincts (to let others know of their whereabouts or territory) and they are just communicating, giving information? Now at the times of multiplicity in culture, where everything is paid attention to and everything is related to everything and consists of many things, it is natural to say that music can be everything. It is communication even when the artist especially tries not to say or signal anything. Semioticians say that meaning can not be avoided, even in music. So could all communication be originally musical if all music is communication? Anthropomorphistic view tries to apply to non-human animals characteristics that are considered only human. Another question is - are these characteristics really only human? It seems to be natural to think so, but perhhaps one should reconsider the whole concept of music when looking into development of that concept. I think the issue here is that animals are not so similar to humans, but vice versa - humans are similar to animals at the basic level (is that again a bit too zoomorphistic now?). I'd like to forget about all the "morphists" and think of this issue in a biocentristic way - that human culture can be seen and understood better when connection to non-human animal cultures is observed too. The most basic drives are still similar in all the animals as we are said to have been developed from the same source. So there is something to think about - if it would appear that in non-human animal cultures most acoustic behavior can be considered musical or that most musical behaviour is actually just communication, and that they are using what we call music for purpose of survival, couldn't the same thing be the starting point also for the development of musical behaviour of humans? Did we have music before speach? I'm sure we had at least musical behaviour. And anyway - at what point it can be said that language starts and musical behaviour ends? Music seems to be defined quite well nowadays, especially clear seems to be what it is not. It is said that anybody can usually make the difference between music and non-music in human culture. Could the same be said about non-human cultures? My oppinion is that music of western culture for example has developed into rather explicit and complex systems, that often have lost the function it originally used to have: communication. I belive that the idea of music as we know it could benefit greatly from examples from other species, where musical behaviour is not so separable from individual's means of communication. On the other hand I'd like also to emphasize the role of play in behavioural patterns, that differ from animal's regular behaviour. Play is also self-rewarding, as is artistic behaviour. Could these two be related more than first expected? Also in human culture and its origins. Afterall - the word "play" is used for different meanings in several languages. For playing music or playing with toys, words, anything. It is more difficult to see also non-human animals being able to enjoy their behaviour aesthetically than to imagine them playing with sounds, perhaps even practicing in this way for some real situation to come. Well, it's not clear yet, how different non-human species sense their communication, or if there is any aesthetics involved. So far it seems that most of that communication consists of instinct-driven and purpouseful behaviour needed for their survival. There are only few examples of non-human animals, and these are mostly captured ones, influenced by people, who are said to show artistic self-expressions (drawing chimpanzees for example) - self-rewarding activity not primarly necessary for their everyday survival. Ofcource that doesn't mean that these examples are not important, but they are in minority. Here I start only with general material about it that could perhaps also be adapted to humans in general and in a very basic level behind our communication system. Most the questions above though are not discussed in this essay. This is more an overview for myself too for getting to know the different means of acoustical communication in non-human animal acoustic behaviour generally. The parallels with human communication are then very easy to come into ones mind, but I'll leave these topics for further studies. 2.
Non-human animal acoustic behaviour 2.1.
Communication in non-human animal cultures The
analysis of communication between individual animals has led to several
discoveries of the highest significance. Althgough something simpler was
initially expected, communicating signals have turned out, at the very
least, to include an announcement that the sender is of given species,
sex, and appropriate age, and is in one of a relatively few basic
behavioural states, such as readiness for fighting, fleeing or mating (Sebeok
and Ramsay, 1969; Hinde, 1972; Smith, in press). These messages also have
an intensity scale from weak to strong. Conspecific partners respond to
varying degrees and in different ways, but often appropriately according
to their own age or reproductive condition. Individual recognition of
conspecific companions is common at least in birds and mammals (Falls,
1969; Beer, 1973a, 1973b, 1975, 1976). A frequent element is the
flexibility and interrelatedness of the signaling behaviour; fairly
complex sequences are performed, with each step depending on an
appropriate signal or response from the partner (Griffin, 1976). The study of animal behaviour brings out the fact that one part of animal activity includes reactions of individuals to informative signals coming from other individuals. Signals are generally defined according to the physico-chemical nature of the stimulus or the sensory properties of the organs which act as detector-receptors. They are chemical (smell), visual (sight), electrical (galvanic sensibility) tactile and kinaesthetic (vibratory sense) and acoustical (hearing). So
almost every sensory system is employed by some species of animals for
communication with conspecies. Chemical signals, including pheromones, are
ordinarilyy detected by the olfactory system and are especially important
in insects, flying phalangers, rodents, cats, and monkeys (Wilson, 1975).
Surface waves are used by aquatic insects (Wilcox, 1972). Tactile
communication includes not only direct contact between animals, but
communication via vibrations of the ground or vegetation. Many groups of
fishes that use electrical orientation (Bullock, 1973) also communicate by
electrical signaling (Hopkins, 1974; Westby, 1974). Then there is Tanzsprache
(dance speech) of bees which is a very complexly received and expressed
message system. Sounds are extensively used by many groups of
invertebrates, as well as by all classes of vertebrate animals (Sebeok,
1968, 1972). Communication by visual signals too is widespread, but it
hasn't been studied as extensively as has acoustical communication,
primarly because it is technically more difficult to record and play back
visual signals (Griffin, 1976). Several studies of languagelike communication learned by chimpanzees have taken place. For example chimpanzees are able to learn sign language rather than vocalizations to communicate. The reason for this is suspected to be that the chimpanzees brain is capable of relatively complex communication but that this capability can be expressed far more readily through manual gestures than by vocalization. The extensive observations by Goodall (1968, 1971, 1975) have clearly demonstrated that wild chimpanzees use gestures and facial expressions that are effective but are difficult for human observers to analyze in detail. This shows that the physiological prerequisitions of a species are to be kept in mind when studying the communication of that species. Other animals are largely controlled by their instincts not their free analytic minds, as humans. Different acoustic signals are sometimes triggered by specific hormonal or other activity or vice versa. For example the roar of a lion seems to be not controllable by the lion itself. When started, his muscles are so tensed and his chest under a lot of pressure, so it looks like he must finish in a certain time and not before, because this pressure has a way of natural decay. Also a dog or a wolf doesn't seem to be able to suddenly just close his mouth when howling. Biomusicological aspects should not be left out when studying animal communication and it's musical values. But they are not dicussed more deeplu in this essay though. I leave it to further studies. Chemical
messages have the wildest range, and their remanence enables them to
impart lasting information. Visual information is more limited in range
because of natural screening caused by vegetation, and also by the
sensitivity of the eye. Acoustical message is clearly greater than optical
or gestural messages, though sound emission can be parially hindered by
climatic conditions. Acoustic message undoubtedly represents the most
complete and efacious mode of imparting information, owing to its facility
of diffusion, its resistance to disturbances and also to its possibility
of creating a vocabulary by a variation of its different parameters. (Dumortier,
1963) The term "language" is not warranted for animal acoustical signals, because they are not so elaborate as certain kinaesthetic signals (such as dance of bees for example). Bee dances convey complex associative information of a mathematical kind, in a symbolic form which is characteristic of language. Acoustic messages express, from a semantic point of view, only one piece of information at a time, although they contain, within themselves, other underlying information that is characteristic of the physical quality of the message (intrinsic information): the presence of an individual of the species, position in space (direction, distance, height), the sex of the animal emitting the signal and possibly individualization (Busnel, 1963). On the basis of available data it seems that the maximum distinctive signal sounds noted in any species of mammal or bird is about 20, though the number of signal sounds uttered by a species is related so closely to its social, territorial, and mating behaviour that comparisons between species with dissimile patterns can be misleading. Observers are also not in complete agreement as to what constitutes a discrete signal sound. Calls and songs may be classified, firstly, according as they are Social, Sexual, Domestic, or Self-Expressive, and then according as they are Aggresive, Attractive, Contact, or Environmental. They may be qualified further and also other qualifications apply. There are suggestions that for example birds have "wordless ideas", that they can express anticipatory associations (that brings to mind countless "wordless songs " by classical western composers for example). Next to man, birds have developed auditory means of communication to greatest perfection. Bird utterances can be both iformative and stimulatory. Phonetic animal expressions convey, almost without exception, subjective situations and aspirations. They are affective sounds which seldom tend to become objective designations or denominations. They express the idea of immediate time only, of a present situation or one which will occur in the immediate future. They cannot express abstract ideas which are unconnected with organic behaviour. But there are also self-expressive utterances - those which express a mood rather than serve a communicatory function, as when a bird croons on the nest (Armstrong, 1947). The sound signals seem to be also very specific to certain areas: there are different "dialects" among the species related to their area of living. For example the distress signals of herring-gulls' form Unated States don't frighten the herring-gulls of Europe. Also as regards different species, the signals of one species have often no informative value. On the contrary, for other species of birds there has been shown that the signals of one species could be percieved as such, that is to say that their semantics, being integrated, produce phonoreactions of the same kind in one or several other species. This can be caused by: 1. a mutual conditioning brought about by fairly close geographical association which is found in different populations 2. non conditioned interspecific response existence in the signal of common reactogenic characteristics to several species. 2.2.Quantitative
evolution of acoustical vocabularies. The number of signals which make up repertory varies with the species, but the higher one goes in the Animal Kingdom the greater their number. In
general signals of different kinds may be grouped, or emitted and used in
an hierarchical order, which very often depends on the transmitting
channel and the distance between the source and receiver. The use of one
signal or another also depends on the particular behaviour during which
they are emitted. Not all the noises or sounds emitted by animals are to
be considered as signals, at least until this has been proved. Sounds are
to be considered as signals only if they are related to a behavioural
pattern (also to another species) (Busnel, 1963). Song is a genetic
feature in the same way as are the morphological features. It is passed
unchanged to each generation, but the characterizing parameters are liable
to some variation. Individuals have characteristic acoustical behaviour
features. For example bird's songs do not also only differ from individual
to individual but individual characteristics are often retained for a
lifetime. The external factor may also considerably modify the song (especially
temperature). Some insects also use other means to produce sound, for
example with wings - the flight-sound (Sotavalta, 1963). 2.3.
Acoustic signals in animal behaviour. Classifications of sound emissions in connection with behaviour: 1. sexual relationships: attracting call, courtship, competition 2. family relationships: between young and parents and reciprocally, individual recognition 3. relationships with community life: group activities, alarm behaviour, food behaviour 4. sound ranging - information concerning location of individuals. 2.3.1
Acoustic signals in sexual relationships. Sexual calls and/or songs are important in overcoming the strangeness or antagonism which often preveils at the formation of the pair bond or before coition and they play a significant role in the progressive synchronization of the sexual cycles necessary for successful breeding. There are various utterances, such as those used in greeting, which probably have some sexual as well as status connotation (Busnel, 1963). Meeting
of the sexes (attracting call). Among the signals used by the different animal species to facilitate meeting and sexual recognition, the sound signal has an essential place, at least for species which are able to send signals. Courtship
song. Sound signals often play an important role here. Although courtship songs delay copulation, they would seem to have a hormonal role, for they enable genital products to be either emitted or matured. They also play a role in natural selection by allowing a better choice to be made. These different points of view relate though to partiular species and cannot be generalized. Courtship songs, which are mainly emitted by males, are almost always of weak intensity in comparison with call signals. They chiefly occur in species where sexual competition is relatively strong, and may intervene in selection. Sexual
competition. Rivalry signals - threat sounds play an important part in the lives of animals with powerful armaments. For example for certain species rivalry behaviour is very clear. The sexual call signal is replaced by a second signal, which has typically a changed rythm. In birds there has been observations of acoustical rivalry followed by attacks on territory which is limited acoustically (in spring or during the mating season, the males territory takes on sexual importance and, at this time especially, the male birds defend their territories against other males of the species by their songs (robins, nightingales), the essential role of which seems to be that of indicating and marking out their territories and attracting females. In case of some birds, it may be that certain songs correspond to an attitude of rivalry, which might be a substitute for real sexual competition. In birds call as well as songs may be declarations of proprietary rights and in some species a call-note seems to be substituted for song when such motivation is of low intensity. Addendum
French explorers between 1634 and 1761, noted that indians of the Menomini tribe, living near Lake Michigan, U.S.A., used wooden whistles to attract the does, by imitating the cry of the fawn. These indians also used, for other purposes, a wooden flute which they called "the lovers' flageolet", which was played chiefly by men in courting, the belief being that the sound has magic power to influence women". It's not clear if that meant a conditioned reflex thouh. (Busnel, 80) But a similar belief seems to be part of our modern day culture as well, as there are still people who believe that a musician "gets the girls". 2.3.2.
Acoustic signals in family relationships Relations
between parents and young Individual
relationships
Sound signals, especially in birds, also serve probably for individual recognition. Although as yet there are no precice experiments, numerous observations have been made on the subject, especially on what is called the "welcoming to the nest" reactions. It is probable that some forms of individual recognition are related to different acoustical signals characteristic of the individual, although associated with numerous other aspects. 2.3.3.
Acoustic signals in connection with collective life
Co-ordination
of the movements of the herd
Signals of collective information value, possible indication of despots or leaders. It is very probable that there are numerous signals of this type in the case of some birds and also mammals, where there appears to be co-ordination of movements in the group, for instance in monkeys, wolves, horses, cattle and elephants. Alarm
and distress behaviour
Numerous observations have shown that sound signals play a great part in alarm behaviour. Some alarm calls, especially those indicating sudden danger, such as the near approach of a swift predator, trigger an immediate reaction appropriate to the whole situation. Many birds utter shrill calls or screams when seized or wounded. In the higher vertebrates, very different signals can give rise to types of behaviour connected with a particular signal. Moreover, alarm signals can, in some cases, be preceded by warning signals, putting individuals or the group on their guards. For example black-tailed prairie dog has several characteristic warning sound signals that can be divided into: a warning bark, danger at the approach of a bird or prey, defensive bark, signal marking territory, muffled cry, dispute, derision (?), fear, battle warning, gnashing of teeth (competition?). Mammals, and possibly crocodiles, also profit by responding to bird warnings, for example. Mammals may also respond to the alarm calls of other species of mammals as a chimpanzee does to the orang-utan's warning (Bierens de haan, 1929). For example the calls and movements of Oxpeckers and other species which perch upon, or constantly frequent, beasts such as buffalo and rchinocheros alert them to tha approach of potentially dangerous creatures, and seals and sea-lions heed the warning calls of gulls. Deer return to a tranquil state after being disturbed when the normal bird voices are heard around. By imitating such noises an observer can reassure alarmed animals (Riney, 1951). Warnings concerning predators are the items of information most immediately relevant to survival which can be conveyed acoustically, so it is not surprising to find that predator-warning calls have been evolved to a highly specialized degree. They vary in the urgency expressed, in the specificity of their information concerning the type and location of the predator, and in other respects. The nature of the alarm cry uttered is influenced by internal state and external situation, by mood, the stage of the breeding cycle, the suddenness of disturbance, and other factors. Most alarm notes are inborn. The response is normally also inborn. Food
behaviour
As distress and alarm signals, signals relating to food can be very effectively used to call forward certain behaviours. For example for protecting certain areas from damages caused by birds or for attracting prey to a certain location. For certain carnivorous birds the noises or cries of their prey act as a signal. Nest-sites and roosts In birds, calls or songs, sometimes specially modified or specific to the situation, are often emploed to indicate a potential nest-site or more or less complete nest, and information also concerning the stage of the breeding cycle may be communicated. Vocalizations are also used by some species to indicate a communal roosting place. 2.3.4.
Sound ranging. Information concerning location of individuals. By virtue of uttering any sound a bird indicates its position to any listener equipped with hearing organs sensitive enough to perceive it, though calls vary from those which are definitely locative to others of such a nature as to reduce, so far as possible, betrayal of the calling bird's position. Birds are able to locate certain calls by exactitude. Locational calls may indicate the location of other individuals than the caller. Locational call-notes always carry additional content - not merely "Here I am" but also "Where are you?". The occurence of call-notes in songs of some birds support the view that song has evolved from calls. For example the alarm flight call is a major component of the Skylark's song (Thorpe, 1961). 3.
Issues on terms "communication" and "music" In this essay I listed several acoustic behaviour types according to their function. Aesthetic pleasure was not listed. It is still quite difficult for me to think of functionality and aesthetics in a connection. This should though be changed. Aesthetical pleasure doesn't have to exclude practical value of the observed object or behaviour. Somehow I have so much accustomed to think that there is hierarchy in things according to the relation to practical value. And the most valued is in this hierarchy ofcource things that have value only in themselves (absolute music, all other products of high-culture). The ghost of commercialization haunts everywhere and seems to change everything it touches into something low and worthless. Things that can be used for something other than aesthetical pleasure seem not so worthy. Well, no more of this! I should think vice versa - that actually there should be more practically useful things in the world that can also be aesthetically enjoyable. As zoömusicology so much seems to emphasize - surviving struggle can be beautiful and there is pleasure in every kind of regular communication. Did I go too far? Here I'd like to point out the basic reasons behind communication that I find applicable to humans as well as other animals:
The question of pleasure. It didn't occur to me before how much several animals have "free time" to be used for achieving all kinds of pleasures. Now, come to think of it how did I overlook it! The most important thing after surviving in wild (being not eaten and being fed yourself, not to mention the urge to reproduce) is seeking pleasure. Perhaps if it wasn't so hard for the animals out there they would have more time for this. No wonder captived animals are most eager to participate in different entertaining activities. Ofcource this is not completely true. Humans should be more like those brave birds who even at the time of busiest seasons have still energy to sing and enjoy it. I belive you can barely find any humans singing at the office nowadays. But seeking pleasure - isn't it the most basic reason behind everything (after the other mentioned above)? And this in mind it would be more easy to believe also in animal aesthetics. Even when word aesthetics doesn't apply in every situation. I tend to think more in a biomusicological or ethological way - every animal action (also human) is based on a physical reason. In here I also want to make clear the distinction between terms "music" and "musical behaviour". I would like to reserve term "music" only for specific areas of musical behaviour. Music has been defined so much that it is really not clear anymore what it is or what can be called music. So I'd like to call music only this what we know from our experience and leave the term "musical behaviour" to describe other phenomenas of which we can not be absolutely sure of (like in other animals). So when a wolf howls, whatever his reasons really are, I won't be wrong calling it musical to my ears because the sound he produces have certain qualities that we are used to think of as musical. Music, or to say aesthetic use of sound communication I want to be left to describe the surely and intentionally made music. So also when a child cries, it could seem musical perhaps to some ears but it's rules are not of music but of communication that could be considered musical too. From this point of view everything in world is musical. To the listener's ears ofcource. There are no universals in universe, all things are only collections of descriptions of different experiences. By making this differentiation I put myself into a difficult position becaus it seems to be a common practice to think of music as part of musical behaviour but also as the name of it. Also the idea of music as part of communication is sometimes overlooked. As it would stand on it's own. Perhaps musical behaviour is easier to consider as part of communication. 4.
Musical behaviour and music in society. Here musical behaviour (and music in humans) seems to have been from the beginning a system of social rules. Humans and other animals must have established certain roles and relations within the members of a community already before codifying music as a system of sounds and their organization. Martinelli (2002) gives three main forms of music-social life relation that occur in all animals:
5.
Conclusion
This whole subject is very new to me. I discovered that I had quite a limited view of animal perception in general and that for making this essay as I would have wanted I should have had much more knowledge of animals and their behaviour in advance. Also the question of the evolution of music and musical behaviour should have been more closely studied. At least now I have lot's of new subjects to get into. But back to my original question. So is there a line between musical and ordinary communication in non-human animals? By studying these different materials I found I came to a conclusion that perhaps is too early to say and needs more close observation. Perhaps I read the wrong books, perhaps I'm just too attached to my original opinion, but it seems to me that there is still not enough proof of "animal music". Some researchers were very convincing but for me it seems they were not considering enough biological aspects and reasons for different animal behaviours. I got the opinion that the aesthetic aspect in any communication is too much emphasized in expense of looking behind the curtains of real physiological reasons behind behaviour. Aesthetical pleasure too is caused by certain reactions in ones body and it is not a drive just by itself as such. It is not something that just appears in our mind. Perhaps next thing I will look into is biomusicology, as from there I could possibly get a better explanation of why certain acoustical stimulators have certain outcomes. Maybe then I find also a proof for my little theory (well, it's not patented, I'm sure everyone has thought of that) that what we call aesthetical pleasure in music consists actually mostly of pleasure caused by sound waves stimulating inborn processes of producing certain activities in our body. This seems so obvious when one thinks of those several examples from other animal cultures where acoustical (musical) behaviour causes sometimes very certain instinctive reactions. I think we have neglected our instinctive behaviour in favour of developing more and more sophisticated theories of how our mind works when actually it works largely without us knowing. References
Blacking, John, "On Musical behaviour" in Derek B. Scott ed. Music, Culture, and Society (New York: Oxford University Press Inc., 2000) Busnel, R. G., Acoustic Behaviour of Animals (Amsterdam-London-New York: Elsevier Publishing Company, 1963) Griffin, Donald R., The Question of Animal Awareness (New York: The Rockefeller University Press, 1976) Hauser, Marc D., The Evolution of Communication (London: A Bradford Book, 1997) Martinelli, Dario, How Musical Is a Whale (Helsinki: International Semiotics Institute, 2002) McLaughlin, Terence, Music and Communication (London: Faber & Faber Limited, 1970) Sebeok, Thomas A. and Ramsay, Alexandra, Approaches to Animal Communication (The Hague/Paris: Mouton, 1969) Tubbs, Stewart L., Moss, Sylvia, Human Communication (USA: McGraw-Hill Higher Education, 2000), 55-56. |