this post was submitted on 12 Jan 2026
78 points (94.3% liked)

science

23549 readers
256 users here now

A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.

rule #1: be kind

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 9 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ranzispa@mander.xyz 1 points 1 day ago

Wow, this guy loves tits!

[–] Gullible@sh.itjust.works 28 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Just want to remind people of Alex the parrot who had a strong grasp on English, could do math, and was very much a bird. Without any of the in-built brain molding that we, as humans, have for human language, Alex did pretty well. Given how common social behavior is among birds, I’d be surprised if none could communicate beyond “fuck you!” or “fuck me!”

[–] JohnnyEnzyme@piefed.social 14 points 2 days ago

had a strong grasp on English

I don't know if I'd go quite so far, but yes, Alex the African Grey knew an impressive amount of words and could directly demonstrate that knowledge via familiar objects. Koko the gorilla was also something of a contemporary IIRC, who could form simple English sentences.

RIP, Alex and Koko.

[–] porcoesphino@mander.xyz 12 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I think this is his most recent paper:

https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms10986

Here is the abstract:

Human language can express limitless meanings from a finite set of words based on combinatorial rules (i.e., compositional syntax). Although animal vocalizations may be comprised of different basic elements (notes), it remains unknown whether compositional syntax has also evolved in animals. Here we report the first experimental evidence for compositional syntax in a wild animal species, the Japanese great tit (Parus minor). Tits have over ten different notes in their vocal repertoire and use them either solely or in combination with other notes. Experiments reveal that receivers extract different meanings from ‘ABC’ (scan for danger) and ‘D’ notes (approach the caller), and a compound meaning from ‘ABC–D’ combinations. However, receivers rarely scan and approach when note ordering is artificially reversed (‘D–ABC’). Thus, compositional syntax is not unique to human language but may have evolved independently in animals as one of the basic mechanisms of information transmission.

I think most people's intuition for "can talk" is very different from "first experimental evidence for compositional syntax in a wild animal species"

[–] porcoesphino@mander.xyz 8 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Actually, I'm likely wrong about this being their most recent work. 2016 is almost ten years ago so his lab must have done more but I'm going to move on to something else. I'd love to see more recent papers if someone wants to add them

[–] ranzispa@mander.xyz 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Looking at the last author, this seems to be the last article on this subject. OpenAlex is a decent tool in my opinion to check this kind of things and it is freely accessible. Web of Science allows for more complex queries, but in most cases those are not really necessary.

https://ecoevorxiv.org/repository/view/10600/

Unsung Songbirds: Advances in the Study of Corvid Communication

[–] ranzispa@mander.xyz 3 points 1 day ago

Regarding the latest article by that guy on this subject, it seems like this is the last article.

https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0960982224000307

The ‘after you’ gesture in a bird

[–] eleijeep@piefed.social 3 points 2 days ago

Sometimes a parrot talks.

[–] mesamunefire@piefed.social 2 points 2 days ago

How fasinating!