Confronting Friends and Family

[Hovik]

http://www.pigeon.psy.tufts.edu/psych26/language.htm

Dolphins use complex sounds to communicate, as do whales. It really depends on how you want to define language. If you, and others, want to give it arbitrary, unobtainable definitions, language will be exclusive to humans by default.

I don't understand calling yourself something before you are something. I'm nitpicking for sure, but I bring it up because I had a similar conversation recently. You are a few credits away. Do you have a job in the field? Are you qualified to teach? I can weld and went to school for metal fabrication. I am not a welder.

That website is pretty basic, but it even says: "Critics say that Kanzi's accomplishments are not proof of language ability in primates because the crucial element in language ability is production, not comprehension" and then just trails off. This is a pretty big point. Language is about production.

At any rate, the usage of complex sounds to communicate doesn't define language. First of all, the phrase "complex sound" is inexact. What constitutes a sufficiently complex sound? Bird use complex sounds, but they're not linguistic (at least not in the sense of complex language). I'm certain there's quite a lot we don't know about the communication system used by dolphins and whales, but whether or not they employ language is to be determined. My guess is that they don't, but I'd be utterly thrilled to be proved incorrect.

Anyway, the criteria that define what constitutes a language are far from arbitrary. They're based on what language actually does and how it works. The biggest criterion is the one of productivity. A full language is capable of taking a finite set of elements and producing an infinite number of novel, grammatical utterances. No other communication system on Earth is capable of this.

I'm not going to debate the semantics of my title. I've studied linguistics for the greater portion of my academic career, and I technically already completed my linguistics portion of the degree. I just need a few more credits for the actual piece of paper. I'm a linguist so long as I perform linguistics, something that can only be done by someone trained in the field. I have worked and will continue to work in a laboratory as well. Being qualified to teach is an entirely separate portion of academia. I don't have to teach to be a researcher. I'm not calling myself something before I am that something. I am a linguist. Whether or not I fit your definition of what makes someone a linguist is ultimately irrelevant.