Text 1: Cognitive scientist Bell argues that human language is unique in the animal kingdom. Only humans, she notes, combine a finite set of elements (words, sounds) according to recursive rules to generate an infinite range of meanings. Bee dances, bird songs, and primate calls, however sophisticated, lack this generative capacity.
Text 2: Cognitive scientist Ruiz finds Bell's argument too clean. Recursion, he notes, has been claimed and contested in studies of Pirahã grammar and starling song. Some songbirds appear to combine syllables according to abstract rules, and chimpanzees taught sign-language combine signs in novel ways. The line Bell draws, Ruiz argues, is sharper in theory than in evidence.
Based on the texts, how would Ruiz (Text 2) most likely respond to Bell's claim?
- A
He would agree that no animal communication system shows any rule-based combination.
- B
He would deny that humans have language.
- Ccheck_circle
He would argue that the boundary between human language and animal communication is less clear than Bell suggests.
- D
He would claim that bees use recursive grammar.
Explanation
Ruiz doesn't deny human language but argues the categorical boundary is empirically blurry. B captures this. A is absurd; C contradicts him; D overstates his examples.