Language

Part 1

1. Did you find this experiment difficult or easy? Explain.

A: I found the experiment difficult. I didn’t tell my friends what I was doing so when I started it they looked at me funny and asked me what I was doing. So I tried to explain to them what I was doing and they didn’t get most of it. They just kept saying what are you doing? Why aren’t you talking? It was really hard not to laugh. When I stopped the experiment, and told them what I was doing they were confused at first and then started laughing.

2. What were the impressions of partners in the conversation? Did they alter their way of

communicating with you because of your absence of symbolic communication? Describe.

A: The people in my conversation just kept asking what I was doing, and why I wasn’t talking. They at one point got a little frustrated, and I just laughed. They really didn’t alter their communication; they would just mimic me asking what it meant.

 3. Imagine that you and your partners in the conversation represent two different cultures meeting for the first time. Which culture has the advantage in communicating complex ideas? What attitudes might the speaking culture have toward the culture that does not use symbolic language?  Identify individuals in our culture that have difficulty communicating with spoken language and explore how that affects how those who do speak interact with those individuals.

A: I think the culture that has the ability to speak has the advantage in communicating complex ideas. They can express how they feel through words, and not just hand gestures, body language, and noises. I don’t think there really should be any attitude toward the culture that doesn’t use symbolic language. I mean the only thing that might happen is that the speaking culture is a little confused as to why the non symbolic language culture is not using their hands, or body language. I think the people that have difficulty communicating with spoken language are the Spanish speaking community out here. If anything I think they avoid anyone they know they can’t talk to. When they are faced with someone that can’t speak the language, they try talking to each other but it always seems to be single words that each person knows in the others language. It works sometimes, but other times each party is just left confused. 

Part 2

1. Were you able to last for the full 15 minutes of using only speech for communicating?  What made this experiment difficult for you?

No, it was a lot harder than I thought it would be. I had a hard time not laughing again. It’s surprising to realize how much you use your voice, hands and facial movements in conversation. When you’re exhausted, like I was, it’s a little easier.  

2. How were your partners in this part of the experiment affected by your communication limitations? Explain. 

They again just looked at me weird and asked me what was wrong. They thought I was sad or tired. They just wanted to know what was wrong with me. Yeah, I was tired, but not enough to be as flat faced and monotone as I had to be for this experiment.

3. What does this experiment say about our use of “signs” in our language, i.e., how important is non-speech language techniques in our ability to communicate effectively? 

This experiment just showed me how much we as a people use more than just our voices for communicating. It’s crazy, and really hard not to express what you really feel, and how you express those feelings with your hands, facial movements, and voice. They are almost key in communicating with others, it’s almost impossible to have a conversation where you show absolutely no sign of symbolic conversation.

4. Are there people who have difficulty reading body language? Describe the adaptive benefit to possessing the ability to read body language. Can you describe environmental conditions where there might be a benefit to not reading body language?

Yes, there are people who have difficulty reading body language. I don’t know how they have the difficulty, because there are times where you can clearly tell what they’re feeling by the way someone is standing, or sitting. Having the ability to read body language can help you in a bad situation. You might be able to tell if someone is antsy, stressed, or angry and you decide whether or not you want to avoid that person, especially if they’re making you feel uncomfortable. An example of a good reason when you wouldn’t want someone to be able to read body language is if you got pulled over and you had a dead body in the back of the car. If you were nervous, you’d really like to hope that the cop wouldn’t notice that you’re nervous. (I just learned about serial killers in psychology, why this example popped in my head.)

Analogy/Homology

1. For your homologus traits provide the following information:

a. Briefly describe the two different species that possess the homologus trait.
A: The two species that represent a homologous traits are snakes and humans. We both posses pelvic bones.

b. Describe the homologus trait of each species, focusing on the differences in structure and function of the trait. Why do these homologus traits exhibit differences between the two species? Make sure your explanation is clear and complete.
A: The homologous trait of the human is the pelvic bone, snakes also have a pelvic bone. In a human our pelvic bone is attached to our legs, which in turn helps us get around. In a snake their pelvic bone serves absolutely no purpose, it sticks to nothing. The only reason they have one is through some distant relative that did possess legs.

c. Who was (generally, not specifically) the common ancestor of these two species and how do you know that ancestor possessed this homologus trait?
A: The common ancestor between a snake and a human is an amniote, which is a vertebrate.From this ancestor produced the vertebrates reptiles, birds, and mammals.

d. Provide an image of each species in this comparison.

2. For your analogous traits provide the following information.

a. Briefly describe the two different species that possess the analogous trait.
A: The snake and humans also have analogous traits. It is also their pelvic bones.

b. Describe the analogous trait of each species, focusing on the similarities in structure and function of Analogy/Homologypts)
A: The Analogous trait is that a human is a mammal and a snake is a reptile. Yet they both have pelvic bones. the snake has just evolved not to use his anymore with the absence of legs, but still has the bone.

c. All pairs of organisms share some common ancestor if you go back far enough in time. Did the common ancestor of these two species possess this analogous trait? Why or why not?
 A: Yes the common ancestor did posses the analogous trait. It too had a pelvic bone. It probably walked around and when it evolved it created reptiles and snakes being a reptile evolved not to have legs.

 d. Provide an image of each species in this comparison.