I’ve had a few people tell me that although the dog and the person are both imagining the same thing - going for a walk, and all that that entails - the dog is merely associating the sound of the phrase with the activity.
But… isn’t that… what language is? What’s qualitatively different between the human and the dog here? The human is undoubtedly making connections and associations far more complex and expressive, but at bottom it’s all just “sound = thing”, no? 🤔
I don’t speak Spanish, but I know that when I hear someone say something that sounds like “andallay!”, it means “hurry up”. I don’t know what the word literally means, or how to actually spell it (well, I do now that I looked it up: ándale), or its etymology or whether or not it’s a loan word from Chinese, but I know from experience (and cartoons) that it means “go faster”. Am I a dog to a Mexican in this scenario? My understanding is as perfunctory as my dog’s understanding of “go for a walk” is. But we wouldn’t say that I’m not using language when I react appropriately to the “ándale!” instruction.
What am I not getting?
Cheers!
That is exactly what language is. Someone makes a sound and you know what it means. Animals can’t reason the fine details of what the meaning of words or context mean. The understand if A happens it means (action), and they do respond to the tone of your voice. Say the same thing in a different tone and it becomes confusing. An example is, if I angrily yell words in French at you (which you don’t speak), even though those words mean “happy, joy, sunshine”, you think I’m angry. But if I cuss at you in French in a super sweet voice, you think I’m being romantic. Humans, can speak non-native languages and not know how to read or write them.
I had this realization some days ago and am nearly ashamed to say that because it took me some decades to think of it.
My dogs know very well what cheese means.