20
Sperm whales’ communication closely parallels human language, study finds
(www.theguardian.com)
Not if we keep allowing nations to harvest them (and their singular food source, krill) at the current astronomical rates.
Great. So what are they talking about ?
We're still at vowels and tones...and maybe names (patterns that repeat when a specific whale shows up)
"Look! There’s a whale! Oh my God!"
You'd have to give the linguist time to sort it all out.
Whales having similar vocalizations (I think using the term "phonology" is quite a stretch) to humans is a far cry from saying that whale communication is at all similar to human language.
Edit: Anyone want to explain their downvotes? Or are you all just that desperate to anthropomorphize whales for some reason?
Edit2: I shouldn't have to flash my linguist credentials to express doubt about a sensationalist pop science article (no shade to OP - it's an interesting article with some good info, so thanks for posting!). When it's about something like new battery technology, for example, skepticism seems to be the default in the comments. Why should linguistics be any different?
Anyone want to explain their downvotes?
I didn't vote you down, but I nearly did. Project CETI, an academic group of linguists, whale biologists, underwater acoustics professionals, and machine learning experts, say that sperm whale communication is highly complex, comparable in many ways to human language, and can be described as phonology.
Random internet user with no declared expertise or experience says, "nuh-uh" and provides no substantial counterpoint, and is confused by the negative reaction.
I don't expect you're wrong per se if the perceived take-away from OP's article is that whales have language to the extent that humans do, but just being dismissive without bringing anything to the table is entirely unhelpful to the discussion.
I was a linguistics professor for almost a decade, and many of my comments here on Lemmy provide in-depth explanations from an informed theoretical linguistic perspective. See here and here, for example.
In my opinion, the phonetic (acoustic) resemblances are superficial, and nowhere in their paper do they identify the sorts of systematic patterns of alternations that constitute the phonology of human languages. It's not just about seeing patterns in the sounds of the whales - it's about showing that these patterns are specifically organized in a similar way to human phonologies, and that they also distinguish meaning in the same structured ways that human phonologies do.
But beyond just phonetics and phonology, and more importantly, the researchers haven't provided any evidence that whale communication in any way resembles the systems of communication that we call "language". Human language is characterized by specific features that aren't found anywhere else in the animal kingdom in the same combination. To an extent the selection of these features is arbitrary, but the sum total of them makes a compelling argument for a categorical distinction between what we call human language and animal communication.
It's possible, of course, that whale communication does in fact include all of these features, but the articles in question are a far cry from demonstrating it, and so using the word "language" is at best premature and at worst disingenuous.
This just seems like one of those sensationalist pop articles that come out every few months, driven largely by researchers without a significant background in theoretical linguistics, that do more to confuse people about the nature of language than to educate them. Language is much more than just "patterns of sounds that convey meaning".
(And, for some reason, like 70% of these articles are related to whales. The two most common responses I get to telling people I'm a linguist are: 1) "How many languages do you speak?" and 2) "You know, I read this article recently on how whale language is really just like human language". I have yet to understand the obsession with whales.)
You really should have lead with some of this! Hopefully you can see why your original comment, in a vacuum, wasn't especially constructive or enlightening.
It's no surprise that a pop sci article makes bolder claims than the paper it's based on (even if you think the paper itself is overreaching); this old PHD Comics diagram is as relevant as ever.
"I shouldn't have to tell you about my expertise for you to find my input valuable!" Weird hill to die on, but okay
Maybe they're doing it on porpoise...
Hi dad.
that documetary about it. Star trek 4. It was awesome.
that was a different species(humpback) of whale tho.
NNNEEEERRRRRRRRRRDDDDDDDD!!!!!!!!!!
this post was submitted on 15 Apr 2026
20 points (100.0% liked)
World News
55710 readers
151 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS