Please respond to 3 classmate discussion responses in at lea

Please respond to 3 classmate discussion responses in at least 250 words. I will include the original question as a reference…but you only need to respond to each classmate response. Use APA format and include at least one reference per answer.Original question for classmate one and two:Find research that differs with Lord Zuckerman’s view that apes are qualitatively unlike humans with respect to language capabilities. Zuckerman suggests that humans have it and apes do not despite the fact that they can learn semantic content of individual words. Choose a view (apes are or apes are not like us) and make an argument for it.Classmate 1 Response:Considering this question, the need to broaden the understanding of languages was necessary. According to the text, there is no clear definition for language and references five characteristics provided by Clark and Clark (1977). The characteristics indicated are communicative, arbitrary, structured, generative, and dynamic (Friedenberg and Silverman, 2012). The indicated characteristics taken as a hole makes it challenging to argue against Lord Zuckerman’s position suggesting that relative to language abilities apes are qualitatively different from humans. Two articles reviewed (Leiman, 2014) and (Trachsel, 2010) shared information concerning studies which provided evidence of success with the utilization of sign language with apes as well as referenced some indication of emotion. This application addresses the communicative and possibly arbitrary characteristics of language. Subiaul (2016) in an article comparing imitation abilities between enculturated apes and human children, suggested that though capable of imitating, the ape’s level of imitation ability was extremely less than human children. In this study, though similarities exist between apes and human children relative to sensory and motor systems, imitation differences was not determined. The apes imitation ability deficit compared to human children during a period where previous studies show human children language acquisition are prevalent may infer likely results relative to apes language abilities. Research was not found which provided for all five characteristics utilized in defining language suggesting that apes are not like humans on the matter of language.Thank you,JamesReferences:Clark, H.H. and Clark, E.V. (1977). Psychology and language: An introduction to psychollinguistics. New York: Harcourt brace Jovanovich.Friedenberg, J. and Silverman, G. (2006). Cognitive Science: An Introduction to the Study of Mind. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage PublicationsLeiman, A. (2014). Poor relations. (Cover story). Biologist, 61(2), 12-16Trachsel, M. (2010). Human uniqueness in the age of ape language research. Society & Animals: Journal of Human-Animal Studies, 18(4), 397-412. doi:10.1163/156853010X524343Classmate 2 Response:2. In Lord Zuckerman’s view of apes not having the language capabilities like human is true although in comparing how apes and human genetics are very much alike which is astonishing. Although one has to wonder even though apes cannot cognitively understand the human language does not mean they do not understand. It would be the same thing as humans not understanding how apes communicate. What each sound and gesture an ape makes is something humans may not understand. There has been extensive research conduct in trying to teach chimpanzees to speak, however the research has failed. Alan and Beatrice Garden did have an idea of teaching a chimpanzee how to communicate using American Sign Language (ASL). The chimpanzee was able to communicate the same way compared to a two-year old child (Leiber, n.d.). Which is not much of a conservation or comprehension of the human language. With the research and studies conducted there is no empirical evidence that apes can fully comprehend the human language. Thank you, CatrinaReferenceLeiber, J. (n.d.). Apes, language, and the human mind. Philosophical Psychology, 12(3), 362-368. Retrieved from http://www.eds.a.ebscohost.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/…Original question for classmate 3:Identify a verb in English that supports Whorf’s linguistic relativity hypothesis in that it shapes our view of reality in a selective way. This is in the sense that an alternative view of the same thing is not only possible, but may be a better description of the relevant physical or social reality. Is your example consistent with the relativity hypothesis?Classmate 3 response:Language can be difficult to learn and develop in the first place but when adding words that can have multiple meanings or multiple spellings of the same pronunciation into language there is another level of confusion that it may bring for a moment. When learning words, the word may be categorized in a location of the brain based on its classification in some theories, but Whorf’s idea was that we are much more illogical in our linguistic abilities (Carnes 2014).Epstein (2016) would suggest that language and the different meanings that one can take from the same word must be considered when writing or speaking in order to make sure that the correct meaning is understood. Individuals take their own experiences both distant and recent in order to understand certain items in a context.One word that can be used as both a noun and a verb would be present. Being present in a classroom is one way to understand this meaning which would be a more likely choice if one had just spent their day in a classroom setting or if it was near Christmas or a birthday one may think of a gift instead. This would be consistent with the relativity hypothesis due to the fact that it is using the most common context meaning of those items that are used most often. The human brain will go to the context that is most often used first and then find a more suitable meaning if the word does not fit in the context of the sentence that is being used.ReferencesCARNES, R. L. (2014). A PERCEPTUAL MODEL OF THE WHORFIAN THESIS. ETC: A Review Of General Semantics, 71(3), 263-271.Cibelli, E., Xu, Y., Austerweil, J. L., Griffiths, T. L., & Regier, T. (2016). The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis and Probabilistic Inference: Evidence from the Domain of Color. Plos One, 11(7), e0158725. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0158725EPSTEIN, R. A. (2016). LINGUISTIC RELATIVISM AND THE DECLINE OF THE RULE OF LAW. Harvard Journal Of Law & Public Policy, 39(3), 583-630.