I personally believe such “primitive” languages would be very onomatopoetic where the connection between the signifier and the signified are very motivated.

Some of our words (indo European descendants) are interesting. For example, Large vs tiny. /a/ in large is very open and /i/ in tiny is closed when you pronunce it. Laaaaaaaarge and tiiiiiiiiny. Same goes with huge and little.

The utterance that signifies the concept of large is made up of a large vowel and tiny is made up of a small vowel. Interesting, I have to think about it and see if these kinds of words might have been onomatopoetic in the beginning (the etymology will probably show the same relation between the pronunciation of the vowel and what it represents).

Another very good post from Loren and a very good post by our guest blogger T. Peter Park. For those of you who aren’t aware of his credentials, here is a short bio.

It’s quite possible our hairy friends have a proto language with some words adopted from us. There are several reports of them using language such as the “Sierra Sounds” still under analysis by Nelson.

It will require close observation of the species which until now has been impossible to ascertain their language ability. They have this habit of intimidating humans to leave their vicinity when we get to close. Perhaps this will change in the future but for now anything within reason is possible.

My best