Does a nonverbal animal make ontological assumptions?

[gprimero]

I'm trying to explore the different definitions of "ontology", and the
relation between ontology and language. And I'd like to ask you:
Considering the different definitions of ontology, does a nonverbal
animal make ontological assumptions? Would you say that all the
definitions (or at least the most relevant ones) imply that they
don't?

Regards,
Gerardo.

[Kerry Trentelman]

Regarding ontology and language, I've recently come across work by the
linguist Anna Wierzbicka. I can highly recommend her book "Semantics:
Primes and Universals". She's proposed a "Natural Semantic
Metalanguage" which is based on primitives such as I, You, Big, Small,
Good, Bad, Be, Say, Think and Want. Her paper "Conceptual primes in
human languages and their analogues in animal communication and
cognition" is worth checking out.
Cheers,
Kerry

[gprimero]

How would you say that she would answer my question, positively or
negatively?

[Kerry Trentelman]

Quoting from the paper: "The literature on primate communication
suggests a set of meanings which are conveyed by more or less
ritualized visual displays as well as vocal signals." Assuming this to
be true, then this suggests (to me) that primates are capable of
making "ontological assumptions".