Righteous

The word I have chosen is righteous. I heard somone say it today when they were referring to something being completely incredible, so it made me wonder about the different ways you can use the word righteous. I have never thought about using the word righteous in my normal, everyday vocabulary so I decided to look it up. Occording to Oxford English dictionary, the word righteous means, "1. a. Of persons: Just, upright, virtuous; guiltless, sinless; conforming to the standard of the divine or the moral law; acting rightly or justly. 2. Of actions, etc.: Characterized by justice or uprightness; morally right or justifiable. Chiefly Sc. Rightful, lawful, legitimate. Right, genuine; correct, exact. Obs. rare." In comparison, the Urban Dictionary states righteous as, " Containing the best possible attributable qualities. A state of extreme perfection bordering on divinity that bestows moral authority upon the subject. Amazingly amazing." The Oxford English dictionary is a professional useful source of dependable meanings to words. The author worked for many, many years with a team trying to perfect every word and and include a variety of words spoken in the english language. The Urban Dictionary, on the other hand, is not a dependable source of vocabulary knowledge. The Urban Dictionary has been known for being more "crude" and also anyone can log on and edit the meaning, make it their very own. Taking into account all of the facts, I believe the Oxford English Dictionary is the more dependable source and it would definately be the one I would always turn to for answers. The Oxford English dictionary is more prescriptive while the Urban dictionary is descriptive. The prescriptive category would be the more accurate and dependable one if you are looking for a more professional meaning. There are different meanings to different people though. To the surfer, righteous might be used to refer to a totally wicked wave he just dominated but to a religious person, it might be a comparison to someone's actions. The difference between the two is that we have taken words and put a modern, slang twist to them and made them into meaning something new and different, along with the old meaning. Personally, when trying to be professional, I will always use the Oxford English Dictionary definitions and will hardly use the Urban Dictionary definitions. If I want to use a definition along those lines, then I will just make it up myself from the slang I use!

Cougar

Cougar… Rrrrrrrr! This word may bring one of two images to your mind. Typically, the first thing that most people would instantly associate with cougar is the image of a courageous feline. In contrast, some people might correlate cougar with an aggressive, slightly older lady. (This definition will get more detailed as you read later.) Depending on which image came to mind, you are indiscreetly revealing your age or the generation you grew up during. Oxford English Dictionary Online defines cougar as “a large feline quadruped, found in most parts of America; also called puma, red tiger, American lion etc.” More enticing, one of my favorite definitions of many from the Urban Dictionary defines cougar as: (see also hunt, prowl, corner, pounce). Noun. A 35+ year old female who is on the "hunt" for a much younger, energetic, willing-to-do-anything male. The cougar can frequently be seen in a padded bra, cleavage exposed, propped up against a swanky bar in San Francisco (or other cities) waiting, watching, calculating; gearing up to sink her claws into an innocent young and strapping buck who happens to cross her path. "Man is cougar's number one prey.” There is obviously great distinction in these diverse definitions. One refers to and animal and the other is in reference to an older female. Such contradiction derives from the sources of authority behind each of these established definitions. Authority in the Oxford English Dictionary Online is prescriptive because their definitions are established by educated and qualified individuals to give a standard meaning to the word. It is typically used as a standard dictionary for a scholar. The Urban Dictionary is a descriptive authority because it is how we speak, the plain fact, and not a standard. This dictionary would be good for trying to define newer terms or slang words that have recently developed. Such a divergence in one definition is due to how the word’s use has changed over time. Younger generations would more likely associate with the second image of the word cougar because it is becoming increasingly popular to use the slang “cougar” to describe these older ladies. Although I am bias of the Urban Dictionary definition of “cougar”, I still believe that an Oxford English Dictionary definition would be more accurate because it is the typical definition of cougar. It is a dependable source. Urban Dictionary is an unreliable and inaccurate source for many words because it does not have a standard for who can establish the definition of a word. Therefore allowing anyone to have the capability to change a word based on what they think it is will vary drastically and be inconsistent among numerous amounts of people. This is why there were pages of definitions of “cougar” although many of them were similar everyone seemed to have their own different way of defining this word. A definition should be consistent and accurate.

english blog 5

If you were to ask my granddad what the meaning of “bitch” was, he would respond by saying, “A female dog” and look at me with a puzzled expression as to why I asked him such a simple question. On the other hand if you were to ask one of my friends the same question the first ideas that would spring to their minds would include a person with a bad attitude or someone that always does what others say; even if it degrades them. This shows that as time progresses peoples understanding of certain words changes as they are subjected to different environments.

The Oxford English Dictionary describes the term as being “The female of a dog” and “The term applied opprobriously to a woman; strictly, a lewd or sensual woman. Not now in decent use; but formerly common in literature. In modern use a malicious or treacherous woman; of things: something outstandingly difficult or unpleasant”. The Urban Dictionary contains similar meanings as well as some which are more painful to the ear. For example one entry describes bitch as “A woman that doesn't give a flying f*ck anymore and that can and will be cruel to men”. Another strong example is “An exceedingly whipped guy who does/wears/thinks/says whatever his girlfriend tells him what to do”.

The Oxford English Dictionary derives its authority prescriptively as it includes the mechanisms for establishing and maintaining an interregional language or a standardized spelling system. It also includes declarations of what particular groups consider to be good taste. The addition of new words to the dictionary can be a long process as each definition is painstakingly revised. This time consists of the contributions of several different people, and the work may in fact be spread out over a period of months, during which the entry is drafted, sent out for specialist consultation, and then returned for final editing.
The Urban Dictionary however derives its authority descriptively as it observes and records how language is used in practice. It also eschews value judgments and makes no recommendations unlike prescription. It is very much like Wikipedia as it allows anyone to add their own meanings to the website which as already shown, can result in graphic descriptions being added.

In conclusion I believe that it would be unfair to say either dictionary is better then the other. This is based on the fact that although the Oxford English Dictionary’s definitions are more ‘Standard English’ and politically correct than the Urban Dictionary, the latter’s definitions simply can’t be frowned upon. They may have some degree of graphicness in some of their definitions, but this only highlights the diversity of our language and how it is actually used in today’s world.

Gone

Many words are used in different ways depending on how it is said in a conversation. When a person leaves a room to go somewhere else, the people in the room may say that the person is gone after they left. A different way “gone” may be used is if there is an extremely drunk person to the stage that they do not know what the difference between right and wrong is, the person may be considered “gone”. If a person died, to make it not sound so bad, someone might say, “She has gone to a better place.”
As a person hears the phrase “going once, going twice, gone!” at an auction, it is meaning that the option of purchasing the object for a higher price is going away quickly. A phrase a person may hear the night after a college party is, “that guy at the party last night was completely gone.” Gone in this sense is being completely drunk or high.
The Oxford English Dictionary defines gone as someone who has passed on or who is dead, not here anymore, or unavailable. The Urban Dictionary defines gone as something that is not here anymore, someone who is dead, and is also a word describing a person who is extremely drunk or extremely high. These two different sources which give similar but different definitions are both correct.
They are each correct depending on the text which a person chooses to use this word in. The authorities of the Oxford English Dictionary are scholars which choose to put this word into the dictionary. The authorities of the Urban Dictionary are just random people who have different meanings and different ways they can use the word “gone”.
The Urban Dictionary and the Oxford English Dictionary are both considered a prescriptive authority because they are telling the reader how the word is used.

What a Cock

To most scholars and people over the age of 25, the word “cock” conjures the image of a rooster. To most college kids, the same “cock” elicits a giggle and the image of the male reproductive organ. According to the Oxford English Dictionary and the Urban Dictionary, both definitions, penis and rooster, are correct. Each dictionary also has several other definitions. Most of the definitions in the Urban Dictionary are related to the male reproductive organ and those definitions are very graphic. The definitions in the Oxford English Dictionary are much more diverse. Some examples of the definition of “cock” from the Oxford English Dictionary are: a night watchman, a leader or chief, something that stops the flow of liquid, a part of the mechanism for discharging a firearm, to fight, and to bend up or stick up at an angle. While neither dictionary contains definitions that are wrong, the dictionary that is most accurate, in terms of quality and depth of information, is the Oxford English Dictionary because it has actually been reviewed and worked on by educated people. The reason I feel that the Urban Dictionary is less dependable is that the definitions have been submitted by many people and most of the definitions are repeated with just some words different therefore when you read it, you can get caught up in reading the same thing over and over again. The authority for the Oxford English dictionary is a Chief Editor, which means that it is a prescriptive authority because it is written and reviewed. The authority for the Urban Dictionary is anyone who gets on the website and decides to give a definition for a word. Since there seems to be no editor, I would say that the Urban Dictionary is a descriptive authority because it does not really give any importance to the use of the words in written form.

Sick

The word "sick" has been known for centuries to label someone that is physically ill. The Urban Dictionary and the Oxford English Dictionary both recognize this word, sick, as a term for describing someone who is not healthy at the time, but the Urban Dictionary has an additional definition or meaning for the word. The history of "sick" can be traced back to the early 1000's. The same meaning has surprisingly stuck for a whole millennium. That record is becoming unheard of for a word to maintain its original meaning for that amount of time. The chain of time has been broken, though.

There is now two additional to the original use of "sick". The common and older version was defined as a person who was suffering from illness. The slang is used to describe something that impresses you or is new, crazy, or daring. Also, it could be describing something bad, as in a prank that was overly rude or crude. This may be identified by a phrase such as, "That joke about her was completely sick." This word could also replace the word cool when referring to an act or material that attracts attention in a good way. An example of this may be, "That trick on his dirt bike was sick." This may be said after a group of people witnessed a new stunt.

The Urban Dictionary is the more modern reference between the two, the other being the Oxford English Dictionary. The Urban Dictionary has the ability to be updated by anyone, as a result it has the most recently updated information. Also, more crude slangs are offered on the Urban Dictionary than the OED, which allows for words to have more interpretations. The usefulness of both sources are limited according to what word is being searched and for what type of definition is being desired. They are both great sources; however, the Urban Dictionary is more geared toward slang and the OED is focused on serious definitions.

Dope

The first term that comes to my mind when thinking of something that would have a definition in both the Oxford English Dictionary and Urban Dictionary is the word “dope.”  In recent times, dope has become a popular word to use to describe the drug heroin, or for those who don’t know what they’re talking about, to reference marijuana.  The authorities of the definition for each dictionary change, as do the definitions.

In the Oxford English Dictionary, the definition for dope is 1. a. Any thick liquid or semi-fluid used as an article of food, or as a lubricant. U.S.  This is a prescriptive definition, being that the authorities from the OED lay out rules for their definitions, based on what they think is “right and wrong.”  This is a very classic definition for the word dope, and can be referenced as far back as 1876.  The authorities of this definition have many degrees in English and devote their lives to deciding definitions of words.

On Urban Dictionary, the definition of the word dope is a little bit different.  My favorite definition for the slang is “heroin, not crack, not powder, but heroin. not marijuana, not meth. but heroin. heroin is the only thing that dope could ever be. people who don't know what dope is are people with very sheltered lives.”  This shows that Urban Dictionary’s authorities are just about anyone who wants to post a definition.  They’re all very much opinionated, and often quite humorous.  There is no “right or wrong” like in the Oxford English Dictionary, but rather pretty much any definition can be posted.

In my opinion, the Oxford English Dictionary and Urban Dictionary are useful for different words.  If I wanted just a standard definition for a word, I would use the authorities of the Oxford English Dictionary.  However, for any newer phrases or slang words, Urban Dictionary would give me the most diversity and choices for words.  As can be seen, dope when used in modern speech is a better word to look up on Urban Dictionary than in the Oxford English Dictionary.

OED vs. UD

Merry Bridgeman
Comparing Authorities: OED vs. UD
Dr. Hughes

Everyday our society comes up with more and more words. Sometimes these words are stolen from the past and given a new meaning or created to fit something that has just been invented. Most of these new words or meanings can usually be somewhat insulting. Faggot, for example, is a word that has much controversy. This word has the power to be very demeaning and rude. With the word, faggot, one can see how over time society changed a words meaning to something totally different.
The Oxford English Dictionary gives several meaning for the word faggot. Some of these definitions include “A bundle of sticks, twigs, or small branches of trees bound together and the practice of burning heretics alive.” It even includes the slang definition which we are more familiar with, “a (male) homosexual.” People, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, have been using this word to refer to male homosexuals since around 1941. Even though this word has two different meanings, society tends to use the more discriminatory definition in everyday vocabulary. Urban dictionary is a little more contemporary in the fact that anyone can post a new word or a new definition that they themselves created. For this reason I find this website to be less credible then the Oxford English Dictionary. However, Urban Dictionary did contain both definitions for the word faggot.
There are always going to be some new words that magically appear out of nowhere. Words such as google, blog, and email were not even thought about in the 1950s, but they have become common, household names. Urban Dictionary and the Oxford English Dictionary can both be extremely helpful resources. However, I believe that the Oxford English Dictionary would be more helpful when looking up words for a paper or school projects. This dictionary is what I would consider to be prescriptive due to the fact that authorities do check over the content to make sure it is correct. On Urban Dictionary, anyone is free to write what they feel a word means and after reading some of their definitions you realize not all of them are correct. This is why I believe it to be a descriptive resource. Not to put Urban Dictionary down because I have used it myself and found it to be very informative, but it probably is not the most reliable source of information.

The Mack Daddy...

The word or term "mac daddy" has it's own special place in both the Oxford English Dictionary and the Urban Dictionary. However, both of the dictionaries analyze the word to have the same meaning, but, the authorities, and how they derive their authorities remain quite different. For the Oxford English Dictionary, language specialists decide if the term "mac daddy" can conform to their regulations in order to become endowed with the definition of an actual word or phrase. These authorites, considered to have high rankings in the area of language, are elected an are considered to hold high positions in the dictionary publishing world. In that, lies the opinions of these authorities who see themselves as "over" the language. The term "mac daddy", though it has been formed and used by the slang users of many days in age, is seen as a "true" phrase or word. Therefore, the authorities of the Oxford English Dictionary, recognize this term in their dictionary. Their definition, the most seemingly "correct" explanation of the word, is comprised of " [a] supremely successful, respected, or influential person; spec. a man who is extremely attr
active to or sexually successful with women." Their definition then goes on to say that the term "mac daddy", has been in use since the nineteen sixties. The word shows up in the 1964 publication of the book "Deep Down in Jungle II." The Urban Dictionary depicts the word or phrase "mac daddy" to have the same meaning; but, the term is further described in a more "slang" and lamens terms way. The Urban Dictionary definition consists of "[t]he pimp-meister, the king of the streetwalkers, possessor of the blingest of bling-bling. The mac daddy is the man who means everything (and the only man who really means anything) to his ladies of the night." Therfore, the Urban dictionary appeals to the younger generation of slang users, rather than the proper and more seemingly "politically correct" terms in the Oxford English Dictionary. The Urban Dictionary conforms to the definitions its contributors. These contributors happen to be the people who use the terms, but who are not elected officials or anyone whith a higher ranking language appeal. The definitions of these two dictionaries carry the same word and somewhat the same definitions. However, The Urban Dictionary will appeal more to all readers because of it's almost "humor filled" definitions, contributed by those who know the words the best.

ICE

The word “ice was meant to be used only to describe only certain things in the human language. Over time, humans have expanded the meaning of the word into a whole different context. The variation of the word "ice” is evident in the differences of the Oxford English Dictionary and the Urban Dictionary. In the Oxford Dictionary, the word “ice” is defined as frozen water; water rendered solid by exposure to a low temperature. You might be thinking to yourself that this definition is very obvious and that there are no other definitions available. The Urban Dictionary tells us otherwise. Among frozen water, it defines “ice” as killing or murdering someone, the street name for the famous methamphetamine drug and the beautiful diamonds that one would wear on a necklace or earring. The differences in these two dictionaries are very fascinating because all of these definitions are in fact true. For example, one would think that there is no way that “ice” could mean to kill or murder someone. But, the term "ice" is used for the describing of a murder, like " that man just got iced" or " if that fool don't pay his rent he is gonna get iced." I know that this is not the proper Standard, but this is what separates the two dictionaries. The problem is that the Oxford Dictionary is descriptive while the Urban Dictionary is prescriptive. This is proven because the Oxford dictionary is written by scholars who have excelled in English courses throughout their college careers. The Urban dictionary can be written by anyone who knows how to use a computer, the fact is that anyone with a brain or no time on their hands can go make up a definition for any word that they choose. The Oxford dictionary has an authority while the Urban Dictionary has none, because everyone can write on it. I believe that the Oxford Dictionary is the more correct dictionary because more people are familiar with the definitions that they use rather than the Urban Dictionary.

Comparing Authorities: OED vs. UD

Dear All,

For your blog this week, you will compare the authoritative practices of two online dictionaries: the OED (http://dictionary.oed.com/) and Urban Dictionary (http://www.urbandictionary.com/). You will probably have to access the OED from a campus computer.

First, you will need to pick a word. The choice is yours. I recommend you look for a word that is either very new (blog, Google, the verb "to friend") or a word that has interesting differences in meaning when it is used formally or as slang (drug terms like: "chronic," "ice," "snow," "juice"; or slang with a sexual charge like: "dime," "box," "cougar"). Be warned that many definitions that you find on Urban Dictionary contain obscenity and offensive material. If you are uncomfortable analyzing this sort of material, try to choose a word that is not particularly "charged" in our society.

Look up that word in both the OED and Urban Dictionary. Analyze the difference between how the two dictionaries function based upon the entries that you read. While looking up the definitions, consider these questions: How do each of these dictionaries derive their authority? Is it PRESCRIPTIVE or DESCRIPTIVE? Who are the authorities? How are the definitions composed? Do you think the definitions from one are "better" or more accurate than the other? Why?

Your blog should be between 300-600 words, and it should be written in formal Standard English. Your authority is Hacker!

Good luck, and have fun!

Blog 3, Question 1, Tom Crosby

The five properties of human language all help to differentiate ourselves from that of other species. I believe the decisive property which helps separate us is productivity. An example of productivity is that humans continually create new expressions and novel utterances by manipulating their linguistic resources to describe new objects and situations. This property is described and is linked to the fact that the potential number of utterances in the human language is infinite. The communication systems of other creatures do not appear to share this type of flexibility. This limited feature of animal communication is described in terms of fixed reference. Each signal in the system is fixed as relating to a particular object or occasion. This inflexibility is supported by the study of velvet monkeys. Among the vervet monkey’s repertoire, there is one danger signal “CHUTTER”, which is used when a snake is around, and another “RRAUP”, used when an eagle is spotted nearby. These signals are fixed in terms of their reference and cannot be manipulated. Evidence of possible productivity in the monkey’s communication system would be an utterance of something like “CHUTT-RRAUP” when a flying creature that looked like a snake came by. Despite a lot of experiments involving snakes suddenly appearing in the air, the vervet monkeys did not produce a new danger signal. If a human were to be put in a similar scenario, they would be quite capable of creating a ‘new’ signal, to respond to the stimulus. For example producing something they have never said before like “Hey! Watch out for that snake!”
In conclusion I believe that although displacement, arbitrariness, cultural transmission and duality play a fundamental part in differentiating human and animal communication, it is productivity which plays the key role. The creation of new words and utterances helps all human languages to continually evolve, adapt to new situations and as a result prosper where as the languages of other species seem to remain static.

blog 3 question 2 jack dowdell

I believe very strongly that our household pets have the ability to communicate with us on a regular basis. I have a 3 year old Wheaton Terrier puppy named Sady. In my home beside our telephone there is a treat jar. Sady has learned that if we are on the phone and she growls long enough we will understand that she wants one. This is an example of communication.

However, this is in no way an example of understanding. When I tell Sady no and to be quiet she does not understand this. She continues to growl because she has learned that if she does eventually we will give in. This is through multiple examples both she and I have had. Through this an expectation has not been reached, not an understanding.

If you truly believe your dog can understand what you are saying then you either suffer from insanity or a very forgiving definition of understanding. Dogs have the ability to interpret circumstances and can learn things by repetition. To show true understanding though Sady would have to ask for a treat when i was nowhere close to her treat jar. She has never done this. She simply sees her treat jar and me in the same vicinity and recognizes circumstance.

Vice versa though Sady has learned some things from me through repeating circumstances. She knows that if i raise my voice at her and she continues her action she will get popped. So now one voice raise is substantial. This is an example of our ability to communicate, in the same instance though if i told her to stop in a low voice she would not because she does not understand me, just remembers past experiences.

Means of communication is a possibility between humans and animals. However I highly doubt understandings will ever be reached. They understand tones and remember circumstances just as we do. A great deal of time with a specific animal is required to reach this point as well. A word for word translation from human to animal language will never happen.

blog 3 question 2

 believe very strongly that our household pets have the ability to communicate with us on a regular basis. I have a 3 year old Wheaton Terrier puppy named Sady. In my home beside our telephone there is a treat jar. Sady has learned that if we are on the phone and she growls long enough we will understand that she wants one. This is an example of communication.

However, this is in no way an example of understanding. When I tell Sady no and to be quiet she does not understand this. She continues to growl because she has learned that if she does eventually we will give in. This is through multiple examples both she and I have had. Through this an expectation has not been reached, not an understanding.

If you truly believe your dog can understand what you are saying then you either suffer from insanity or a very forgiving definition of understanding. Dogs have the ability to interpret circumstances and can learn things by repetition. To show true understanding though Sady would have to ask for a treat when i was nowhere close to her treat jar. She has never done this. She simply sees her treat jar and me in the same vicinity and recognizes circumstance.

Vice versa though Sady has learned some things from me through repeating circumstances. She knows that if i raise my voice at her and she continues her action she will get popped. So now one voice raise is substantial. This is an example of our ability to communicate, in the same instance though if i told her to stop in a low voice she would not because she does not understand me, just remembers past experiences.

Means of communication is a possibility between humans and animals. However I highly doubt understandings will ever be reached. They understand tones and remember circumstances just as we do. A great deal of time with a specific animal is required to reach this point as well. A word for word translation from human to animal language will never happen.

Taylor Haney Blog 3

What makes it so difficult for animals and humans to communicate with one another? Or what is the reason why we can not communicate with each other through speech or a particular language? In Yules book he describes all the reasons and meanings behind it why we as humans and animals can not communicate through a language as I said before. He list five properties in his article that differentiate between human and animal communication: Displacement- When humans can refer to past and future time. Arbitrariness- No “natural” connection between a linguistic form and its meaning. Productivity- When you create new expressions and novel utterances by manipulating their linguistic resources to describe new objects and situations. Cultural Transmissions- Process whereby a language is passed on from one generation to the next. Duality- When human language is organized at two levels or layers simultaneously. I believe that displacement and arbitrariness both are the main reasons why we can not communicate with animals. But if I were to chose one it would have to be arbitrariness simply because neither humans or animals have a natural connection with each other. For example, the video we watched of Koko the gorilla, Penny and Koko could communicate but it was by their own sign language if you will. So that means there is still a language barrier there between us humans and animals. Even though there is a language barrier there we can still communicate but not as well as we would like. Also another example would be with a dog. When we say “sit” or any other type of command they will obey most likely just by the way or tone you say it in. I do not think dogs can fully understand us when we say something but just by the way we say it they will do anything. They also do whatever you do by making hand gestures. Back to the conversation on Koko, well see she could let you know when she was mad or sad for example when her cat died because she learned the hand gestures for sad and mad. It shows that while there is still this language barrier that animals have such as Koko, can still communicate.

Blog Prompt 3, Question 2

Ryan Carr
Composition 1101
Professor Hughes
Blog Prompt 3
Question 2

Abbey is my chocolate Labrador Retriever. I also have a Jack Russell Terrier named Bear (an oxymoron). However, my brother’s dog Dexter which is an American Bull Dog is the most communicative of the three. My communication with our domestic pets is not only clear, it is very experienced as the oldest, Abbey is ten years old. Abbey is an absolutely beautiful dog. Her personality is to please no matter what the cost to herself. She will fetch just about any object you ask. Asking her to fetch the remote control is most helpful! She does so with exuberance! When asked, she perks up her ears and watches your expressions explicitly. Once you nod your head that seems to be her signal to perform that task that was assigned verbally. When she has accomplished the mission, she wags her tail in anticipation of praise. Knowing that a treat is in store in the form of a carrot or simply petting her profusely. When she is outside her tail is constantly wagging as a sign of joy. That also communicates her mood as well as when her tail is tucked between the legs conveying her anxiety when she is being scolded for running away. Afterwards her ears are down and she looks as if she had just lost her best friend. When we go inside she lies down on the rug in front of the fireplace and looks forlorn as if to say, “I am so sad I was disobedient”. (reference to Koko clip)
Bear is impishly angelic. His jumping like a Mexican bean when a family member arrives home implies his joyfully elation to the fact that we have not abandoned him forever! His actions imply such happiness! However, when we leave for our daily duties to work, college, and so forth he has separation anxiety which demonstrates itself in shreds of paper, magazines or tissues greeting us upon our arrival home.
Dexter on the other hand is extremely obedient, observant, and communicative. His very gaze and sideways motion of the head sounds his intentions as if he were speaking verbally. Whenever asked to sit, wave, close the door, and many other requests that he has been taught by our family, he seems to blink as if to say, “Okay, gladly!” Then while wagging his tail performs such tasks with a precise execution that shadows any human’s attempt to obey a direct verbal command. Hence he is the most obedient and shows the utmost intelligence in non-verbal communication as even one type of look you give him will command him to sit, stay or even bark. Yes domestic animals, such as our personal family pets are able to understand and communicate with us. (reference to Koko clip)