This is something I've been trying to figure out on my own for a while now, and the most recent formspring question helped me, but I still have questions.

I read the Speech Guide and it prompted a question pertaining to a character I really want to play, though it'd likely be temporary, and not yet.

For the characters that can speak low-speech, such as Naniko (I think? I think I skimmed that once?), they cannot have written-dialogue conversations with low-speech speaking animals anymore? This changes the way that characters that learned low-speech can use their skills, but how much?

This next question was prompted by the FS question... If Marlowe, a raven, could learn broken high-speech, is is plausible that another low-speech speaking animal could also learn extremely broken high speech? Where, if at all, is the limit?

Basically... Where and what, if any, are the limits on the boundaries? I know it'd be difficult to understand a low-speech speaking character's broken high speech, but if a high-speech speaking animal can learn to understand and try to use low-speech, is it not plausible it'd be the same the other way, like with Marlowe? Or am I over-thinking and is it just not plausible or allowed?

Being super lame, I am not familiar with past/current characters that are low-speech fluent, but no, they shouldn't have explicit written dialogue with low-speech-speaking companions. They will still be able to speak to them, obviously, but it should be more descriptive and less word-for-word translations of what they're saying. A further limitation would be that characters that have learned low-speech should now specify exactly which dialect of low-speech they're versed in -- a character that has learned the low-speech of horses would still probably have no clue what a bird is saying; indeed, they would probably still just hear a bunch of noise, rather than any kind of words.

For Speech Guide mentions that some low-speech-speaking species may be more flexible with language than others, making them somewhat more capable of learning high-speech. In general, species known modernly to be "more intelligent" would be more capable of learning high speech, including a lot of birds like ravens, crows, and parrots, and probably most lesser predators, like ferrets and badgers. Prey animals like horses and rabbits would have a much harder time. I would also note that for birds, ravens, crows, and parrots also have the advantage of having relatively versatile voices -- they have been known to mimic humans and it would follow that they would be able to mimic canine/mammalian sounds as well. Birds of prey like hawks and eagles are all very intelligent, so while they actually probably speak a version of high-speech instead of low-speech, the compatibility with canine/mammalian high-speech is likely low.

I hope... that makes sense. x_x We really wanted to avoid needing to write explicit lists of species capable of what and what, so I hope this logic is intuitive enough.

Gotta agree with Kiri here.

I think maybe it has to do with the sounds an animal can emit.

Cats, birds, and animals that have a wide range of vocalizations would be able to learn High Speech easier than say, a goat or mouse, which are two examples of animals with a low range of sounds they can make. It all depends on the vocal cords' ability to produce and mimic noises of other animals.

Think of how a baby learns to speak;
They hear a sound and they mimic it. This continues with various other sounds and eventually they grasp a concept of what a particular sound means. High pitched noises are related to excitement, just like low-pitched but loud noises are related generally to anger. That's the first thing they learn. Next is the sounds a certain word makes.

Let's pretend a growl in a certain punctuation means something like 'back off'. Sort of 'grrRh.'
In low speech, this sound would mean nothing to say a bird or deer, unless facial expressions and body language are present and viewable. A new born calf wouldn't understand that a growl would mean something bad, simply because they've never heard it before. Match it with the expression in say, eyes or face, and they'll understand it perfectly, because the same movements in the muscles are present if their own parent is upset. In animals, it's also related to ear movement.

Eventually, that calf might be able to mimic the sound in its own way, and understand what it means through trial and error. This leads to that low-speech speaking calf to learn at least a 'word' of high-speech. It won't be perfect, but it gets the point across.

Much like someone who doesn't understand or speak english would use various terms they've learned and their own knowledge of vocal patterns to make 'back off' into something aggressive or unhappy.


It's all in the vocalizations an animal can make.


Did that make any sense? :/ I was rambling.

Kiri's explanation was fine and all I needed, thanks. I understood already why the dialects were different - my question was entirely about characters that could already speak low-speech no longer being allowed to actually put it as dialogue and about whether or not a prey animal could learn high speech. I already understood why there's different levels of speech and did not need that part explained. c:

With regard to playing a low-speech speaking character that is one of... lesser intelligence, I suppose, they could still communicate with those that could understand low-speech, but instead of...

The bunny looked to the wolf and said, "It's a marvelous day, isn't it?" Copper smiled at the bunny and nodded. "Yes, it is a lovely day!"

It would have to be something like...

The bunny watched the wolf and made bunny sounds trying to convey that he thought it was a nice day. Copper, in turn, nodded enthusiastically, as he knew ohw to speak low-speech and he returned the senitment.

Something akin to that? I'm more curious about how it affects low-speech speaking characters, and if it'd be plausible for a prey animal to learn basic high-speech words, like "Hello," or something.

The basic idea is that yes, the second example you provided is now what's required, though personally, I think some leeway can be allowed as thus:

He paused as the rabbit spoke -- a greeting akin to "good morning." Copper smiled and nodded enthusiastically, returning the greeting the best he could.

This way, a high-speech equivalent is offered without applying the translation directly to what was said. The main idea is that while there are a lot of basic messages that can be understood between high- and low-speech, direct translations don't really work. Mostly, this is to keep the intelligence/anthropomorphism levels between predators and prey more distinct -- things can get messy/weird if we have prey animals acting more and more like "people" and less like prey. x_x

As for prey animals learning basic high-speech words -- I think this is technically fine, especially amongst mammalian species. It would be worth keeping in mind that most prey animals won't hang around their predators long enough and/or care enough to learn even basic words though. A deer would flee any sound suggesting a wolf might be nearby; I can't really see it sticking around long enough to learn "hello," y'know? Naturally though, you're free to create circumstances where this might have happened. :3

Alright, sounds good. c: This pertains to a potential future (likely temporary) character of mine, as I said. I know that my uncle hunts and tells me about some of the exceptionally stupid prey animals he sees, like deer that just... walk up to him (idek, we are in mass, so I guess even the prey is ballsy? lol), so I've been toying with the idea of an exceptionally headstrong to the point of absurdly stupid prey animal, hehe.