I chose the topic of Nicaraguan Sign Language because it seemed interesting and Burling only briefly mentioned it in the book. I had no idea of ​​the importance of studying Nicaraguan Sign Language or its implications for the origins of the language. I learned more than I expected about language as a whole, and I wish there was a way for linguistics to confirm how language actually developed. Goldin-Meadow's article complimented the main points of The Talking Ape and expanded on Burling's brief mention of Nicaraguan sign language. The only point of contention is what I implied from Senghas' research, not Goldin-Meadow's analysis. The fact that deaf children create grammatically complex greeting signs with consistent syntax and a wide variety of vocabulary without anyone being able to communicate directly with them in their own language, runs directly counter to Burling's rejection of a completely innate universal grammar, in my article.