Yule (2010) assumes that animals use systems of communication that are substantially different from human language. For instance, unlike human language, animals use linguistic systems that relate to the immediate time and place of communication. Also, animals are said to use “fixed and limited sets of vocal or gestural forms” (p. 13). Evidence from religious sources (Holy Quran) suggests that animals can competently communicate with human beings in systems that are both complex and productive. It is legitimate to ask therefore: Is it possible to integrate religious evidence into the linguistic theory to account for animal language?
Hathem Alhelfy
You should understand the question before deciding on its usefulness.
It depends who is considering the evidence. A religious evidence is only valid if the person considering it believes in the scripture, otherwise it is not relevant.
If we want to integrate religious knowledge into the existing body of scientific knowledge, then it can be done through hypothesis testing (and experiments). I recently read an article where the author suggests using ideas from the Quran as hypothesis and then undertaking hypothesis testing or experiments to validate them. This seems to be the only way, for the time being, to incorporate religious knowledge into the body of scientific knowledge.