And, if it's alive, so that it will be dead instead.
Thus, it's because grass and weeds are bland and lacking in tasty fat that bovines and ruminants chew their food for so long and so many times.
Carnivores vs. herbivores.
Also, it depends if something eats leaves (not very digestible, not very nourishing) vs fruit (very digestible, except the seeds, and highly nourishing).
Carnivores don't need to chew much.
Carnivores have shorter guts than herbivores.
For most animals, this is true I think. But frogs seem to be perfectly happy swallowing live prey whole. You can see videos of frogs eating live mice!
I didn't say that.
Putting things another way, just a few minutes of observation are sufficient to demonstrate that running the air intake past the esophagus is so irrelevant to the purpose of chewing that the absence of that problem does not affect the behavior in any way.
No, I haven't. That quite simply does not follow, at all. There is to much variation in the definitions and permutations of chewing, throat design, air intake design, types of foods eaten, and digestive systems to make that leap.
1. Chewing -> bad throat
2. Good throat -> no chewing
Good throat -> chewing not required for that reason but possibly for other reason.
Chewing -> bad throat possible, but not required.
Not chewing -> bad throat badge not unlocked.