I read with great interest the exciting study by Leroux et al. [(2021) Anim Behav 179, 49–50] who investigated the nature of pant-hoot–food-call combinations in a community of wild chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes schweinfurthii) at the Budongo Conservation Field Station, Budongo Forest, Uganda. The authors propose, among others, that they reveal the first evidence that wild chimpanzees are able “to combine meaning-bearing units into larger structures” (i.e., that they are capable of semantic compositionality and, by extension, syntax). Their analysis represents an important addition to a growing body of research and discussions on communicational combinatoriality in wild primates and specifically apes, and, by extension, extinct hominins. Incidentally, I have recently published a paper in Animal Cognition in which I also suggested, based on a reanalysis of existing data, that wild chimpanzees can display semantic compositionality and syntax in their communication [Gabrić (2021) Anim Cogn, online ahead of print]. In the present commentary, I argue that Leroux et al.’s (2021) interpretation of the data may be ungrounded given that (1) unlike for food calls, there is currently very little if any indication in the scientific literature that pant-hoots have semantic content (i.e., are meaningful) and given that (2) Leroux et al. (2021) did not investigate their a priori assumption that the observed pant-hoots are in fact semantic. Since pant-hoots feature prominently in the chimpanzee vocal repertoire and the debate on their eventual semanticity is still wide open, this represents a fine opportunity to revisit this issue in the context of Leroux et al.’s (2021) study. Their paper further raises several other less significant questions.