Re: Universal grammar
- From: groups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: 17 Oct 2006 20:26:46 -0700
Hi Hans,
Are you saying you want to look up what was said about linguistic
universals to give you new ideas for constructing computer languages?
-Rob Freeman
Hans Aberg wrote:
...
The other end, though, is that I am into computer language construction,
mainly using Bison/Flex, which are Yacc/Lex compatible programs. There is
one constructed human language with a Yaccable grammar, Lojban
<http://www.lojban.org/>. But other human languages are quite
nondeterministic and ambiguous. Parsers, like Bison, now slowly get the
capacity of handling ambiguous grammars. Bison does that by what is called
GLR, "Generalized LR", which splits the parser when an ambiguity occurs,
and merges it again when it is resolved. This is faster than parsing all
possibilities. Parsing a human language is even more complicated, because
the lexer needs to be split as well, which is currently not within scope,
even though we have discussed the possibility.
Anyway, so I thought it might be good to have some references handy in the
case of need.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Universal grammar
- From: Hans Aberg
- Re: Universal grammar
- References:
- Universal grammar
- From: Hans Aberg
- Re: Universal grammar
- From: Peter T. Daniels
- Re: Universal grammar
- From: Hans Aberg
- Re: Universal grammar
- From: Peter T. Daniels
- Re: Universal grammar
- From: Hans Aberg
- Universal grammar
- Prev by Date: Re: Warter, warter everywhere
- Next by Date: Re: The Business Memoir - the ``whom'' question
- Previous by thread: Re: Universal grammar
- Next by thread: Re: Universal grammar
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|