Re: Universal grammar
- From: "Rob Freeman" <groups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 21 Oct 2006 19:26:06 -0700
LEE Sau Dan wrote:
"Rob" == Rob Freeman <groups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Rob> Incompressible strings can be our mathematical model for
Rob> human language, and as a model they can be a more compact
Rob> representation for information than rules.
More compact: yes. More appropriate? Probably not.
Lee Sau Dan, Why?
-Rob
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Universal grammar
- From: LEE Sau Dan
- Re: Universal grammar
- References:
- Re: Universal grammar
- From: Hans Aberg
- Re: Universal grammar
- From: groups
- Re: Universal grammar
- From: Hans Aberg
- Re: Universal grammar
- From: groups
- Re: Universal grammar
- From: Hans Aberg
- Re: Universal grammar
- From: Rob Freeman
- Re: Universal grammar
- From: Hans Aberg
- Re: Universal grammar
- From: Rob Freeman
- Re: Universal grammar
- From: Hans Aberg
- Re: Universal grammar
- From: Rob Freeman
- Re: Universal grammar
- From: Hans Aberg
- Re: Universal grammar
- From: Rob Freeman
- Re: Universal grammar
- From: Hans Aberg
- Re: Universal grammar
- From: Rob Freeman
- Re: Universal grammar
- From: LEE Sau Dan
- Re: Universal grammar
- Prev by Date: Re: Universal grammar
- Next by Date: Re: Universal grammar
- Previous by thread: Re: Universal grammar
- Next by thread: Re: Universal grammar
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|