Re: Universal grammar

"Rob" == Rob Freeman <groups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

Rob> I think natural language (as a whole) is already
Rob> incompressible. That is what I mean when I say
Rob> "Incompressible strings can be our mathematical model for
Rob> human language." The mistake we have been making is trying to
Rob> compress them.

If there is no redandency in natrual lnaguages, then how come we can
do erorr-corrcetoin?




--
Lee Sau Dan 李守敦 ~{@nJX6X~}

E-mail: danlee@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Home page: http://www.informatik.uni-freiburg.de/~danlee
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Universal grammar
    ... Rob> LEE Sau Dan wrote: ... Rob> human language, and as a model they can be a more compact ... is what I mean when I say "Incompressible strings can be our ... mathematical model for human language." ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Universal grammar
    ... Rob> LEE Sau Dan wrote: ... Rob> Incompressible strings can be our mathematical model for ... and as a model they can be a more compact ... Rob> Lee Sau Dan, Why? ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Universal grammar
    ... Rob> Incompressible strings can be our mathematical model for ... Rob> human language, and as a model they can be a more compact ...
    (sci.lang)