Re: unnatural languages

On Mar 12, 11:44 am, hru...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Herman Rubin) wrote:
In article <1173564124.762662.263...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Jens S. Larsen <jens_s_lar...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

Herman Rubin:
I can see no reason why one needs to know a "natural language"
to learn a more structured one. Nor can I see a reason why
one needs to learn a natural language first.
Strictly speaking, a natural language is not "learnt". Our capability
to interpret utterances as meaningful strings of words is in-born in
humans. This capability is called (natural) language.

The capability can be called natural language ability.

This says nothing about the characteristics of the
language learned this way. This language could have
evolved in the manner of the "natural" languages, or
it could be one constructed according to systematic
rules, designed to make learning easier once the
original barrier is passed.

No, of course it does say and of course it could not.

Human infants are language-acquisition-machines, and their internal
equipment is attuned to certain types of input data -- namely, human
language.

Not some invented "structured language" with "systematic rules."

Since we know nothing of how the brain learns language, how could we
"make learning easier"?

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: assignment expression peeve
    ... > in code is that is it resembles, to some degree, natural language. ... specific disagreement about your contention that assignment - as - ... described and about which other imperatives are expressed within the ...
    (comp.lang.python)
  • Re: Godel Incompleteness Theorem
    ... Of course it is true that we can't analyze natural language in EVERY ... can formalize Godel's arguments in a completely formal language for a ... You seem to be saying that 'is a number theoretic relation' cannot be ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Merry Xmas, Logic Hounds!
    ... is always true, in natural language, "If there are three hydrogen atoms in ... connection is meant by the natural language is not clearly defined." ... linguistic expression of truth preserving cognitive inference ("verbal ... but also to some degree the content of logical propositions. ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: Formalisation
    ... no formalization, no genuine proofs). ... choose to talk about them using natural language is ... language to talk about EVERYthing -- that's what natural ... PARTICULAR axioms, or, at best, ON LEMMAS, which will then ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: Is wittgensteins colour exclusion problem formalizable?
    ... OTOH language is serial and it foeces us to ... representation into a non spatial, ... The natural language is serial and because of this every object, ... It differentiates from cars and so occupies a different place ...
    (sci.logic)