Re: unnatural languages
- From: hrubin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Herman Rubin)
- Date: 21 Mar 2007 17:25:09 -0400
In article <1174399032.873398.218480@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Peter T. Daniels <grammatim@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 15, 3:43 pm, hru...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Herman Rubin) wrote:
In article <1173929457.442038.57...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Peter T. Daniels <gramma...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 14, 5:43 pm, hru...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Herman Rubin) wrote:
In article <1173824361.678668.201...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,It is of course part of every human language. It needs no "adding"
Peter T. Daniels <gramma...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 13, 3:48 pm, hru...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Herman Rubin) wrote:One can try too hard to achieve what cannot yet be done.
BTW, algebraic notation can be applied to ordinaryApplications of logical systems to human language were tried --
language. Variables are linguistic entities, which
can substitute for anything, and have rigid rules.
Euclid could, and did, use variables for geometric
objects, but variables for anything else had not yet
been invented.
Generative Semantics, Montague grammar -- and were soon abandoned.
I was not suggesting replacing language, but adding the
capabilities of "algebraic notation" to language. This
is partly done now, but clumsily and in too limited a
manner. We use such terms as gizmo, doohickey,
whatamajig; these are used as variables. We also say,
"From place A to place B." this is linguistic use of
variables, and we could replace "A" by "Q" and "B" by
"RsT". If we had a few dozen places to keep track
of, or people, we could use variables for notation.
We can even use variables for verbs or adjectives.
THIS is the suggestion, and it can be done early.
from "algebraic notation."
It is?
For the umpteen gazillionth time, learn something about human language
before you continue to spout off abuot it.
Or even "foundations of mathematics," as in Russell and Whitehead, or
Carnap, etc.
We have much better now. Those are limited, wordy, and
now obsolete. I am known in that field.
EVERYTHING in human language that isn't a proper name is a variable.
Do you include verbs, adjectives, adverbs? And at most,
these are highly restricted variables. The brevity of the
notation is important. How would YOU use human language
to disambiguate
He gave him his toy.
Why could not the Greeks use it?
Because Euclid and Archimedes weren't as smart as you?
I do not claim credit for much on variables. The real
work was done by Diophantus (c. 300), Viete (16th century),
Boole, Pierce and others (19th century), and many in the
20th century. Euclid and Archimedes were 5 centuries
before Diophantus.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: unnatural languages
- From: Oliver Cromm
- Re: unnatural languages
- From: Jens S. Larsen
- Re: unnatural languages
- From: Peter T. Daniels
- Re: unnatural languages
- References:
- Re: unnatural languages
- From: Peter T. Daniels
- Re: unnatural languages
- From: Herman Rubin
- Re: unnatural languages
- From: Peter T. Daniels
- Re: unnatural languages
- Prev by Date: Re: Esperanto and Interlingua
- Next by Date: Re: unnatural languages
- Previous by thread: Re: unnatural languages
- Next by thread: Re: unnatural languages
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|