Occam, et al
Occam, et al
Can ordinary verbal/written language be expressed in more symbolic/mathematical equations? Is not every idea in a sentence expressible as either a distinct object or as a relationship between two distinct objects? Can we not say that to the extent those objects are sufficiently distinct that the relationships can be sufficiently known? In other words, isn't it possible to do math on language in every meaningful sense?
Last edited by Advocate on Sun Dec 06, 2020 7:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 4360
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm
Re: Occam, et al
even bearded chimney sweepers know that mathematics itself is nothing but another language
-Imp
-Imp
Re: Occam, et al
[quote=Impenitent post_id=483587 time=1607278405 user_id=3944]
even bearded chimney sweepers know that mathematics itself is nothing but another language
-Imp
[/quote]
fixed
even bearded chimney sweepers know that mathematics itself is nothing but another language
-Imp
[/quote]
fixed
Re: Occam, et al
This is moot. Mathematics and English are both languages.Advocate wrote: ↑Sun Dec 06, 2020 5:46 pm Can ordinary verbal/written language be expressed in more symbolic/mathematical equations? Is not every idea in a sentence expressible as either a distinct object or as a relationship between two distinct objects? Can we not say that to the extent those objects are sufficiently distinct that the relationships can be sufficiently known? In other words, isn't it possible to do math on language in every meaningful sense?
Mathematics has no adjectives/adverbs (feeling words), so it's obvious that certain things from English can't be expressed in Mathematics.
On the other hand formal languages have homoiconicity and English doesn't so it's obvious that certain things from formal languages can't be expressed in English.
The distinction is subtle yet enormous. What becomes a "circular argument" in English turns into a "recursive function" in a homoiconic language.
You literally get a language which doesn't require interpretation because it interprets itself.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homoiconicity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meta-circular_evaluator
Re: Occam, et al
[quote=Skepdick post_id=483599 time=1607284471 user_id=17350]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homoiconicity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meta-circular_evaluator
[/quote]
Good stuff but i'm talking about something more skin to Lojban, but with which ordinary sentences like this one can be directly represented as a sequence of technically specific relationships and changes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homoiconicity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meta-circular_evaluator
[/quote]
Good stuff but i'm talking about something more skin to Lojban, but with which ordinary sentences like this one can be directly represented as a sequence of technically specific relationships and changes.
Re: Occam, et al
[quote=Advocate post_id=483603 time=1607287776 user_id=15238]
[quote=Skepdick post_id=483599 time=1607284471 user_id=17350]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homoiconicity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meta-circular_evaluator
[/quote]
Good stuff but i'm talking about something more skin to Lojban, but with which ordinary sentences like this one can be directly represented as a sequence of technically specific relationships, intents, changes.
[/quote]
[quote=Skepdick post_id=483599 time=1607284471 user_id=17350]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homoiconicity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meta-circular_evaluator
[/quote]
Good stuff but i'm talking about something more skin to Lojban, but with which ordinary sentences like this one can be directly represented as a sequence of technically specific relationships, intents, changes.
[/quote]
- Agent Smith
- Posts: 1442
- Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2022 12:23 pm
Re: Occam, et al
We're gettin' there! Hold onto your horses.
Last edited by Agent Smith on Sun May 07, 2023 12:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 5181
- Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm
Re: Occam, et al
Good. But something akin to Lojban with concise sentences.Advocate wrote: ↑Sun Dec 06, 2020 9:54 pmAdvocate wrote: ↑Sun Dec 06, 2020 9:49 pmGood stuff but i'm talking about something more skin to Lojban, but with which ordinary sentences like this one can be directly represented as a sequence of technically specific relationships, intents, changes.Skepdick wrote: ↑Sun Dec 06, 2020 8:54 pm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homoiconicity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meta-circular_evaluator
- Agent Smith
- Posts: 1442
- Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2022 12:23 pm
Re: Occam, et al
I sense an insight, the OP's, that seems to suggest the task s/he has in mind isn't impossible, but isn't a walk in the park either. Language is evolving and from the small sample any one individual like myself can hope to get their hands on, I'd say we're getting there ... slowly but ... surely.