"I am invisible, understand, simply because people refuse to see me."~ Ralph
Ellison on the connection between Sign Language and Decoding and Computational
Linguistics.
From: piagetmode...@hotmail.com
To: a...@listbox.com
Subject: RE: [agi] The road to language learning is iconic
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 13:46:31 -0800
A word to the wise is sufficient.
~PM
From: tint...@blueyonder.co.uk
To: a...@listbox.com
Subject: Re: [agi] The road to language learning is iconic
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 21:11:15 +0000
PM:Need I say
more?
Yeah, What has sign language got to do with
decoding and computational linguistics? For example, the sign[s] for eating
involving bringing fingers to mouth?
From: Piaget Modeler
Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 8:26 PM
To: AGI
Subject: RE: [agi] The road to language learning is
iconic
In the case of Helen Keller, the language output interface was her
hands, and
the language input interface was also her hands.
Need I say more?
~PM.
From: piagetmode...@hotmail.com
To: a...@listbox.com
Subject: RE: [agi] The
road to language learning is iconic
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 11:06:21
-0800
In the case of Capoeira, the language output and interface is the
entire human body,
and the input interface is the eyes.
In the case of Jiu-Jitsu, the language output interface is the entire human
body,
and the input interface is the entire human body, including the eyes.
Both of these sports have a lexicon which is communicated from instructors
to students.
~PM
From: piagetmode...@hotmail.com
To: a...@listbox.com
Subject: RE: [agi] The
road to language learning is iconic
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 10:53:53
-0800
Roland Hausser IS talking about the same thing.
In the case of American Sign Languae (ASL) the language output interface is
your hands (and arms).
The language input interface is your eyes.
PM,
I’m talking about the sign language/gestural origins – signs made by hands
predominantly – which apes are also capable of. Unless I missed something,
Hausser is talking about signs in the broader semiotic sense and is irrelevant
here.
"I should add that I am just getting
into reading about the argument for the origins of
language in sign language which
is a strong one and very extensively argued and
debated – and I suspect like much
other crucial science, largely unknown to AGI-ers."
~ Mike
Tinter
That has already been addressed.
You should read Roland Hausser's work:
"A natural language manifests itself in the form of signs, the
structures of which have evolved
as conventions within a language community. Produced by cognitive agents in
the speaker mode
and interpreted by cognitive agents in the hearer mode these signs are used
for the transfer of
content from the speaker to the hearer. Depending upon whether the
scientific analysis concentrates
on the isolated signs or the communicating agents, we may distinguish
between sign-oriented
and agent-oriented approaches.
"Sign oriented approaches like Generative Grammar, Truth-Conditional
Semantics, and Text
Linguistics analyze expressions of natural language as objects, fixed on
paper, magnetic tape,
or by electronic means. They abstract away from the aspect of communication
and therefore
are neither intended nor suitable to model the speaker and the hearer
mode. Instead linguistic
examples isolated from the communicating agents are analyzed as
hierarchical structures which
are formally based on the principle of possible substitutions.
"The agent-oriented approach of Database Semantics, in contrast, analyzes
signs as the result
of the speake'rs language production and as the starting point of the
hearer's language
interpretation. Inclusion of the agents' production and interpretation
procedures requires a time
linear analysis which is formally based on the principle of possible
continuations.
"The goal of Database semantics is a theory of natural language
communication which is complete
with respect to function and data coverage, of low mathematical complexity,
and is suitable for an
efficient implementation on the computer. The central question of
Database Semantics is:
"How does communicating with Natural Language work?
"In the most simple form this question is answered as follows.
"Natural language communication takes place between cognitive agents.
They have real bodies
"out there" in the world with external interfaces for nonverbal
recognition and action
at the context level, and verbal
recognition and action at the language level.
Each agent
contains a database in which contents are
stored. These contents consist of the agent's knowledge
its memories, current recognition,
intentions, plans, etc.
"The cognitive agents can switch between
the speaker and hearer mode (turn taking). In a
communication procedure, an agent in the
speaker mode codes content from its database into signs
of language which are realized externally
by the language output interface. These signs are
recognized by another agent in the hearer
mode via the language input interface, their content is
decoded and is then stored in the second
agent's database. This procedure is successful if the
content coded by the speaker is decoded
and stored equivalently by the hearer."
~Roland Hausser, A Computational Model of
Natural Language Communication: Interpretation,
Inference, and Production in Database
Semantics (pp. 9, 10).
AGI | Archives
| Modify
Your Subscription
-------------------------------------------
AGI
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-f452e424
Modify Your Subscription:
https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
