On 4/28/07, Mark Waser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No, I mean applying to other "modality" so to say, to some other kind
> of problem solving, not to another language
Ah. And this is the basis for my repeated clarification about NLP requiring
general cognition of a specific level (or type). Path-finding cognition
certainly isn't required for NLP and category-creation/discovery probably
isn't either -- and most people would definitely include the latter, if not
the former, in AGI. In this sense, NLP certainly *is* "only" a sub-part of
AGI.
> I think what is enough is for an NLP *module* is a flexible model of
> supplying contexts, so that, for example, a non-grammatical
> metaphorical reading could take precedence on literal grammatical
> reading.
> NLP cannot read poetry without an AGI over its shoulder.
Again, I'll state that I don't think/believe that the problem can be
partitioned this way. I think that the NLP WILL have to be able to read and
understand poetry or it won't have the necessary smarts to be able to do
it's job.
So you mean, that NLP can/must understand the Whorfian, Barthesian,
philosophical "broad language" using the tools of computational
linguistics' "narrow language"?
Then NLP=AGI (holistic, non-modular view)
-----
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=231415&user_secret=fabd7936
