> Thus: building a NL parser, no matter how good it is, is of no use > whatsoever unless it can be shown to emerge from (or at least fit with) > a learning mechanism that allows the system itself to generate its own > understanding (or, at least, acquisition) of grammar IN THE CONTEXT OF A > MECHANISM THAT ALSO ACCOMPLISHES REAL UNDERSTANDING. When that larger > issue is dealt with, a NL parser will arise naturally, and any previous > work on non-developmental, hand-built parsers will be completely > discarded. You were trumpeting the importance of work that I know will > be thrown away later, and in the mean time will be of no help in > resolving the important issues.
Richard, you discount the possibility that said NL parser will play a key role in the adaptive emergence of a system that can generate its own linguistic understanding. I.e., you discount the possibility that, with the right learning mechanism and instructional environment, hand-coded rules may serve as part of the initial seed for a learning process that will eventually generate knowledge obsoleting these initial hand-coded rules. It's fine that you discount this possibility -- I just want to point out that in doing so, you are making a bold and unsupported theoretical hypothesis, rather than stating an obvious or demonstrated fact. Vaguely similarly, the "grammar" of child language is largely thrown away in adulthood, yet it was useful as scaffolding in leading to the emergence of adult language. -- Ben G ----- 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=8660244&id_secret=72129171-2bf67a
