my reply contains a distinctive example in the typo "naturnal" ... typos
are annoyances in natural and artificial languages; homo sapiens can often
still get "the message" in spite of typos.

OTOH a typo in code is often a game disruptor.

On Mon., Jan. 18, 2021, 00:08 Bernie Eckhart, <[email protected]>
wrote:

> A natural language is one that evolves naturally like English, often over
> centuries.
>
> The opposite is artificial languages which are mainly designed by homo
> sapiens and are likely to be constrained by usage rules; an application
> could be crafted to create artificial languages.
>
> Esperanto is a fine example of an artificial language.
>
> Also Klingon.
>
> "Programming languages" is a loose usage of the concept of "language" ‐-
> one could not write a "1984" with any programming language.
>
> Naturnal and artificial languages can communicate ideas between most homo
> sapiens while only a subset of homo sapiens are able to use programming
> languages to guide the actions of computers.
>
> Ken Iverson titled his Turing Award lecture "Notation as a tool of
> thought"; it's not my suggestion to stop talking about programming
> languages, just be aware of the distinction.
>
> On Sun., Jan. 17, 2021, 11:00 Raul Miller, <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> A natural language is a language which people use to talk with each other,
>>
>> In this context, an artificial language is a set of symbols which
>> people use to configure machines.
>>
>> I hope this helps,
>>
>> --
>> Raul
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 17, 2021 at 10:50 AM Justin Paston-Cooper
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> > All languages are fixed over a given Planck time. What is it for a
>> language
>> > to be artificial or not? Can it be objectively proved either way?
>> >
>> > On Sun, 17 Jan 2021 at 18:43, Hauke Rehr <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Natural languages are flexible. Recipients of messages are
>> > > forgiving, trying to understand what you meant.
>> > > The rules are dynamic and at times even local or personal.
>> > >
>> > > This is much different from many artificial languages,
>> > > in particular from programming languages.
>> > > They have one set of fixed rules* (even if they are rules
>> > > for declaring rules); the interpreter/compiler can only
>> > > be told to handle a list of common mistakes but cannot
>> > > intelligently try to understand anything never seen before.
>> > >
>> > > Therefore I think learning should be at least somewhat different, too.
>> > > (And I used to learn even foreign languages by first studying
>> > > their grammar, then learning a thesaurus and then applying them,
>> > > building hopefully correct sentences. When a Spanish teacher began
>> > > talking to us in Spanish from the start, I was overchallenged.)
>> > >
>> > > * yes, they are evolving – but for any version, they’re fixed
>> > >
>> > > Am 17.01.21 um 16:27 schrieb Henry Rich:
>> > > > It gives them a wrong mental model of rank, which they must unlearn
>> > > > later.  This can have serious consequences,  particularly if they
>> get
>> > > > the idea that u"n is 'like u with the rank set to n' (if that were
>> true,
>> > > > u"1"_1 would be the same as u"_ 1, which it isn't).
>> > > >
>> > > > Ken thought you should learn J like you learn a natural language, by
>> > > > seeing and saying, and creating your own rules internally.  I think
>> he
>> > > > was wrong when it comes to verb rank.  The idea is so new, and so
>> > > > subtle, that users left to themselves get it wrong.  I had one very
>> > > > bright student who, discovering that (,1) + 1 2 3 gave an error,
>> found
>> > > > that +/ would not give an error, and ever after applied / to every
>> > > > verb.  He created his own rule, you see.
>> > > >
>> > > > Henry Rich
>> > > >
>> > > > On 1/17/2021 12:24 AM, Raul Miller wrote:
>> > > >> Does it really cost them that much?
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Given that beginner problems generally do not involve
>> multi-megabytes
>> > > >> of data, I mean...
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Thanks,
>> > > >>
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > ----------------------
>> > > mail written using NEO
>> > > neo-layout.org
>> > >
>> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > For information about J forums see
>> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>> > >
>> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to