aruzinsky.... FYI , Einseele is fairly well educated when it comes to linguistics..... you, on the other hand, do not appear to be all that knowledgeble of linguistics , at all..... a little courtesy on your part might be in order.... On another front... statistics is usually a certain sign or indicatior of a "Soft Science".... Most "hard empirical Sciences" strive to obtain a single fixed result for any given experiment... I mean, taking into account and accomodation for variables imposed by the limitations of experimental instruments or by the limitations of the "theoretical method".... But, soft sciences depend on statistical ranges..... e.g. 25% of respondents sustain this view....etc....
Finally, in reply to Mr. Creed.....Thanks for the memory jolt.....a pleasant reminder of fonder, younger days.... Songwriters: Glover, Roger;Blackmore, Ritchie;Gillan, Ian http://www.lyricsg.com/25580/lyrics/deeppurple/knockingatyourbackdoor.html Perfect Strangers (1984) Sweet Lucy was a dancer But none of us would chance her Because she was a Samurai She made electric shadows Beyond our fingertips And none of us could reach that high She came on like a teaser I had to touch and please her Enjoy a little paradise The log was in my pocket When Lucy met the Rockett And she never knew the reason why I can't deny it With that smile on her face It's not the kill It's the thrill of the chase Feel it coming It's knocking at the door You know it's no good running It's not against the law The point of no return And now you know the score And now you're learning What's knockin' at your back door Sweet Nancy was so fancy To get into her pantry Had to be the aristocracy The members that she toyed with At her city club Were something in diplomacy So we put her on the hit list Of a common cunning linguist A master of many tongues And now she eases gently >From her Austin to her Bentley Suddenly she feels so young Sweet Lucy was a dancer But none of us would chance her Because she was a Samurai She made electric shadows Beyond our fingertips And none of us could reach that high She came on like a teaser I had to touch and please her Enjoy a little paradise The log was in my pocket When Lucy met the Rockett And she never knew the reason why I can't deny it With that smile on her face It's not the kill It's the thrill of the chase Feel it coming It's knocking at the door You know it's no good running It's not against the law The point of no return And now you know the score And now you're learning What's knockin' at your back door Sweet Nancy was so fancy To get into her pantry Had to be the aristocracy The members that she toyed with At her city club Were something in diplomacy So we put her on the hit list Of a common cunning linguist A master of many tongues And now she eases gently >From her Austin to her Bentley Suddenly she feels so young On Nov 30, 11:09 am, aruzinsky <aruzin...@general-cathexis.com> wrote: > Addenda: > > And there is a big overlap between electrical engineers and computer > scientists in publication and practice. In some universities, the two > departments have merged. > > On Nov 30, 9:44 am, aruzinsky <aruzin...@general-cathexis.com> wrote: > > > > > Dear Enrique Fynn, > > > Exactly, except I am talking about engineers who publish papers in > > peer reviewed engineering journals versus "scientists" who publish > > papers in peer reviewed science journals. Otherwise, we should > > include witchdoctors as scientists when comparing with your suggested > > "wall designer constructor engineers". > > > Who do you think designed the electronic device that you are currently > > looking at, you big ingrate? Name one good thing in my life for which > > linguists are responsible. > > > On Nov 29, 1:51 pm, Enrique Fynn <enriquef...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Dear aruzinsky... > > > > Now you are proposing the aruzinsky classification of science. > > > So a engineering is now more science than other sciences because it > > > has more empirical validation... > > > Branches of logic, set theory, computability, theoretical physics on > > > the other hand are less science... now with a completely new aruzinsky > > > model, we can rebuild the epistemology entirely, first by defining the > > > degree of science... > > > So... I assume by this logic that a wall designer constructor engineer > > > is doing science constructing walls, because more empirical evidence > > > for the walls cannot be given. > > > > Regards; > > > Fynn. > > > -- > > > "Even a stopped clock is right twice a day" > > > > "When I feed the poor, they call me a saint, but when I ask why the > > > poor are hungry, they call me a communist." > > > _ Dom Helder Camara > > > > 2010/11/29 aruzinsky <aruzin...@general-cathexis.com>: > > > > > Engineering is a sort of science, as a matter of degree, it is more > > > > science than most "science" because it has more empirical validation. > > > > > I assume that you have some familiarity with translation programs such > > > > ashttp://translate.google.com/#. They are currently terrible, but > > > > do you think that they will ever "amount to very much?" I think they > > > > will provided either the linguists get their act together, or, the > > > > more competent body of engineers, who design the software, do the > > > > necessary linguistics research themselves (especially, as I described > > > > about conditional probability). > > > > > On Nov 28, 3:07 pm, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > >> PS... Einseele... if he's still around, should get involved in this > > > >> discussion....he likes Linguistics.. and math... and computer > > > >> languages sorts of matters..... > > > >> My own opinion is that Linguistics is a very Soft Science... that will > > > >> never amount to very much... at best it can aspire to be to is to be > > > >> "encyclopedic" and catalogue all "words" or other languages > > > >> constructions... just as a sort of "zoological" excercise... and note > > > >> what new "species or genera" are "born" and which old ones become > > > >> extinct...... > > > > >> On Nov 28, 3:33 pm, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > >> > But, in Linguistics, empirical validation, including > > > >> > experimentation,> is more easily done than in sociology or > > > >> > psychiatry/ > > > > >> > You think so?... clearly..... > > > >> > Can you explain how easier and why?... I mean, apart from the > > > >> > "seeming" false validation (experimental or otherwise provided by > > > >> > such > > > >> > things" (human constructs, really) such "grammar rules" accepted > > > >> > definitions and the like.... language as a means of shared > > > >> > communication requiring a basic imposed uniforminty for the sake of > > > >> > mutual "human" understanding, sort of thing..... > > > >> > As another consideration.... how do you account for other shared > > > >> > imposed orderings... like Mathematics.... Musical notation..... > > > >> > Computer languages....etc. Are they "Hard Science or Soft Science.... > > > >> > Mathematics seems to be a confusing case... but only because it is > > > >> > used to account for "Hard Science" sorts of "things"? > > > >> > nominal9 > > > > >> > On Nov 27, 5:17 pm, aruzinsky <aruzin...@general-cathexis.com> wrote: > > > > >> > > But, in Linguistics, empirical validation, including > > > >> > > experimentation, > > > >> > > is more easily done than in sociology or psychiatry. > > > > >> > > On Nov 27, 11:20 am, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > >> > > > Hard Science... Soft Science.... > > > >> > > > Physics... Sociology > > > >> > > > Biology... Psychology > > > >> > > > anything... "Human"- or behavioral based (or other such areas... > > > >> > > > pretty much Soft Science, I think......... > > > >> > > > Cause and effect.... action and reaction > > > >> > > > nominal9 > > > > >> > > > On Nov 24, 12:34 pm, aruzinsky <aruzin...@general-cathexis.com> > > > >> > > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > Correction: > > > > >> > > > > Replace "experimentation" with "empirical validation." > > > >> > > > > Experimentation is not always necessary for science (My bad.). > > > > >> > > > > On Nov 23, 4:40 pm, aruzinsky <aruzin...@general-cathexis.com> > > > >> > > > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > According tohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistics, > > > >> > > > > > linguistics is > > > >> > > > > > a science. According > > > >> > > > > > tohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science#Scientific_method, > > > >> > > > > > science requires experimentation. For your entertainment, > > > >> > > > > > what's > > > >> > > > > > wrong with these papers about bare plurals?: > > > > >> > > > > >http://people.umass.edu/partee/docs/Dependent_Plurals_Partee.pdfhttp:...... > > > > >> > > > > > The authors of these papers do not report any > > > >> > > > > > experimentation, > > > >> > > > > > therefore, these studies are not science. > > > > >> > > > > > I found only one paper with an experiment: > > > > >> > > > > >http://mercury.hau.ac.kr/kggc/Publications/SIGG/SIGG12/SIGG12201_HKKa... > > > > >> > > > > > but it is flawed in some other ways.- Hide quoted text - > > > > >> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > >> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > >> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > >> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > >> - Show quoted text - > > > > > -- > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > > > Groups "Epistemology" group. > > > > To post to this group, send email to epistemol...@googlegroups.com. > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > > > epistemology+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > > > > For more options, visit this group > > > > athttp://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.-Hidequoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to epistemol...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to epistemology+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.
