I disagree with this two ways. First, it's fairly well accepted among mainstream AI researchers that full NL competence is "AI-complete", i.e. that human-level intelligence is a prerequisite for NL. Secondly, even the parsing part of NLP is part of a more general recursive sequence understander/generator, which is used for doing complex tasks with the hands (and the conjecture is that language bootstrapped itself on this capability).
In other words, although there is enough special-purpose hardware in there to make it make sense to call language a "module", the full capability is so interwoven with general cognition that it can't be separated across a bottleneck. Josh On Saturday 28 April 2007 11:26, Lukasz Stafiniak wrote: > I think that a *solution to NLP* is not a *solution to AGI*, so your > argument does not apply. A solution to NLP is a module, with NL input > and two-way communication with the rest of the AGI, making the life > for the rest of AGI as simple as possible. ----- 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
