The other thing I'd add is that you have an understanding that semantic ambiguities have to be resolved somehow, and there is likely to be a marker in the language for resolving those ambiguities, and so you pay attention to where those clues might be.
Right now I am working on reverse engineering a communications protocol internal to a particular series of models of the IBM Wheelwriter typewriter (mine is a WW5), and understanding where information originates, and where it needs to go is a huge help in puzzling out what is likely to be going on, and that if a letter comes out on the paper, it got there for a reason. Eventually, this project will be offered as a potential PLUG talk. On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 3:40 PM John Jason Jordan <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, 7 Jun 2020 14:38:17 -0700 > Ali Corbin <[email protected]> dijo: > > >No reference, but a personal anecdote. In my first job, back in > >late 70's, the company was having problems finding people with CS > >degrees. They ended up going to colleges and recruiting language > >majors. > > I am a linguist, not a language major, but I have long observed that > many language majors are such because they have found that they are > good at learning languages. And as a linguist (and one who is also good > at learning languages), the key to being good at learning languages is > an ability to recognize complex patterns unconsciously and store them > in the deeper parts of the brain. And the more languages you learn the > easier it is to learn new ones, even ones that are unrelated to your > current languages. > > Those programmers who are proficient in more than one computer language > may find a kernel of truth in the above. > _______________________________________________ > PLUG mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > _______________________________________________ PLUG mailing list [email protected] http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
