, 2008 9:23 PM
Subject: Lojban (was Re: [agi] constructivist issues)
Why would anyone use a simplified or formalized English (with regular
grammar and no ambiguities) as a path to natural language understanding? Formal
language processing has nothing to do with natural language
--- On Thu, 10/23/08, Mark Waser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi. I don't understand the following
statements. Could you explain it some more?
- Natural language can be learned from examples. Formal language
can not.
I really mean that formal languages like C++ and HTML are not designed to
[Usual disclaimer: this is not the approach I'm taking, but I don't find it
stupid]
The idea is that by teaching an AI in a minimally-ambiguous language, one
can build up its commonsense understanding such that it can then deal with
the ambiguities of natural language better, using this
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 11:23 AM, Matt Mahoney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So how does yet another formal language processing system help us understand
natural language? This route has been a dead end for 50 years, in spite of
the ability to always make some initial progress before getting stuck.
