From: Edward Heil" <edheil@...>"
>
>I've been thinking about this, and while at first I thought of these
>RPN-ish grammars as dreadfully unnatural, they seem to be variations on
>the following theme:
>
>As symbols come in through your ears, you're sitting there building
>conceptions. You try to fuse the meanings of those symbols together as
>they come in. Sometimes a given meaning has several possible places
>where other meanings could fit into it -- multivalent verbs are examples
>of this. That's where you need things like case marking, morphological
>or syntactic.
>
>It strikes me that natlangs are probably nothing more than examples of
>this process, optimized according to parameters we don't understand to
>maximize communicative value and ease of use.
>
Hi,
You might be interested in this URL I found which is part of the big
field of human memory as related to information processing.
http://matrix.psych.ualberta.ca/%7emike/Pearl_Street/OSHERSON/Vol3/Jonides.3.7.html
Gerald Koenig
>
>>From: charles" <catty@...>"
>>
>>On Wed, 17 Mar 1999, Denis Moskowitz wrote:
>>
>>> Much of what has been discussed in this thread is reminiscent of what
>>> I'm doing with Rikchik
>("
http://www.cs.hmc.edu/~dmm/rikchik/intro.html").
>>> Rikchik words include a collector that says how many previous words
>>> are popped off the stack, and each word includes a relation that
>specifies
>>> how it relates to the word that collects it.