Re: Mathematical Notation (Was Re: Tiny lexicon languages)

On 19 Jun 99, at 13:09, Charles wrote:

> Paul Bennett wrote:
>
> > I may be way off the point here, but there's a very effective
> > mathematical notation already in existence
> >
> > It's called Reverse Polish Notation.
>
> The last time we discussed RPN, I think the sticking point
> was how to handle adverbs that dangle before/after the verb,
> like "not" in Japanese. Also, what to make of multiple
> adjectives and such. The basic "subject object(s) verb" pattern
> works well enough, but I got lost in modifier complications.
Absolutely.  As the basis for making a whole language, RPN
seems fatally flawed.  The referencing back and forth along
streams of both lexemes(?) and sememes(?) that occurs in parsing
most languages makes a complete mockery of what RPN's
designed for.

I jumped in on the topic of "How can we have a spoken system for
disambiguating(?) mathematical expressions?" with a suggestion
for a word order that could accompany that part of a conlang that
expresses mathematics, hence the change in subject line.



---
Pb

Still no conlang epithet, I'm waiting for Wenetaic to get stable
before I dare produce anything substantial.