From: Andrew Clough (aclough@mit.edu)
Date: Wed Nov 28 2001 - 22:26:16 MST
At 10:45 AM 11/29/2001 +0800, you wrote:
>Incidentally, I had made some postings relating to this topic in the past,
>on related to the kinds of languages the higher
>intelligences will likely use. These also include a 4096 and 65536
>systems, as well as 4D data entry devices for rapid entry of
>these symbols.
>
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Personal_Discourses/message/100
Excerpted from link:
/I also discovered the intricate problem of designing a language:
/ - An ideal language must have 1) simplicity (to make the
language easy to
/ learn and use), 2) redundancy (to prevent errors from
occurring), 3)
/ compressibility (not taking too long to transmit common
modes of thinking) and
/ 4) flexibility (to allow creative use of the language to
deliver memes in the
/ most accurate way possible).
/ - You cannot achieve all these ideals simultaneously.
/ - You cannot compromise with all of them without making a
language cumbersome
/ and inefficient.
/ - You can focus on a few, but your language will lack the
important others.
/ - So what can we do? Sorry, I cannot give an answer yet
as I had not completed
/ my research.
If we are dealing with a posthuman language we can posit exceptional
language learning abilities. This means that we can neglect the simplicity
of the language entirely, and possibly flexibility too, since new languages
could be learned and used for different situations. I can see posthumans
having a language for spatial relations/physics/math, another for social
relationships, maybe another for statistical relationships, and a general,
flexible one.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:12:16 MST