Re: Natural language
Wallace B. Riley wrote:
> On this business of coding in 'natural language', has anybody thought of
> Esperanto?
Yes, Esperanto has been used as the intermediate language in efforts
at machine translation. Others have used Aymara (a South American
language)
because its grammar is entirely regular (far more regular in fact, than
Esperanto)
> I even have problems in Australian English and 'English'
> English (as opposed to American English).
That is perfectly normal. When I migrated to Australia I spoke perfect
English, and understood spoken "English" English without any problem.
But I couldn't understand a word of Australian English (the broader
variety, I mean). A fellow teacher, who was Canadian, told me the
same. It was so bad for him that he hadn't realized that the
announcements
at Sydney airport were made in English!
> Somebody start a movement to program in Esperanto. You might trigger a
> landslide.
Ahem! A landslide it will be: you'll be buried in it. No, Esperanto is
no good for programming. No human language is good for programming.
A programming language is not at all a "language" in the sense that
English, Hebrew, Esperanto, Chinese, Indonesian, are languages. I know:
I taught French, Chinese, Latin, and ...programming in Simula 67!
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
