Math can be pursued as a language (pure mathematics) or as measurements (mathematical physics). And while we can write fantasy novels in a language, we cannot do so in measurements. Language like mathematical platonism is bounded only by imagination, while measurements must always describe the existential because all measurement requires correspondence, while language only requires meaning.
Theme: Grammar
-
Math as a Language
Math can be pursued as a language (pure mathematics) or as measurements (mathematical physics). And while we can write fantasy novels in a language, we cannot do so in measurements. Language like mathematical platonism is bounded only by imagination, while measurements must always describe the existential because all measurement requires correspondence, while language only requires meaning.
-
THE PROBLEM OF SYMBOLIC EXISTENCE Or to quote my long time friend Frank Lovell,
THE PROBLEM OF SYMBOLIC EXISTENCE
Or to quote my long time friend Frank Lovell, Knowledge of unicorns exists, even if unicorns do not exist. And even this statement depends upon how we demarcate between Knowledge with Information. We actually don’t have a vocabulary for existence as idea or information other than ‘symbol’. And symbol is often confused with ‘glyph’. So, assuming we demarcate symbol and glyph unicorns exist only symbolically while horses exist existentially.
So for existence we have grammars:
|| platonic < symbolic < constructive(operational) <- descriptive(existential) -> analogistic > literary > and fictional(isms) ||
Source date (UTC): 2018-04-21 11:57:00 UTC
-
Math can be pursued as a language (pure mathematics) or as measurements (mathema
Math can be pursued as a language (pure mathematics) or as measurements (mathematical physics). And while we can write fantasy novels in a language, we cannot do so in measurements. Language like mathematical platonism is bounded only by imagination, while measurements must always describe the existential because all measurement requires correspondence, while language only requires meaning.
Source date (UTC): 2018-04-21 09:13:00 UTC
-
More on English vs German
Q: What would English look like if it followed the grammar of German? by Vlad Andreev (From Quora) Have you geheard, we should to the German Grammar overswitch? That have i already yesterday gemade. The German Grammar could, itself tofirst, strange sound, but you will perhaps discover that it not so difficult is. It is yes only a Matter of Wordorder… wait but. Have i “geheard” gesaid? I estimate once, that there also other Factors be could. Firstens, the Verbs. The Present Perfect in English is not the same as the Perfekt Timeform on German. On German, corresponds she to the Simple Past on English, in the last Years becomes but also increasingly employed in order all past Forms to indicate. The perfective Aspect, on German, is with the Gerundform geformed. So, now say we Things so like “gefound” and “geshopped” and “atgelooked”. Wait, “atgelooked”? Right. Whereas on the old Language, we Things “looked at”, now we Things “atlook”. This is a separable Verb, so the Gerundmarker becomes in the Word insidegeinserted. Secondens, the Nouns. Each has a grammatical Gender, and it must with the Pronouns match in anaphoric Situations (in this Answer, i want it to avoid, new Morphemes to withupcome, or from the Old English to borrow: so it’s called the Phrase, not þēos Phrase, is but still toreferred as she). If one with the Goal operates, new Words not towardstoadd, and the existing Inflections to reuse (“in the last Years”, not “in the lasts Years”, because the adjectival Plural unmarked in English is), then are we already more or less there. Some Littlehoods remain: Questionwordorder, Compoundnouns, certain Verbconjugationdetails and a few more, but in the Principle should you on Denglish communicate can. Much Luck! ANOTHER: English: Here is a little demonstration of what English would roughly feel like if it had essentially the same grammar as German. Word order would perhaps be the most difficult for modern English speakers trying to understand it, but word inflections would be particularly hard to produce correctly, especially because of noun genders. English with German grammar: Here is a little demonstration thereof, how English itself rough feelen would, if it in’t General thesame Grammar hadde, as German. That wordorder weré perhaps the biggest Understandingdifficulty for Speaker of’t modernen English, but Wordendings weren particular difficult correct to producen, before all because of thes’ gendern’s thes’ nounen’s. German with English grammar: Hier ist ein klein demonstration von wie Englisch ungefährlich würd fühl, wenn es hatte wesentlichlich de selb grammatik wie Deutsch. Wortfolge war vielleicht de meist schwierig für modern Englisch sprechers versuchend zu verstehen es, aber wort endungs würd sein besonders schwer zu reproduzier richtiglich, vor all wegen von substantiv geschlechts. German: Hier ist eine kleine Demonstration davon, wie sich Englisch ungefähr anfühlen würde, wenn es im Wesentlichen dieselbe Grammatik hätte, wie Deutsch. Die Wortstellung wäre vielleicht die größte Verständnisschwierigkeit für Sprecher des modernen Englisch, aber Wortendungen wären besonders schwer richtig zu reproduzieren, vor allem wegen der Geschlechter der Substantive. Apr 20, 2018 9:54am
-
More on English vs German
Q: What would English look like if it followed the grammar of German? by Vlad Andreev (From Quora) Have you geheard, we should to the German Grammar overswitch? That have i already yesterday gemade. The German Grammar could, itself tofirst, strange sound, but you will perhaps discover that it not so difficult is. It is yes only a Matter of Wordorder… wait but. Have i “geheard” gesaid? I estimate once, that there also other Factors be could. Firstens, the Verbs. The Present Perfect in English is not the same as the Perfekt Timeform on German. On German, corresponds she to the Simple Past on English, in the last Years becomes but also increasingly employed in order all past Forms to indicate. The perfective Aspect, on German, is with the Gerundform geformed. So, now say we Things so like “gefound” and “geshopped” and “atgelooked”. Wait, “atgelooked”? Right. Whereas on the old Language, we Things “looked at”, now we Things “atlook”. This is a separable Verb, so the Gerundmarker becomes in the Word insidegeinserted. Secondens, the Nouns. Each has a grammatical Gender, and it must with the Pronouns match in anaphoric Situations (in this Answer, i want it to avoid, new Morphemes to withupcome, or from the Old English to borrow: so it’s called the Phrase, not þēos Phrase, is but still toreferred as she). If one with the Goal operates, new Words not towardstoadd, and the existing Inflections to reuse (“in the last Years”, not “in the lasts Years”, because the adjectival Plural unmarked in English is), then are we already more or less there. Some Littlehoods remain: Questionwordorder, Compoundnouns, certain Verbconjugationdetails and a few more, but in the Principle should you on Denglish communicate can. Much Luck! ANOTHER: English: Here is a little demonstration of what English would roughly feel like if it had essentially the same grammar as German. Word order would perhaps be the most difficult for modern English speakers trying to understand it, but word inflections would be particularly hard to produce correctly, especially because of noun genders. English with German grammar: Here is a little demonstration thereof, how English itself rough feelen would, if it in’t General thesame Grammar hadde, as German. That wordorder weré perhaps the biggest Understandingdifficulty for Speaker of’t modernen English, but Wordendings weren particular difficult correct to producen, before all because of thes’ gendern’s thes’ nounen’s. German with English grammar: Hier ist ein klein demonstration von wie Englisch ungefährlich würd fühl, wenn es hatte wesentlichlich de selb grammatik wie Deutsch. Wortfolge war vielleicht de meist schwierig für modern Englisch sprechers versuchend zu verstehen es, aber wort endungs würd sein besonders schwer zu reproduzier richtiglich, vor all wegen von substantiv geschlechts. German: Hier ist eine kleine Demonstration davon, wie sich Englisch ungefähr anfühlen würde, wenn es im Wesentlichen dieselbe Grammatik hätte, wie Deutsch. Die Wortstellung wäre vielleicht die größte Verständnisschwierigkeit für Sprecher des modernen Englisch, aber Wortendungen wären besonders schwer richtig zu reproduzieren, vor allem wegen der Geschlechter der Substantive. Apr 20, 2018 9:54am
-
“The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English i
—“The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don’t just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary.” —James Nicoll
Source date (UTC): 2018-04-20 10:11:00 UTC
-
MORE ON ENGLISH VS GERMAN Q: What would English look like if it followed the gra
MORE ON ENGLISH VS GERMAN
Q: What would English look like if it followed the grammar of German?
by Vlad Andreev (From Quora)
Have you geheard, we should to the German Grammar overswitch? That have i already yesterday gemade. The German Grammar could, itself tofirst, strange sound, but you will perhaps discover that it not so difficult is. It is yes only a Matter of Wordorder… wait but. Have i “geheard” gesaid? I estimate once, that there also other Factors be could.
Firstens, the Verbs. The Present Perfect in English is not the same as the Perfekt Timeform on German. On German, corresponds she to the Simple Past on English, in the last Years becomes but also increasingly employed in order all past Forms to indicate. The perfective Aspect, on German, is with the Gerundform geformed. So, now say we Things so like “gefound” and “geshopped” and “atgelooked”.
Wait, “atgelooked”? Right. Whereas on the old Language, we Things “looked at”, now we Things “atlook”. This is a separable Verb, so the Gerundmarker becomes in the Word insidegeinserted.
Secondens, the Nouns. Each has a grammatical Gender, and it must with the Pronouns match in anaphoric Situations (in this Answer, i want it to avoid, new Morphemes to withupcome, or from the Old English to borrow: so it’s called the Phrase, not þēos Phrase, is but still toreferred as she).
If one with the Goal operates, new Words not towardstoadd, and the existing Inflections to reuse (“in the last Years”, not “in the lasts Years”, because the adjectival Plural unmarked in English is), then are we already more or less there. Some Littlehoods remain: Questionwordorder, Compoundnouns, certain Verbconjugationdetails and a few more, but in the Principle should you on Denglish communicate can. Much Luck!
ANOTHER:
English: Here is a little demonstration of what English would roughly feel like if it had essentially the same grammar as German. Word order would perhaps be the most difficult for modern English speakers trying to understand it, but word inflections would be particularly hard to produce correctly, especially because of noun genders.
English with German grammar: Here is a little demonstration thereof, how English itself rough feelen would, if it in’t General thesame Grammar hadde, as German. That wordorder weré perhaps the biggest Understandingdifficulty for Speaker of’t modernen English, but Wordendings weren particular difficult correct to producen, before all because of thes’ gendern’s thes’ nounen’s.
German with English grammar: Hier ist ein klein demonstration von wie Englisch ungefährlich würd fühl, wenn es hatte wesentlichlich de selb grammatik wie Deutsch. Wortfolge war vielleicht de meist schwierig für modern Englisch sprechers versuchend zu verstehen es, aber wort endungs würd sein besonders schwer zu reproduzier richtiglich, vor all wegen von substantiv geschlechts.
German: Hier ist eine kleine Demonstration davon, wie sich Englisch ungefähr anfühlen würde, wenn es im Wesentlichen dieselbe Grammatik hätte, wie Deutsch. Die Wortstellung wäre vielleicht die größte Verständnisschwierigkeit für Sprecher des modernen Englisch, aber Wortendungen wären besonders schwer richtig zu reproduzieren, vor allem wegen der Geschlechter der Substantive.
Source date (UTC): 2018-04-20 09:54:00 UTC
-
Creating New Understanding Is Very Hard, Disciplined, Time Consuming Work.
It takes an extraordinary long time to simplify a very complex set of ideas into a language consisting of a sufficiently small set of general rules, that they can be taught within the ability, patience, and incentives available to the audience. (this shit I do is f’king hard, which is why it takes so long. I have become much much better at communicating these ideas over time, and that’s because I work, much, much, harder with more discipline with lower tolerance for error, than anyone else I have know, and the only other person I really can commiserate with is Kant – and he was wrong – even if I identify with Hayek [information] in nearly everything. Hume and Smith were innovative and insightful but they lacked legal rigour. As far as I know it takes nine to ten years of research on an innovation to develop marginally indifferent ability in any discipline. I knew that going in. And I knew I was slower that most. But sometimes I wake up from my work and look back and realize that no sane person would do this kind of thing without a cognitive bias to work endlessly [hyper orderliness], and in pursuit of a solution to a problem [threat] that’s pervasive [cultural or civilizational]. )
-
Creating New Understanding Is Very Hard, Disciplined, Time Consuming Work.
It takes an extraordinary long time to simplify a very complex set of ideas into a language consisting of a sufficiently small set of general rules, that they can be taught within the ability, patience, and incentives available to the audience. (this shit I do is f’king hard, which is why it takes so long. I have become much much better at communicating these ideas over time, and that’s because I work, much, much, harder with more discipline with lower tolerance for error, than anyone else I have know, and the only other person I really can commiserate with is Kant – and he was wrong – even if I identify with Hayek [information] in nearly everything. Hume and Smith were innovative and insightful but they lacked legal rigour. As far as I know it takes nine to ten years of research on an innovation to develop marginally indifferent ability in any discipline. I knew that going in. And I knew I was slower that most. But sometimes I wake up from my work and look back and realize that no sane person would do this kind of thing without a cognitive bias to work endlessly [hyper orderliness], and in pursuit of a solution to a problem [threat] that’s pervasive [cultural or civilizational]. )