On Thu, 21 Sep 2000, Marcus Smith wrote: > H. S. Teoh wrote: > > >Alas??? I find math to be very enlightening in learning different ways to > >think about things. I especially appreciate the courses I took on number > >theory and set theory. > > Try set theory in relation to linguistics. Or constructing lattices based > on everyday sentences. Ie, mathematical proof that "The dog is running > fast" implies that a) there is a dog, b) there is a running, c) the dog is > running, etc. That class hurt my poor head. ! Set theory isn't my strength; I'm assiduously avoiding the semester class in Zermelo-Fraenkel (I hope I spelled that right) set theory. > Just a sample form my text: > > "In general, (both)...and... and (either)...or... combine expressions of > d,d' in a lattice category C, and [(both) d and d'] denotes the greatest [snip] > This is why mathematicians can do well in linguistics. (ruefully) I don't know about linguistics, but I'm *much* better at language-learning (writing, foreign language, whatever) than at math. German has yet to give me a headache (I was freaked out when I first saw separable verbs, but I got used to them, and you know what? the bracketing sort of structure they induce is kinda pretty). French rarely did. Math, OTOH... Sometime I'll post 1-100 in Chevraqis.... What would be *really* fun to encode in a conlang in terms of conjunctions/conditionals (and, but, if...? I'm never sure if I have the right terminology), would be fuzzy logic, a.k.a multivalent logic (and yes, it's an area of math, and no, it isn't *that* fuzzy). So you could have ways to express (A and not-A) without being inconsistent, because you have the in-between shades. I only wish I knew more about the field; I'm probably going to stick to more tame conjunctions/conditionals for Chevraqis, like XOR and OR and so on. YHL