Xref: utzoo comp.ai:1148 sci.lang:1670 Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!sunybcs!boulder!hao!oddjob!uwvax!uwmacc!edwards From: edwards@uwmacc.UUCP (mark edwards) Newsgroups: comp.ai,sci.lang Subject: Re: Language Learning (anecdotes) Message-ID: <2053@uwmacc.UUCP> Date: 10 Dec 87 14:06:26 GMT References: <1966@uwmacc.UUCP> <12400009@iuvax> <1117@uhccux.UUCP> <2048@uwmacc.UUCP> <4181@utai.UUCP> Reply-To: edwards@unix.macc.wisc.edu (mark edwards) Organization: UW-Madison Academic Computer Center Lines: 47 In article <4181@utai.UUCP> murrayw@ai.UUCP (Murray Watt) writes: :> Just because there is no observed evidence does not prove your theory. : : Theories that predict the observed evidence are better than those that : are inconsistent with the evidence! : :> I say because any child can learn his native language any adult can :> learn the childs native language also. My proof is that any adult can : ^^^^^ : Is this a tableau proof or modus ponens? No. It was making a similar kind of statement to those who say it can't be done. Their proof is as shallow as my stated proof is. : :> do what ever any child can do. : ^^^^^^^^^ : How about climbing through small holes in fences? : : Murray Watt : : Are we getting emotional statements on the net from people : who cannot come to terms with their loss of youth? Maybe it is emotional. However I think a lot of the facts are being glossed over, ignored or simply not explored. You don't find answers by saying the observed evidence supports the "C period", or that an adult can not become fluent. Two hundred years ago the observed evidence would support the conclusion that "man cannot fly", or "the moon is made out of cheese". Things like radio, television, would never have been invented. Only 40 years ago, dreams about having a workstation on every desk would have seem to be only that. Now we know that someday we will probably have computers in our watches that are just has powerful as the workstations today. I guess I should move into the Cognitive Science discipline because the other disciplines dealing with natural language are much too rigid. It looks like it takes a new science to find answers that the other sciences refuse to consider. mark -- edwards@vms.macc.wisc.edu {allegra, ihnp4, seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!edwards UW-Madison, 1210 West Dayton St., Madison WI 53706