Xref: utzoo comp.ai:1141 sci.lang:1667
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!hao!oddjob!gargoyle!ihnp4!homxb!houdi!marty1
From: marty1@houdi.UUCP (M.BRILLIANT)
Newsgroups: comp.ai,sci.lang
Subject: Re: Language Learning (anecdotes)
Message-ID: <1433@houdi.UUCP>
Date: 8 Dec 87 15:09:15 GMT
References: <1966@uwmacc.UUCP> <12400009@iuvax> <1117@uhccux.UUCP> <2048@uwmacc.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Holmdel
Lines: 32
Summary: Word of warning about subject of argument

In article <2048@uwmacc.UUCP>, edwards@uwmacc.UUCP (mark edwards)
writes, in response to article <2999@bcsaic.UUCP> by
rwojcik@bcsaic.UUCP (Rick Wojcik):
> 
>  ... It seems to me what you are saying is that the observed
>  evidence shows that no adult can lose their native accent. Which is
>  like saying "That man listens only to jazz because that is all I hear
>  him listening to".
> 
>  Just because there is no observed evidence does not prove your theory.
>  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
>  do what ever any child can do.
> 
I don't think you can learn much about natural processes by restricting
the argument to terms of "can do" vs. "can't do."  All good studies of
natural systems are done statistically, with large subject pools and
systematic controls, because all individuals are different.

When you study the capabilities of psychological systems, important
clues can come from subtle differences in learning time or response
time.  Since differences may be reversed in some individuals, because
of their particular capabilities, large subject groups must be used.

It is probably true that anything most children do easily, some adult
can do with effort.  But if you want to know how natural learning
works, to figure out how to make artificial systems learn, that doesn't
tell you much.

M. B. Brilliant					Marty
AT&T-BL HO 3D-520	(201)-949-1858
Holmdel, NJ 07733	ihnp4!houdi!marty1