Review Lecture - The algorithmic description of natural language
Abstract
Abstract Human language is a uniquely rewarding subject of psychological investigation because of the richness of its structure and its wide expressive power; and the ability to communicate in language is a skill which is possessed by almost all adult human beings. But the scientific study of language calls for appropriate modes of description; and the concept of an algorithm enables one to relate the phenomena of language to those of behaviour in general. A useful paradigm is to be found in computing science, where algorithms are expressed as programs written in specially designed languages. Like computer languages, natural languages have both a syntactic and a semantic aspect; and human utterances can be viewed as programs to be implemented by the hearer. This idea has been used for the development of computer programs with which one can converse in simple English.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
To understand how the brain works, the neurophysiologist must equip himself with a non-physiological account of the tasks the brain and its peripheral organs can perform; only then can he form mature hypotheses about how these tasks are carried out by the available hardware.
“In so far as the neurophysiologist is concerned to understand how the brain works, he must equip himself with a non-physiological account of the tasks which the brain and its peripheral organs are able to perform; only then can he form mature hypotheses as to how these tasks are carried out by the available 'hardware'-to borrow a phrase from computing science”
From Neuroscience Needs Behavior: Correcting a Reductionist Bias (2017) · cites this paper as Longuet-Higgins, 1972
Cites
Chomsky, N. (1957) · doi:10.1515/9783112316009 · Cited by 7,885 · see citing works
Understanding natural language
Winograd, T. A. (1972) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(72)90002-3 · Cited by 2,803 · see citing works
Prior, A. N. (1967) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198243113.001.0001 · Cited by 1,482 · see citing works
Boyd, J., & Thorne, J. P. (1969) · Journal of Linguistics · doi:10.1017/s002222670000205x · Cited by 115 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Neuroscience Needs Behavior: Correcting a Reductionist Bias
Krakauer, J. W., Ghazanfar, A. A., Gomez-Marin, A., MacIver, M. A., & Poeppel, D. (2017) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2016.12.041 · Cited by 1,358 · see citing works
- Authors
- Longuet-Higgins, H. C.
- Affiliations
- University of Edinburgh (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Longuet-Higgins, Hugh Christopher
- Venue
- Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences
- Publisher
- The Royal Society
- Published
- 1972-10-10
- Volume
- 182
- Issue
- 1068
- Pages
- 255-276
- ISSN
- 0080-4649 (ISSN-L)
- 2053-9193
- OpenAlex
- W2146310062
- Cited by
- 15
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2017: 1
- FWCI
- 11.83
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › semigroups and automata theory
- Keywords
- natural language, algorithms, computational linguistics, syntax and semantics, human language, language and behavior
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
