The Relationship Between Language and Speech: Formal Understanding of Natural Symbology
1. Teacher Education Development Center (Interdisciplinary Knowledge Modeling Research Group), Peking University, Beijing 100871, China
2. Peng Ge Learning Center (Admissions Department for China), Budapest British International Academy, Budapest 1025, Hungary
| Abstract: | This paper aims to realize the natural language formal understanding through the mathematical logic principle of indirect formalization for Chinese and its characters, and its essence is to understand the relationship between language and speech. The method is: First, it is clear that monosyllabic Chinese characters have two basic attributes of language and text, English letters and morphemes, words, phrases and sentences, which belong to another type of text and language; It is found that in the past Chinese was regarded as a monosyllabic language and English was regarded as a polysyllabic language which is a complete misjudgment; Finally, it is further clarified that monosyllabic and mixed syllables not only have unique interpersonal communication in Chinese, but also have human-computer interaction and even automated batch processing with uniqueness, its fundamental feature is that the monosyllabic Chinese characters meet a certain arithmetic base that is indirectly formalized, that is, the typical P base. Its result is that, it was unexpectedly discovered that arithmetic and language have rigid constraints on the underlying sequence-position logic and surface linkage functions, but there are flexible rules for broad interpretation or translation for the symbolic objects of their division and combination. Its significance lies in: sequence-position logic, linkage function, generalized bilingual or translation or language, in essence, from the macroscopic global to the microscopic local, to systematically and formally understand natural language, especially to thoroughly understand the relationship between language and speech, namely: Global Chinese Sequencing and Positioning System. |
| Keywords: | Computer Aided; Formal Methods; Chinese Character Studies; Compatibility of Standardization; Cognitive Computing Systems; Linguistics and Philology; Mathematical Logic; Arithmetic System |
| DOI: | 10.57237/j.cll.2022.01.003 |
View:
Downloads:
Received: 10 September 2022
Accepted: 11 October 2022
Published Online: 27 October 2022
References
| [1] | Lepschy, Guilio. “F. de Saussure, Course in general linguistics, translated and annotated by Roy Harris. London: Duckworth, 1983. Pp. xx + 236.” Journal of Linguistics 21 (1985): 250 - 254. |
| [2] | Sériot, Patrick. “Is language a system of signs? Lenin, Saussure and the theory of hieroglyphics.” Sign Systems Studies (2022): n. pag. |
| [3] | Coeckelbergh, Mark. “Technology Games: Using Wittgenstein for Understanding and Evaluating Technology.” Science and Engineering Ethics 24 (2018): 1503 - 1519. |
| [4] | Kuusela, Oskari. “Wittgenstein on Logic as the Method of Philosophy.” (2018). |
| [5] | De Mesel, Benjamin. “Ordinary Language Philosophy as an Extension of Ideal Language Philosophy. Comparing the Methods of the Later Wittgenstein and P.F. Strawson.” Philosophical Investigations (2021): n. pag. |
| [6] | Gruber, Monika. “Alfred Tarski and the "Concept of Truth in Formalized Languages".” (2016). |
| [7] | Kennedy, J.. “Gödel, Tarski and the Lure of Natural Language.” (2020). |
| [8] | Wagner, Pierre. “CARNAP.” Philosophy of Language (2020): n. pag. |
| [9] | Novaes, Catarina Dutilh. “Carnap meets Foucault: conceptual engineering and genealogical investigations.” Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines (2020): 1-27. |
| [10] | “Saussure and Chomsky.” (2022). |
| [11] | Searle, John R.. “Chomsky's Revolution in Linguistics.” (2016). |
| [12] | Ibbotson, Paul and Michael Tomasello. “Evidence rebuts Chomsky's theory of language learning.” Scientific American 315 (2016): n. pag. |
| [13] | 邹晓辉, 邹顺鹏.当代中国大学新使命: 基于汉语思维与双语处理的文化传承和创新 [J]. 南京理工大学学报(社会科学版), 2012, 25 (05): 106-113. |
| [14] | 邹晓辉, 邹顺鹏.两大类形式化方略 [J]. 计算机应用与软件, 2013, 30 (09): 194-199. |
| [15] | 邹晓辉, 王肖群, 邹顺鹏.大数据与人机对话: 语必在言的集合里选取 [J]. 计算机应用与软件, 2019, 36 (09): 186-191. |
| [16] | 邹顺鹏, 邹晓辉, 柯丽君, 林雨露. 三类思维: 可感、可知、可悟三个计量维度 [C]. 中国思维科学会议CCNS 2019 暨上海市社联学术活动月思维科学学术讨论会论文集.上海交通大学钱学森纪念馆, 2019: 21-30. |
| [17] | 邹晓辉, 邹顺鹏. 软件工程学科何以独特——形式化方法的双重路径 [J]. 软件, 2011, 32 (07): 1-14+20. |
| [18] | 邹晓辉, 邹顺鹏. “云计算”概念的分析研究——协同智能计算系统的一个特例 [J]. 软件, 2011, 32 (09): 1-4+8. |
| [19] | 邹晓辉, 邹顺鹏.言和语的关系——在语言和言语的区分基础上进一步 [C]. 第四届中西语言哲学国际研讨会论文摘要集. 苏州大学, 2012: 160. |
| [20] | 邹晓辉. 智能教育协同创新: 学术引领与产业驱动的数字化进程 [J]. 数字教育, 2017, 3 (06): 1-5. |
| [21] | Maimaiti, M. et al. “How to Understand: Three Types of Bilingual Information Processing?” ICCSIP (2018). |
| [22] | Zou, Shunpeng and Xiaohui Zou. “Understanding: How to Resolve Ambiguity.” IFIP TC12 ICIS (2017). |
| [23] | Zou, Xiaohui et al. “The Strategy of Constructing an Interdisciplinary Knowledge Center.” ICNC-FSKD (2019). |
| [24] | Lv, Chenjun and Xiaohui Zou. “How to Understand the Mathematical Basis of Two Basic Types of Computational Behavior.” ICCSIP (2018). |
| [25] | Hua, Wei et al. “Using Two Formal Strategies to Eliminate Ambiguity in Poetry Text.” IFIP TC12 ICIS (2018). |
| [26] | Zou, Xiaohui. “The Formal Understanding Models.” ICCSIP (2018). |
Join the Editorial Board
We invite active, qualified and high profile scientists and researchers to join as Editorial Board Members.
Join UsBecome a Reviewer
Scholars with a strong interest in reviewing are invited to join the reviewer panel to ensure the quality of the research to be published.
Join Us