RE: RE: SUO: Language & Effect of spelling on dyslexia
Pat,
In my recommendations for developing some version of controlled
English as an alternative (or supplementary) notation for the
SUO, I never considered it to be anything more than "syntactic
sugar" for the base logic that is expressed in KIF.
>Speaking as a "logic" protagonist, I can certainly *conceive* of it.
>If anyone knows of such a 'restricted English' which has a precise
>model theory (precise enough to settle the question of whether an
>inference in the language is valid or not), then I would be delighted
>to hear about it and would be happy to see the SUO adopt it as an
>alternative notation. But without such a model theory any formalism
>is worthless for machine use.
If a formal mapping can be done in both directions, then it
is theoretically irrelevant whether the model theory is defined
for KIF or for the controlled English.
However, for practical purposes, the syntax of KIF is simple
enough that we would not expect major changes. But any version
of controlled English (or other NL) would undoubtedly be
subject to a great deal of development and refinement in order
to increase its naturalness, readability, writability, etc.
Furthermore, we would not want to make any single NL the
"official version". Therefore, it would make more sense to
adopt the KIF model theory and define any and every version
of controlled NL as a kind of syntactic sugar for KIF.
John