User talk:ASHPvanRenssen

Welcome![edit]

Hello, ASHPvanRenssen, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! BracketBot (talk) 16:54, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

July 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Formal language may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

* Andries van Renssen, ''Formal English]'', Lulu, 2014, ISBN 978-1-304-60376-0, 2nd edition of ''Gellish, a Generic Extensible Ontological

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:54, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

== Reply Thanks. I have corrected the typing error.

Formal language[edit]

Can you explain why you think Formal English belongs in the formal language article? That article is about the syntactic properties of sets of strings of symbols, and is not about anything to do with semantics. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:10, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The exclusion of any semantics is an unnecessary constraint for a formal language. Formal languages also include sets of strings of symbols that constrain the strings to strings that also occur in natural languages. Gellish Formal English is an example of such a formal language.

Why don't you use rather the notion of Controlled natural language? Formal languages are usually associated with computer science or mathemetics, not linguistics. But the article formal language really desserves a section about the linguistic motivations and applications (currently it's only mentionned in the intro). Pintoch (talk) 15:56, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

- - The term 'formal language' and formal English were used in linguistics already long time ago (1970) whereas it included semantics. See Montague grammar and his article "English as a Formal Language" (1970). Gellish Formal English is a formalization of Montague's English.