Noam From: jeffrey E. [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, August 01, 2015 7:34 AM To: Noam Chomsky < > Subject: Re: Re: can it be thought of as no more than signal processi=g. why not use the same technology that attempts to intercept commun=cations and decode the signals and apply it to language. normally one tries to process the signals. i wonder if they put it i= reverse. and processed the language in an attempt to find coherence=??? On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 6:58 PM, Noam Chomsky <mailto: > =rote: There is a notion of coherence in bot= cases, but how to unify them, or whether it's possible, I don =80 t really see. From: jeffrey E. [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, July 31, 2015 1:33 PM To: Noam Chomsky <IMINION IMMIEMEM Subject: Re: what i have been calling my sense making module. . visual sense, is the image coherent. / ? why dont you ask your young friends what they think the cho=sky questions should be. I will provide the reward On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 1:21 PM, Noam Chomsky < > =rote: Marr's group, as you know, st=died edges, rigidity, etc. Those particular phenomena don't =eem relevant to language, except indirectly (as Marr and I in fact discussed often): th=re must be built-in systems that enter into language processing (including=determining grammatical status -- "legitimacy" =80 one property among many). That's what work on UG shoul= be about. 3 EFTA_R1_01614998 EFTA02492333