Exploring the N-th Dimension of Language

Mondal, Prakash (2010) Exploring the N-th Dimension of Language. [Journal (Paginated)]

Full text available as:



This paper is aimed at exploring the hidden fundamental computational property of natural language that has been so elusive that it has made all attempts to characterize its real computational property ultimately fail. Earlier natural language was thought to be context-free. However, it was gradually realized that this does not hold much water given that a range of natural language phenomena have been found as being of non-context-free character that they have almost scuttled plans to brand natural language contextfree. So it has been suggested that natural language is mildly context-sensitive and to some extent context-free. In all, it seems that the issue over the exact computational property has not yet been solved. Against this background it will be proposed that this exact computational property of natural language is perhaps the N-th dimension of language, if what we mean by dimension is nothing but universal (computational) property of natural language.

Item Type:Journal (Paginated)
Keywords:Hidden fundamental variable; natural language; context-free; computational property; N-th dimension of language.
Subjects:Linguistics > Computational Linguistics
ID Code:8026
Deposited By: Mondal, Prakash
Deposited On:09 Nov 2012 19:24
Last Modified:09 Nov 2012 19:24

References in Article

Select the SEEK icon to attempt to find the referenced article. If it does not appear to be in cogprints you will be forwarded to the paracite service. Poorly formated references will probably not work.


1. Chomsky, N.: Syntactic Structures. Mouton, The Hague (1957).

2. Chomsky, N.: Formal Properties of Grammars. In: Luce, R. D., Bush, R. R.,

Galanter, E. (eds.) Handbook of Mathematical Psychology. Vol. II. Wiley, New

York (1963).

3. Postal, P. M.: Limitations of Phrase-Structure Grammars. In: Fodor, Jerry, Katz,

Jerald. (eds.) The Structure of Language: Readings in the Philosophy of Language.

Prentice Hall, New Jersey (1964).

4. Langendoen, D. T.: On the Inadequacy of Type-2 and Type-3 Grammars for Human

Languages. In: Hopper, P. J. (ed.) Studies in Descriptive and Historical Linguistics.

John Benjamins, Amsterdam (1977).

5. Higginbotham, J.: English is not a Context-Free Language. Linguistic Inquiry. Vol.

15, 225-234 (1984).

6. Langendoen, D. T., Postal, P. M.: The Vastness of Natural Language. Blackwell,

Oxford (1984).

7. Langendoen, D. T., Postal, P. M.: English and the Class of Context-Free Languages.

Computational Linguistics. Vol. 10, 177-181 (1985).

8. Shieber, S. M.: Evidence against Context-Freeness of Natural Language. Linguistics

and Philosophy. Vol. 8, 333-343 (1985).

9. Pullum, G. K., Gazdar, G.: Natural Languages and Context-Free Languages.

Linguistics and Philosophy. Vol 4, 471-504 (1982).

10. Pullum, G. K.: On Two Recent Attempts to Show that English is not a CFL.

Computational Linguistics. Vol. 10, 182-186 (1985).

11. Joshi, A.: Factoring Recursion and Dependencies: An Aspect of Tree-Adjoining

Grammars and a Formal Comparison of some Formal Properties of TAGs, GPSGs,

PLGs, and LFGs. In: Proceedings of the 21st Annual Meeting of the Association for

Computational Linguistics, pp. 7-15. Association for Computational Linguistics,

Cambridge, MA (1983).

12. Joshi, A.: Tree Adjoining Grammars: How much Context-Sensitivity is Required to

Provide Reasonable Structural Descriptions? In: Dowty, D., Karttunen, L., Zwicky,

A. M. (eds.) Natural Language Processing: Psycholinguistic, Computational and

Theoretical Perspectives. Cambridge University Press, New York (1985).

13. Chomsky, N.: Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.


14. Chomsky, N.: Rules and Representations. Columbia University Press, New York


15. Chomsky, N.: The Minimalist Program. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. (1995).

16. Pollard, C., Sag, I.: Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. Chicago University

Press, Chicago (1994).

17. Bresnan, J.: The Mental Representation of Grammatical Relations. MIT Press,

Cambridge, Mass. (1982).

18. Pullum, G. K.: Systematicity and Natural Language Syntax. Croatian Journal of

Philosophy. Vol. 7. 375-402 (2007).

19. Turner, R.: Computable Models. Springer, London (2009).

20. Pendar, N.: . Linguistic Constraint Systems as General Soft Constraint Satisfaction.

Research on Language and Computation. Vol. 6:163–203 (2008).

21. Prince, A., Smolensky, P.: Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative

Grammar. Rutgers University Centre for Cognitive Science, New Jersey (1993).

66 Mondal P.

22. Cover, T. M., Thomas, J. A.: Elements of Information Theory. Wiley, New York


23. Andreewsky, E.: Complexity of the Basic Unit of Language: Some Parallels in

Physics and Biology. In: Mugur-Schachetr, M., van der Merwe, A. (eds.) Quantum

Mechanics, Mathematics, Cognition and Action. Springer, Amsterdam (2002).

24. Marr, D.: Vision: A Computational Investigation into the Human Representation and

Processing of Visual Information. W H Freeman, San Francisco (1982).

25. Mondal, P.: How Limited is the Limit? In: Proceedings of the International

Conference on Recent Advances in Natural Languages Processing, pp. 270-274.

RANLP, Borovets (2009).

26. Kinsella, A. R., Marcus, G. F.: Evolution, Perfection and Theories of Language.

Biolinguistics. Vol 3.2–3: 186–212 (2009).

27. Ristad, E. S.: The Language Complexity Game. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.


28. Goodman, J.: Semiring Parsing. Computational Linguistics. Vol. 25, 573.605 (1999).

29. Charnaik, E.: A Maximum-Entropy-Inspired Parser. In: Proceedings of North

American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics-Human

Language Technology, pp. 132-139. Association for Computational Linguistics,

Washington (2000).

30. Eisner, J.: Bilexical Grammars and their Cubic-Time Parsing Algorithms. In: Bunt,

H., Nijholt, A. (eds.) Advances in Probabilistic and Other Parsing Technologies, pp.

29.62. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Amsterdam (2000).

31. Nederhof, M. J.: Weighted Deductive Parsing and Knuth's Algorithm.

Computational Linguistics. Vol. 6. 135.143 (2003).

32. Pradhan, S., Ward, W., Hacioglu, K., Martin, J. H., Jurafsky, D.: Shallow Semantic

Parsing Using Support Vector Machines. In: Proceedings of North American

Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics-Human Language

Technology, pp. 233-240. Association for Computational Linguistics, Boston, MA


33. Charnaik, E., Johnson, M.: Coarse-to-Fine n-Best Parsing and MaxEnt

Discriminative Reranking. In: Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Meeting of the

Association for Computational Linguistics, 173-180. Association for Computational

Linguistics, Michigan (2005).

34. Huang, L., Chiang, D.: Better k-Best Parsing. In: Proceedings of International

Workshop on Parsing Technologies (IWPT), pp. 53-64. Vancouver, Omnipress


35. Moore, R. K.: Towards a Unified Theory of Spoken Language Processing. In:

Proceedings of 4th IEEE International Conference on Cognitive Informatics, pp. 167-

172. IEEE Press, Irvine, CA (2005).


Repository Staff Only: item control page