Saussure, the greatest linguist in the 20^(th) century, is the founder of modern linguistics, semiology as well as structuralism linguistics. Moreover, his ideas have have influenced a great number of linguists in the...Saussure, the greatest linguist in the 20^(th) century, is the founder of modern linguistics, semiology as well as structuralism linguistics. Moreover, his ideas have have influenced a great number of linguists in the last ninety years. This paper aims to present and comment on some of his ideas in one of this masterworks—Course in General Linguistics. In the end, the author proposes some suggestions for further study.展开更多
The Monty Hall problem has received its fair share of attention in mathematics. Recently, an entire monograph has been devoted to its history. There has been a multiplicity of approaches to the problem. These approach...The Monty Hall problem has received its fair share of attention in mathematics. Recently, an entire monograph has been devoted to its history. There has been a multiplicity of approaches to the problem. These approaches are not necessarily mutually exclusive. The design of the present paper is to add one more approach by analyzing the mathematical structure of the Monty Hall problem in digital terms. The structure of the problem is described as much as possible in the tradition and the spirit—and as much as possible by means of the algebraic conventions—of George Boole’s Investigation of the Laws of Thought (1854), the Magna Charta of the digital age, and of John Venn’s Symbolic Logic (second edition, 1894), which is squarely based on Boole’s Investigation and elucidates it in many ways. The focus is not only on the digital-mathematical structure itself but also on its relation to the presumed digital nature of cognition as expressed in rational thought and language. The digital approach is outlined in part 1. In part 2, the Monty Hall problem is analyzed digitally. To ensure the generality of the digital approach and demonstrate its reliability and productivity, the Monty Hall problem is extended and generalized in parts 3 and 4 to related cases in light of the axioms of probability theory. In the full mapping of the mathematical structure of the Monty Hall problem and any extensions thereof, a digital or non-quantitative skeleton is fleshed out by a quantitative component. The pertinent mathematical equations are developed and presented and illustrated by means of examples.展开更多
In Advances in Pure Mathematics (www.scirp.org/journal/apm), Vol. 1, No. 4 (July 2011), pp. 136-154, the mathematical structure of the much discussed problem of probability known as the Monty Hall problem was mapped i...In Advances in Pure Mathematics (www.scirp.org/journal/apm), Vol. 1, No. 4 (July 2011), pp. 136-154, the mathematical structure of the much discussed problem of probability known as the Monty Hall problem was mapped in detail. It is styled here as Monty Hall 1.0. The proposed analysis was then generalized to related cases involving any number of doors (d), cars (c), and opened doors (o) (Monty Hall 2.0) and 1 specific case involving more than 1 picked door (p) (Monty Hall 3.0). In cognitive terms, this analysis was interpreted in function of the presumed digital nature of rational thought and language. In the present paper, Monty Hall 1.0 and 2.0 are briefly reviewed (§§2-3). Additional generalizations of the problem are then presented in §§4-7. They concern expansions of the problem to the following items: (1) to any number of picked doors, with p denoting the number of doors initially picked and q the number of doors picked when switching doors after doors have been opened to reveal goats (Monty Hall 3.0;see §4);(3) to the precise conditions under which one’s chances increase or decrease in instances of Monty Hall 3.0 (Monty Hall 3.2;see §6);and (4) to any number of switches of doors (s) (Monty Hall 4.0;see §7). The afore-mentioned article in APM, Vol. 1, No. 4 may serve as a useful introduction to the analysis of the higher variations of the Monty Hall problem offered in the present article. The body of the article is by Leo Depuydt. An appendix by Richard D. Gill (see §8) provides additional context by building a bridge to modern probability theory in its conventional notation and by pointing to the benefits of certain interesting and relevant tools of computation now available on the Internet. The cognitive component of the earlier investigation is extended in §9 by reflections on the foundations of mathematics. It will be proposed, in the footsteps of George Boole, that the phenomenon of mathematics needs to be defined in empirical terms as something that happens to the brain or something that the brain does. It is generally assumed that mathematics is a property of nature or reality or whatever one may call it. There is not the slightest intention in this paper to falsify this assumption because it cannot be falsified, just as it cannot be empirically or positively proven. But there is no way that this assumption can be a factual observation. It can be no more than an altogether reasonable, yet fully secondary, inference derived mainly from the fact that mathematics appears to work, even if some may deem the fact of this match to constitute proof. On the deepest empirical level, mathematics can only be directly observed and therefore directly analyzed as an activity of the brain. The study of mathematics therefore becomes an essential part of the study of cognition and human intelligence. The reflections on mathematics as a phenomenon offered in the present article will serve as a prelude to planned articles on how to redefine the foundations of probability as one type of mathematics in cognitive fashion and on how exactly Boole’s theory of probability subsumes, supersedes, and completes classical probability theory. §§2-7 combined, on the one hand, and §9, on the other hand, are both self-sufficient units and can be read independently from one another. The ultimate design of the larger project of which this paper is part remains the increase of digitalization of the analysis of rational thought and language, that is, of (rational, not emotional) human intelligence. To reach out to other disciplines, an effort is made to describe the mathematics more explicitly than is usual.展开更多
Course in General Linguistics (1916) is an indispensable “Great Book” in the contemporary canon of ideas.This foundational text laid out an innovative research program in contemporary semiotics and it led to the dev...Course in General Linguistics (1916) is an indispensable “Great Book” in the contemporary canon of ideas.This foundational text laid out an innovative research program in contemporary semiotics and it led to the development of structuralist methods in the humanities.Recent developments in Saussurean scholarship offer multiple venues for developing a critical perspective on this programmatic text.Specifically,the materials from the linguist’s Nachlass (works unpublished or unexhibited at Saussure’s death,some of them recently discovered) challenge the official doctrine associated with the Course (a posthumous redaction published in 1916 and attributed to Saussure who died in 1913) and with structural linguistics (a “return to Saussure” in the 1950s and 60s France).The official doctrine maps language onto a set of hierarchical oppositions between la langue and la parole,and synchrony and diachrony.According to Saussure’s own writings,language intersects structure with speech,and stability with temporal change (Saussure,2006;Stawarska,2020,2015).Instead of a vertical dualism elevating the synchronous structure (the presumed proper object of study in scientific linguistics) above the evolving patterns of use,we find that language has a “double essence” (Saussure,2006,p.144) and it exists equally in the present and in the past;furthermore,duality is a “first and last” principle in general linguistics (p.3).This inescapable duality is rendered more concrete in this essay by studying linguistic creativity,specifically,innovation by analogy.展开更多
文摘Saussure, the greatest linguist in the 20^(th) century, is the founder of modern linguistics, semiology as well as structuralism linguistics. Moreover, his ideas have have influenced a great number of linguists in the last ninety years. This paper aims to present and comment on some of his ideas in one of this masterworks—Course in General Linguistics. In the end, the author proposes some suggestions for further study.
文摘The Monty Hall problem has received its fair share of attention in mathematics. Recently, an entire monograph has been devoted to its history. There has been a multiplicity of approaches to the problem. These approaches are not necessarily mutually exclusive. The design of the present paper is to add one more approach by analyzing the mathematical structure of the Monty Hall problem in digital terms. The structure of the problem is described as much as possible in the tradition and the spirit—and as much as possible by means of the algebraic conventions—of George Boole’s Investigation of the Laws of Thought (1854), the Magna Charta of the digital age, and of John Venn’s Symbolic Logic (second edition, 1894), which is squarely based on Boole’s Investigation and elucidates it in many ways. The focus is not only on the digital-mathematical structure itself but also on its relation to the presumed digital nature of cognition as expressed in rational thought and language. The digital approach is outlined in part 1. In part 2, the Monty Hall problem is analyzed digitally. To ensure the generality of the digital approach and demonstrate its reliability and productivity, the Monty Hall problem is extended and generalized in parts 3 and 4 to related cases in light of the axioms of probability theory. In the full mapping of the mathematical structure of the Monty Hall problem and any extensions thereof, a digital or non-quantitative skeleton is fleshed out by a quantitative component. The pertinent mathematical equations are developed and presented and illustrated by means of examples.
文摘In Advances in Pure Mathematics (www.scirp.org/journal/apm), Vol. 1, No. 4 (July 2011), pp. 136-154, the mathematical structure of the much discussed problem of probability known as the Monty Hall problem was mapped in detail. It is styled here as Monty Hall 1.0. The proposed analysis was then generalized to related cases involving any number of doors (d), cars (c), and opened doors (o) (Monty Hall 2.0) and 1 specific case involving more than 1 picked door (p) (Monty Hall 3.0). In cognitive terms, this analysis was interpreted in function of the presumed digital nature of rational thought and language. In the present paper, Monty Hall 1.0 and 2.0 are briefly reviewed (§§2-3). Additional generalizations of the problem are then presented in §§4-7. They concern expansions of the problem to the following items: (1) to any number of picked doors, with p denoting the number of doors initially picked and q the number of doors picked when switching doors after doors have been opened to reveal goats (Monty Hall 3.0;see §4);(3) to the precise conditions under which one’s chances increase or decrease in instances of Monty Hall 3.0 (Monty Hall 3.2;see §6);and (4) to any number of switches of doors (s) (Monty Hall 4.0;see §7). The afore-mentioned article in APM, Vol. 1, No. 4 may serve as a useful introduction to the analysis of the higher variations of the Monty Hall problem offered in the present article. The body of the article is by Leo Depuydt. An appendix by Richard D. Gill (see §8) provides additional context by building a bridge to modern probability theory in its conventional notation and by pointing to the benefits of certain interesting and relevant tools of computation now available on the Internet. The cognitive component of the earlier investigation is extended in §9 by reflections on the foundations of mathematics. It will be proposed, in the footsteps of George Boole, that the phenomenon of mathematics needs to be defined in empirical terms as something that happens to the brain or something that the brain does. It is generally assumed that mathematics is a property of nature or reality or whatever one may call it. There is not the slightest intention in this paper to falsify this assumption because it cannot be falsified, just as it cannot be empirically or positively proven. But there is no way that this assumption can be a factual observation. It can be no more than an altogether reasonable, yet fully secondary, inference derived mainly from the fact that mathematics appears to work, even if some may deem the fact of this match to constitute proof. On the deepest empirical level, mathematics can only be directly observed and therefore directly analyzed as an activity of the brain. The study of mathematics therefore becomes an essential part of the study of cognition and human intelligence. The reflections on mathematics as a phenomenon offered in the present article will serve as a prelude to planned articles on how to redefine the foundations of probability as one type of mathematics in cognitive fashion and on how exactly Boole’s theory of probability subsumes, supersedes, and completes classical probability theory. §§2-7 combined, on the one hand, and §9, on the other hand, are both self-sufficient units and can be read independently from one another. The ultimate design of the larger project of which this paper is part remains the increase of digitalization of the analysis of rational thought and language, that is, of (rational, not emotional) human intelligence. To reach out to other disciplines, an effort is made to describe the mathematics more explicitly than is usual.
文摘Course in General Linguistics (1916) is an indispensable “Great Book” in the contemporary canon of ideas.This foundational text laid out an innovative research program in contemporary semiotics and it led to the development of structuralist methods in the humanities.Recent developments in Saussurean scholarship offer multiple venues for developing a critical perspective on this programmatic text.Specifically,the materials from the linguist’s Nachlass (works unpublished or unexhibited at Saussure’s death,some of them recently discovered) challenge the official doctrine associated with the Course (a posthumous redaction published in 1916 and attributed to Saussure who died in 1913) and with structural linguistics (a “return to Saussure” in the 1950s and 60s France).The official doctrine maps language onto a set of hierarchical oppositions between la langue and la parole,and synchrony and diachrony.According to Saussure’s own writings,language intersects structure with speech,and stability with temporal change (Saussure,2006;Stawarska,2020,2015).Instead of a vertical dualism elevating the synchronous structure (the presumed proper object of study in scientific linguistics) above the evolving patterns of use,we find that language has a “double essence” (Saussure,2006,p.144) and it exists equally in the present and in the past;furthermore,duality is a “first and last” principle in general linguistics (p.3).This inescapable duality is rendered more concrete in this essay by studying linguistic creativity,specifically,innovation by analogy.
