/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11889749
Haskell not at all.
really cool lang but rarely used in the industry.

Python, C++ are a good bet.
There are many trendier languages out there but to start out I would just stick with the big stuff.
You can also look at the stack overflow surveys to see what's big.

Python is easier to learn than C++, so I would go with that to start out.

R is used in data science but in many areas people just use Python. There is this lang called Julia that is growing but not quite in the big leagues yet. It's like a marriage between Python and R, I like it.

I like the counting example that I used somewhere up the thread.
So if you want an example from a real language look at vowel harmony in languages like Turkish.
In vowel harmonies all vowels in a word have to share certain phonological features,
so they might all have to share the same value for +-front.
They might all have to share the value for front that the first vowel has or maybe even the value that the stressed vowel has.
so for example
"mine'ni" might stay "mine'ni"
"muni'ne" might become "munu'no"
"mini'no" might become "mini'ne"
(if we look at the first vowel)
"mine'ni" might stay "mine'ni"
"muni'ne" might become "minine"
"mini'no" might become "munu'no"
(if we look at the stressed vowel)
but we never see a pattern like:
"mine'ni" stays "mine'ni"
"muni'ne" becomes "mini'ne"
"mini'no" becomes "mini'ne"
(takes the most common value)
This is only a minimal example, this pattern could probably be explained by a viable rule.
What I mean is that we don't see language like patterns that can only be explained by counting.

In this example
i is fronted u
e is fronted o

If this still sounds too outlandish for you there are loads of examples for which syllable gets stress.
If you want I can look those up.
Generally you can either have lexical stress or predicable stress in a few positions.
You couldn't have pattern like "the 4th to last syllabe is always stressed, otherwise the first syllabel is stressed"

It turns out that these counting patterns, which we don't see, are also computationally more taxing than the patterns we do see.
So until we see a language which has some weird counting behavior, it makes sense to assume it is impossible.
This is because we don't have infinite working memory and we want our model of language to accommodate that.

>>11668673
I like the counting example that I used somewhere up the thread.
So if you want an example from a real language look at vowel harmony in languages like Turkish.
In vowel harmonies all vowels in a word have to share certain phonological features,
so they might all have to share the same value for +-front.
They might all have to share the value for front that the first vowel has or maybe even the value that the stressed vowel has.
so for example
"mine'ni" might stay "mine'ni"
"muni'ne" might become "mununo"
"mini'no" might become "mini'ne"
(if we look at the first vowel)
"mini'ni
"mine'ni" might stay "mine'ni"
"muni'ne" might become "minine"
"mini'no" might become "munu'no"
(if we look at the stressed vowel)
but we never see a pattern like:
"mine'ni" might stay "mine'ni"
"muni'ne" might become "minine"
"mini'no" might become "munu'ne"
(takes the most common value)
This is only a minimal example, this pattern could probably be explained by a viable rule.
What I mean is that we don't see language like patterns that can only be explained by counting.

In this example
i is fronted u
e is fronted o

If this still sounds too outlandish for you there are loads of examples for which syllable gets stress.
If you want I can look those up.
Generally you can either have lexical stress or predicable stress in a few positions.
You couldn't have pattern like "the 4th to last syllabe is always stressed, otherwise the first syllabel is stressed"

It turns out that these counting patterns, which we don't see, are also computationally more taxing than the patterns we do see.
So until we see a language which has some weird counting behavior, it makes sense to assume it is impossible.
This is because we don't have infinite working memory and we want our model of language to accommodate that.