Chomskybot: Almost Intelligible Gibberish

Chomskybot is a web-hosted program that generates text which appears similar to (and based on) the famously hard-to-follow linguistic work of Noam Chomsky. But unlike Chomsky's actual work, Chomskybot's text is devoid of meaning. Circling back on itself, piling modifiers on terms, and stretching the limits of human attention, Chomskybot generates a stream of text that's almost meaningful -- and by doing so, it's actually kind of fun to read...until it drives you nuts. For example, try to make sense of this Chomskybot passage:

With this clarification, the theory of syntactic features developed earlier is not subject to a descriptive fact. For one thing, a subset of English sentences interesting on quite independent grounds is not to be considered in determining nondistinctness in the sense of distinctive feature theory. It must be emphasized, once again, that the fundamental error of regarding functional notions as categorial is to be regarded as a corpus of utterance tokens upon which conformity has been defined by the paired utterance test. Clearly, the systematic use of complex symbols cannot be arbitrary in an abstract underlying order. To characterize a linguistic level L, the descriptive power of the base component delimits an important distinction in language use.

What I find fun about this is that it almost makes sense, or at least it seems plausible that to an expert it might make sense. But there's a point in the text (for me, it's right when the text above reaches "determining nondistinctness") when my brain seems to run out of follow-the-nonsense capacity and sort of shuts down. It's similar to that feeling from high school, when I'd be reading a textbook and suddenly realize that I'd spaced out and read the same paragraph five times over, and still hadn't absorbed any of its content. This moment when language seems to break apart and lose meaning is bewildering, and maybe even pleasant -- if you're not trying to learn something.

Visit Chomskybot for more scary gibberish.

Read more on Chomskybot from Wikipedia, or see the official FAQ (which begins with the very appropriate question: "What the hell is this, anyway?"). Next week perhaps we'll dig into Colorless green ideas sleep furiously, Chomsky's famous (intentional) nonsense phrase.

nextArticle.image_alt|e
iStock
25 Endangered Languages You Should Hear Before They Disappear
iStock
iStock

Irish isn't just a nationality or heritage—it’s also a language. Otherwise known as Gaelic, the language has less than 450,000 speakers, making it one of 2500 endangered languages around the world. By the turn of the century, at least half of the world’s spoken languages are expected to go extinct, according to UNESCO [PDF].

Financial services website GoCompare reached out to native speakers of 25 endangered languages and had them record a translation of a quote by Italian filmmaker Federico Fellini in their mother tongue. The phrase was “a different language is a different vision of life”—a reference to scientific evidence that language not only shapes the way we think and perceive the world around us, but also shapes our culture.

One of the languages featured in the project, the Australian indigenous language of Wiradjuri, is spoken by just 30 people. The continent was once home to 250 indigenous languages, but only 40 of those are still spoken. Wiradjuri is seeing something of a revival, though, and schools in several areas are now starting to teach the language.

Nawat, a language spoken in El Salvador, has just 200 speakers remaining. Also known as Pipil, the language evolved from Nahuatl, the language of the Aztecs. According to historian Laura Matthew of Marquette University, some Nahuatl speakers in El Salvador are too ashamed to speak their mother tongue in public because of prejudice that persists in the country. Matthew and others around the world have started projects in an effort to preserve important documents in endangered languages and encourage more people to learn about them.

Below is the full list of languages that were included in the project:

Aymara: Bolivia, Chile, Peru
Balti: India, Pakistan
Basque: Spain, France
Belarusian: Belarus, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Russia, Ukraine
Breton: France
Choctaw: USA
Cornish: England
Guaraní: Paraguay, Argentina, Brazil
Irish: Ireland
Kalmyk: Russia
Limburgian: Netherlands, Germany
Lombard: Italy, Switzerland
Nafusi: Libya
Nawat: El Salvador
North Frisian: Germany
North Sami: Finland, Norway, Sweden, Russia
Ojibwe: USA
Ossete: Georgia, Russia
Quechua: Bolivia, Peru, Ecuador, Colombia, Argentina
Venetan: Italy, Croatia, Slovenia, Brazil, Mexico
Walloon: Belgium, France, Luxembourg
Welsh: Wales
West Frisian: Netherlands
Wichi: Argentina, Bolivia
Wiradjuri: Australia

nextArticle.image_alt|e
iStock
Linguists Say We Might Be Able to Communicate With Aliens If We Ever Encounter Them
iStock
iStock

If humans ever encountered extraterrestrials, would we be able to communicate with them? That was the question posed by linguists from across the country, including famed scholar Noam Chomsky, during a workshop held in Los Angeles on May 26.

Organized by a scientific nonprofit called Messaging Extraterrestrial Intelligence (METI), the one-day event entitled "Language in the Cosmos" brought together two camps that don't usually converge: linguists and space scientists. The event was held in conjunction with the National Space Society's annual International Space Development Conference, which featured the likes of theoretical physicist Freeman Dyson, Amazon CEO and Blue Origin founder Jeff Bezos, SpaceX's Tom Mueller, science fiction writer David Brin, and more.

Linguist Sheri Wells-Jensen, chair of the workshop, said in a statement that it's unlikely we'll ever come face to face with aliens or find ourselves in a "Star Trek universe where most of the aliens are humanoid and lots of them already have a 'universal translator.'" Still, scientists don't rule out the possibility of chatting with extraterrestrials via radio.

Chomsky, who's often regarded as the father of modern linguistics, was optimistic that extraterrestrial life forms—if they're out there—might observe the same “universal grammar” rules he believes serve as the foundation for all human languages. His theory of universal grammar posits that there's a genetic component to language, and the ability to acquire and comprehend language is innate. Chomsky argues that a random mutation caused early humans to make the “evolutionary jump” to language some 40,000 years ago through a process called Merge, which lets words be combined, according to New Scientist. (Not all linguists are convinced by Chomsky's theory.)

At the workshop, a presentation by Chomsky (of MIT), Ian Roberts (University of Cambridge), and Jeffrey Watumull (Oceanit) argued that "the overwhelming likelihood is that ET Universal Grammar would be also be based on Merge." They said grammar would probably not be the greatest barrier in communicating with aliens; rather, understanding their "externalization system," or whatever channel they're using to communicate, could be the greatest challenge.

Another presentation by Jeffrey Punske (Southern Illinois University) and Bridget Samuels (University of Southern California) drew a similar conclusion. Human languages have physical and biological constraints, some of which are grounded in physics, so it follows that extraterrestrial languages would be limited by the same laws of physics, the linguists said.

Douglas Vakoch, president of METI, said in a statement that these theories represent a "radical shift" for scientists working in the field, who have "scoffed at the idea of creating interstellar messages inspired by natural languages." Past radio messages sent out into space relied on math and science, in hopes that those principles are universal.

SECTIONS

arrow
LIVE SMARTER
More from mental floss studios