Re: cognitive != observable?

"Ray Gardener" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > So the Chinese person passes a note to the English person, who then
looks
> up
> > a cross-reference. "IF these symbols, THEN reply with those symbols." So
> the
> > English person carefully copies down the reply glyphs, and passes it
back
> to
> > the Chinese person on the outside, who then responds.
> >
> > The kicker is that the Chinese person might be having an interesting
> > conversation :)
>
> I wonder. I mean, all the intentionality of the conversation belongs to
the
> Chinese person. How would the English person decide to change the subject,
> for example? The whole thing would wind up like an ELIZA conversation
where
> all the original material really only comes  from one person.
>
> The other critical thing is that such a formal system could never evolve
> Chinese any further, whereas in the real world languages evolve all the
> time.
>
> Ray

Always inspiring, a conversation.

And suppose now the Chinese woman falls in love with that so good
Englishman, who ansers so interesting. But after week, what does she think
then.
Time is an interesting phenomenon. We can get surprises isn't it.

And Eliza is after a time not very inspiring. She talks like someone I told
it her before.Well Eliza you only function shortly.

But now Eliza II is born and she has collectred many conversation with
different people.

Then she can have a longer relationship, but longer than a year? For other
tell sometime about things that are really history. Would you like such
company?

Have a nice Halloween. In Europe we don't know that. Please don't make bad
jokes with razer blades in candy, sweets.in England I thought.

Ed