On Fri, 18 Apr 1997, James Logajan wrote:
> NOTE TO LISP AND FORTH FANS: one important reason your languages
> have never caught on may be due to the fact that many natural languages
> follow the "subject verb object" form. Usage of SOV, OSV, VSO, and VOS
> are less likely (I don't have any references in front of me; if anybody
> wants details, I'll try to locate what I have). They also lack visual
> redundancy (they aren't alone in this short-coming of course).
Best quote on this topic I've read lately
The use of the Chomsky formalism is also responsible for the term
"programming language", because programming languages seemed to
exhibit a strucure similar to spoken languages. We believe that
this term is rather unfortunate on the whole, because a programming
language is not spoken, and therefore is not a language in the true
sense of the word. Formalism or formal notation would have been
more appropriate terms.
In Wirth's opinion, and the opinion of many reputable linguists like
Steven Pinker, the analogy betweem formal notations :-) and human
languages is bogus. "Spoken" is the key point to consider.