41–50 of 147 posts
The German language is superior in this regard because there it would we either "peanut, butter" or "peanutbutter".
How is this relevant? Peanut butter isn't spoken like "peanut, butter" it's spoken like "peanutbutter".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd say it was probably worse in this respect, doesn't German have a lot more of these "compound" words that would need to be parsed in this way?
Exactly, car insurance is much better than Kraftfahrzeug-Haftpflichtversicherung.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A human really wouldn't. It's the same thing as telling the difference between black bird and blackbird in running speech; peanut butter may be spelled as two words, but it's spoken as a single thing. If the concept was new enough that you were consciously talking about a type of butter made from (of all things) peanuts , it would be a black bird vocal entity rather than a blackbird one.
It's true that we do alter our speech to provide context clues, it is also true that without them we're _still_ capable of piecing them together. If someone says in a unnaturally drawn out way "I like peanut butter sandwhiches" then I will have no problem detecting the situation and then re-parsing it correctly.
The black bird ate seeds.
The blackbird flew at mach 3.
Your brain thinks of these two words completely differently and it's only through conscious effort that you think of them together. They are different words even though they sound and are spelled the same, regardless of the space.
A better example I think is "bear feet" vs "bare feet"
This, yet again shows just how far the computer science is from real natural language processing, despite of all "AI" companies' claims. Unless they have all and everything hardcoded, even such natural thing are impossible to process for the "natural" language processing programs. All cloud "AI" and "natural" language processing services should really be called "lots and lots of hardcoded stuff language processing"
This only a surprising thing because a human would parse the waveform as two words and then back into a single concept. A computer could parse it as a single concept directly or in syllable lengthed chunks to be reconfigured however.
A human really wouldn't. It's the same thing as telling the difference between black bird and blackbird in running speech; peanut butter may be spelled as two words, but it's spoken as a single thing. If the concept was new enough that you were consciously talking about a type of butter made from (of all things) peanuts , it would be a black bird vocal entity rather than a blackbird one.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's true that we do alter our speech to provide context clues, it is also true that without them we're _still_ capable of piecing them together. If someone says in a unnaturally drawn out way "I like peanut butter sandwhiches" then I will have no problem detecting the situation and then re-parsing it correctly.
The space is irrelevant. Consider the sentences: The black bird ate seeds. The blackbird flew at mach 3. Your brain thinks of these two words completely differently and it's only through conscious effort that you think of them together. They are different words even though they sound and are spelled the same, regardless of the space. A better example I think is "bear feet" vs "bare feet"
Ps. I'm aware this will not be a popular comment