Does Linguistic Aptitude = Programming Potential?

Icephreak asks: " I've been studying a foreign language for quite some time now and have been recently researching the more effective ways to approach learning the nuances of it in both spoken and written form. Not so surprisingly the same advice comes up again and again. More still, I remember being given the same dead ringer advice by a few programmer friends about learning programming languages. I find this lends a good hand to the observation presented in the famous Thomas Scoville article, "The Elements Of Style: UNIX As Literature," about a surprising number of linguistically capable people gravitating to text-based operating environments and programming careers. What are your thoughts about a possible parallel between human and computer-based linguistics? Does a good command of one's spoken language loan leverage to becoming an effective programmer or computer operator in general? "

Comments

Re:C is not a human language

[Zachary Kessin]

Had to do some reasearch here.

Modern Hebrew was created about a 100 years ago by Eliezer Ben-Yehuda. Prior to that time no one spoke Hebrew, Jews prayed in Hebrew but spoke in Yiddish or Ladino. He created a dictonary of modern Hebrew and created hundreds of words including those for Soldier, Newspaper, toothbrush etc.

I am unsure exactly how much gramar was introduced, but I believe it was significant.

The cure of the ills of Democracy is more Democracy.

Re:C is not a human language

[Zachary Kessin]

Counter point Modern Hebrew, is an invented language. 150 years ago no one spoke Hebrew as a first language and no one had in well more than a 1000 years. A few people took Biblical and Talmudic Hebrew and expanded it into the modern language.

The cure of the ills of Democracy is more Democracy.

Programmer == Linguist

[SecretAsianMan]

I pre-apologize for the use of stereotypes here, but here goes...

I would have to say that having the skills of a good programmer does enable one to have certain skills in traditional languages. I would not say that it works the other way around, though. Being a connoisseur (sp?) of programming languages entails being a master of syntax and semantics. That is, programmers must be intimate with the rules of how to form statements of the language together into programs and with the meanings of each thing that can be expressed in the language. When dealing with traditional languages, the same rules exist, though they are usually a bit more vague and irregular (read: inelegant). So programmers typically are masters of the mechanics of traditional languages. Of course, there is much more to being a linguistically talented than just knowing the mechanical aspects.

Use me for an example. I am a skilled programmer. I took four EASY years of Spanish in high school. My English grades were most likely a school record. However, I have trouble writing things; it takes a really long time and I'm never satisfied with what comes out. I also did very poorly on those "reading comprehension" types of questions where you read something and answer questions about the artistry or hidden meaning of the work. I hate pretty much all classic literature; I read nothing except for a few sci-fi books and programming books.

Anyway, my point is that the artistic side of the study of traditional languages will probably get you nowhere in the programming language world. It's the mastery of the syntax and semantics of language that makes you have the right thought processes for programming.

Of course, all of this is my humble opinion!

--
SecretAsianMan (54.5% Slashdot pure)

Re:My mother can't program... Couldn't program

[Cyclopatra]

If you want a counter-anecdote, I also have an English degree, and I can program. But I think it's skill in picking up foreign languages that the original poster was talking about. I think being able to pick up programming *languages* easily is related to quickly learning foreign languages...at least the basics. I guarantee you that I can ace the first (and sometimes the second) year of any university level foreign language course. Why? Because, just like learning a new programming language, the basics of any foreign language involve memorizing rules...syntax, grammar, vocabulary, etc. Maybe the aptitudes are related in and of themselves, or maybe the ability to pick up new languages has to do with having new programming languages thrown at me every six weeks or so in my CS classes, but it's no mystery why someone who's good at one would be good at the other.

Cyclopatra

Reasoning aptitude yields both

[zelig123]

The correlation is indeed present, but should be understood this way: Programming potential and linguistic aptitude both come from (a more fundamental) aptitude at reasoning. Why? Because using a language (natural or computer) is a problem-solving task in itself. You need to organize and structure your thoughts in order to communicate them efficiently. If someone's good at reasoning, it means they will likely be good at programming, and they will generally express themselves better than average. Of course, there are exceptions, caused by many factors, such as personal interests, motivation, etc.

Shouldn't that be...

[crisco]

...Does Linguistic Aptitude == Programming Potential?

No

[scotpurl]

Whilst someone may write in perfect syntax, that does not mean they have used the correct algorithms, or that the program has good construction. Form vs. substance.

For an extreme example, look to politicians, who say nothing perfectly.