zlacker

> there is no probabilistic link between the words of a text and the gist of the content

How could that possibly be true?

There’s obviously a link between “[original content] is summarized as [summarized”content]

>>sorcer+(OP)
It’s not true

The idea that meaning is not impacted by language yet is somehow exclusively captured by language is just absolutely absurd

Like saying X+Y=Z but changing X or Y won’t affect Z

>>sorcer+(OP)
Yea I'm lost there. If we took n bodies of text x_1 ... x_n, and k different summaries each y_1i ...y_kn , there are many statistical and computational treatments with which you would be able to find extremely strong correlations between y and x...

>>DrBenC+x2
Language is a symbolic system. From an absolute or spiritual standpoint, meaning transcends pure linguistic probabilities. Language itself emerges as a limited medium for the expression of consciousness and abstract thought. Indeed, to say meaning arises purely from language (as probability alone) or, to deny language influences meaning entirely are both overly simplistic extremes.

>>DrBenC+x2
... meaning is not always impacted by the specificity or sensitivity of language while sometimes indeed exclusively captured by it, although the exclusivity is more of a time-dependent thing as one could imagine a silent, theatrical piece that captures the very same meaning but the 'phantasiac' is probably constructing the scene(s) out of words ... but then again ... there either was, is or will be at least one Savant to whom this does not apply ... and maybe 'some' deaf and blind person, too ...

>>neom+kb
"When he to whom one speaks does not understand, and he who speaks himself does not understand, that is metaphysics." - Voltaire

Like I said in another comment, I can think of a dozen statistical and computational methods where if you give me a text and its synthesis I can find a strong probabilistic link between the two.

>>aerhar+612
"Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts." - Someone.

Statistical correlation between text and synthesis undoubtedly exists, but capturing correlation does not imply you've encapsulated meaning itself. My point is precisely that: meaning isn't confined entirely within what we can statistically measure, though it may still be illuminated by it.