From: tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk   
      
   I think I understand your usage of syntactical and semantical so I've   
   understood what you were saying.   
      
      
   On 05/01/2026 23:10, Mike Terry wrote:   
      
   > ... that is clearly "syntactic".   
   > ... syntactic or semantic concept?    
      
   I should note, on a technical matter of terminology:   
      
   Your description appears to be the related "abstract" vs "concrete"   
   dichotomy in which an "abstract" system is about nothing but thought   
   objects.   
      
   "syntactical" vs "semantical" seems to be another matter in which the   
   -al morpheme seems to have been used in a philosophical way to form   
   terms of art distinct from "syntactic" and "semantic". In Curry and Feys   
   Combinatory Logic 1, the type of system that is the foundation for   
   combinatory logic has been introduced as a "fully formalised" "abstract"   
   "semantical" "logistic" system, not "syntactical" even though it's more   
   about mere strings than anything I've seen, and that's even before   
   combinators have been formally introduced.   
      
      
   --   
   Tristan Wibberley   
      
   The message body is Copyright (C) 2026 Tristan Wibberley except   
   citations and quotations noted. All Rights Reserved except that you may,   
   of course, cite it academically giving credit to me, distribute it   
   verbatim as part of a usenet system or its archives, and use it to   
   promote my greatness and general superiority without misrepresentation   
   of my opinions other than my opinion of my greatness and general   
   superiority which you _may_ misrepresent. You definitely MAY NOT train   
   any production AI system with it but you may train experimental AI that   
   will only be used for evaluation of the AI methods it implements.   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)