Maybe ironically, neither one would be appropriate as a linguistic definition.
i wonder what the inverse of the letters in the english alphabet are. since it has a non-prime number of letters (26 to be exact), we know that some letters won’t have inverses. i wonder which letters don’t have inverses. i guess it would be pretty easy to find out if you use the standard alphabet ordering and then port the alphabet over to ℤ/26ℤ, but that’s not a particularly satisfying answer.
Or, in either field (formal language theory bridges both) it can mean any string of symbols, letters, or tokens.
"word" is a four letter word
I think you’ll find that in actual fact “bird” is the word
That's what I heard.
Birds are not real, though, are they?
And it begins...probably be 2 days until I get the song out of my head
The definition still applies.
Please, it's wrd, we want to keep this fmily friendly
If you want a clear definition, ask a mathematician:
Or a computer scientist:
Meanwhile, in Unicode land...
Maybe ironically, neither one would be appropriate as a linguistic definition.
i wonder what the inverse of the letters in the english alphabet are. since it has a non-prime number of letters (26 to be exact), we know that some letters won’t have inverses. i wonder which letters don’t have inverses. i guess it would be pretty easy to find out if you use the standard alphabet ordering and then port the alphabet over to ℤ/26ℤ, but that’s not a particularly satisfying answer.
Or, in either field (formal language theory bridges both) it can mean any string of symbols, letters, or tokens.