[laughinghan]

That is such an interesting and...low-level way to think of it.

To me it feels a little deeper than just there being a "maze of rules". Your earlier mention of "everything's connected to everything else" resonated with me more.

In a sense, the expressive power of programming languages, and mathematical notation, feels very small. I liked the board game metaphor brought up in the top comment: programming languages and mathematical notation merely feel like arrangements of board game pieces (from an infinite box, and the rules of how they can be arranged are "context-free"). They don't have meaning except what we impose (ideally, assisted by comments).

A metaphor I brought up in another comment is that it feels "easy" to systematically translate an arbitrary program into an equivalent diagram, such that the diagram would contain 100% of the operational information in the program, and could be runnable as-is. (Would be cumbersome to input into the computer, ofc.) Whereas the idea of systematically translating an arbitrary natural sentence into a diagram just seems...nonsensical to me. I wouldn't even know where to begin.

Does that resonate with you?

[whynaut]

> Whereas the idea of systematically translating an arbitrary natural sentence into a diagram just seems...nonsensical to me. I wouldn't even know where to begin.

we actually literally did this in high school. It was very informative for me.

[motakraxxer]

This is really an interesting thought. Would it surprise you if I said that for me, it works in an opposite manner? I first think in terms of diagrams and the construct sentences for it, whether it be programming language, natural language or math.

[bzbarsky]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentence_diagram#Reed%E2%80%93... is totally a thing I recall with moderate fondness from high school.

Yes, if you try to apply it to some parts of "Moby Dick" it will be rather painful. :)

[bobyfyfy]

Have you studied syntax? They diagram sentences all the time