formal language
please note:
- the text and code below is from The Pseudopedia
- it has been imported raw for GetWiki
{{About|a technical term in mathematics and computer science|related studies about natural languages|grammar framework|formal language as a mode of speech|Register (linguistics)}}A
formal language is a
set of
words, i.e. finite
strings of
letters, symbols, or tokens. The set from which these letters are taken is called the
alphabet over which the language is defined. A formal language is often defined by means of a
formal grammar (also called its
formation rules); accordingly, words that belong to a formal language are sometimes called
well-formed words (or
well-formed formulas). Formal languages are studied in
computer science and
linguistics; the field of
formal language theory studies the purely syntactical aspects of such languages (that is, their internal structural patterns).Formal languages are often used as the basis for richer constructs endowed with
semantics. In
computer science they are used, among other things, for the precise definition of
data formats and the syntax of
programming languages. Formal languages play a crucial role in the development of
compilers, typically produced by means of a
compiler compiler, which may be a single program or may be separated in tools like
lexical analyzer generators (e.g.
lex), and
parser generators (e.g.
yacc). Since formal languages alone do not have semantics, other formal constructs are needed for the formal specification of
program semantics. Formal languages are also used in
logic and in
foundations of mathematics to represent the syntax of formal theories.
Logical systems can be seen as a formal language with additional constructs, like
proof calculi, which define a
consequence relation.
(1) "
Tarski's definition of truth" in terms of a
T-schema for
first-order logic is an example of
fully interpreted formal language; all its sentences have meanings that make them either true or false.
Words over an alphabet
An
alphabet, in the context of formal languages can be any
set, although it often makes sense to use an
alphabet in the usual sense of the word, or more generally a
character set such as
ASCII. Alphabets can also be infinite; e.g.
first-order logic is often expressed using an alphabet which, besides symbols such as ∧, ¬, ∀ and parentheses, contains infinitely many elements
x0,
x1,
x2, … that play the role of variables. The elements of an alphabet are called its
letters.A
word over an alphabet can be any
finite sequence, or
string, of letters. The set of all words over an alphabet Σ is usually denoted by Σ
* (using the
Kleene star). For any alphabet there is only one word of length 0, the
empty word, which is often denoted by e, ε or λ. By
concatenation one can combine two words to form a new word, whose length is the sum of the lengths of the original words. The result of concatenating a word with the empty word is the original word.In some applications, especially in
logic, the alphabet is also known as the
vocabulary and words are known as
formulas or
sentences; this breaks the letter/word metaphor and replaces it by a word/sentence metaphor.
Definition
A
formal language L over an alphabet Σ is just a
subset of Σ
*, that is, a set of
words over that alphabet.In computer science and mathematics, which do not usually deal with
natural languages, the adjective "formal" is often omitted as redundant.While formal language theory usually concerns itself with formal languages that are described by some syntactical rules, the actual definition of the concept "formal language" is only as above: a (possibly infinite) set of finite-length strings, no more nor less. In practice, there are many languages that can be described by rules, such as
regular languages or
context-free languages. The notion of a
formal grammar may be closer to the intuitive concept of a "language," one described by syntactic rules. By an abuse of the definition, a particular formal language is often thought of as being equipped with a formal grammar that describes it.
Examples
The following rules describe a formal language
L over the alphabet Σ = {
0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, +, =}:
- Every nonempty string that does not contain + or = and does not start with 0 is in L.
- The string 0 is in L.
- A string containing = is in L if and only if there is exactly one =, and it separates two valid strings in L.
- A string containing + but not = is in L if and only if every + in the string separates two valid strings in L.
- No string is in L other than those implied by the previous rules.
Under these rules, the string "
23+4=555" is in
L, but the string "
=234=+" is not. This formal language expresses
natural numbers, well-formed addition statements, and well-formed addition equalities, but it expresses only what they look like (their
syntax), not what they mean (
semantics). For instance, nowhere in these rules is there any indication that
0 means the number zero, or that
+ means addition.For finite languages one can simply enumerate all well-formed words. For example, we can describe a language
L as just
L = {"a", "b", "ab", "cba"}.However, even over a finite (non-empty) alphabet such as Σ = {a, b} there are infinitely many words: "a", "abb", "ababba", "aaababbbbaab", …. Therefore formal languages are typically infinite, and describing an infinite formal language is not as simple as writing
L = {"a", "b", "ab", "cba"}. Here are some examples of formal languages:
- L = Σ, the set of all words over Σ;
- L = {a} = {an}, where n ranges over the natural numbers and an means "a" repeated n times (this is the set of words consisting only of the symbol "a");
- the set of syntactically correct programs in a given programming language (the syntax of which is usually defined by a context-free grammar);
- the set of inputs upon which a certain Turing machine halts; or
- the set of maximal strings of alphanumeric ASCII characters on this line, (i.e., the set {"the", "set", "of", "maximal", "strings", "alphanumeric", "ASCII", "characters", "on", "this", "line", "i", "e"}).
Language-specification formalisms
Formal language theory rarely concerns itself with particular languages (except as examples), but is mainly concerned with the study of various types of formalisms to describe languages. For instance, a language can be given as
Typical questions asked about such formalisms include:
- What is their expressive power? (Can formalism X describe every language that formalism Y can describe? Can it describe other languages?)
- What is their recognizability? (How difficult is it to decide whether a given word belongs to a language described by formalism X?)
- What is their comparability? (How difficult is it to decide whether two languages, one described in formalism X and one in formalism Y, or in X again, are actually the same language?).
Surprisingly often, the answer to these decision problems is "it cannot be done at all", or "it is extremely expensive" (with a precise characterization of how expensive exactly). Therefore, formal language theory is a major application area of
computability theory and
complexity theory. Formal languages may be classified in the
Chomsky hierarchy based on the expressive power of their generative grammar as well as the complexity of their recognizing
automaton.
Context-free grammars and
regular grammars provide a good compromise between expressivity and ease of
parsing, and are widely used in practical applications.
Operations on languages
Certain operations on languages are common. This includes the standard set operations, such as union, intersection, and complement. Another class of operation is the element-wise application of string operations.Examples: suppose
L1 and
L2 are languages over some common alphabet.
- The concatenation L1L2 consists of all strings of the form vw where v is a string from L1 and w is a string from L2.
- The intersection L1 ∩ L2 of L1 and L2 consists of all strings which are contained in both languages
- The complement ¬L of a language with respect to a given alphabet consists of all strings over the alphabet that are not in the language.
- The Kleene star: the language consisting of all words that are concatenations of 0 or more words in the original language;
- Reversal:
- Let e be the empty word, then eR = e, and
- for each non-empty word w = x1…xn over some alphabet, let wR = xn…x1,
- then for a formal language L, LR = {wR | w ∈ L}.
- String homomorphism.
Such
string operations are used to investigate
closure properties of classes of languages. A class of languages is
closed under a particular operation when the operation, applied to languages in the class, always produces a language in the same class again. For instance, the
context-free languages are known to be closed under union, concatenation, and intersection with
regular languages, but not closed under intersection or complement.
{| class="wikitable"
Closure properties of language families (
Larg∈-→(:4(x;font-size:12(x;">1
Op
Larg∈-→(:4(x;font-size:12(x;">2
where both
Larg∈-→(:4(x;font-size:12(x;">1
and
Larg∈-→(:4(x;font-size:12(x;">2
are in the language family given by the column). After Hopcroft and Ullman.
|
|Operation || regular | DCFL | CFL | CSL | recursive | r.e. |
|
| Union (set theory)>Union | w > w ∈ Larg∈-→(:4(x;font-size:12(x;">1 ∨ w ∈ Larg∈-→(:4(x;font-size:12(x;">2 | | {{Yes}}| {{No}}| {{Yes}}| {{Yes}}| {{Yes}}| {{Yes}}
|
| Intersection (set theory)>Intersection | w > w ∈ Larg∈-→(:4(x;font-size:12(x;">1 ∧ w ∈ Larg∈-→(:4(x;font-size:12(x;">2 | | {{Yes}}| {{No}}| {{No}}| {{Yes}}| {{Yes}}| {{Yes}}
|
|Complement w > w not∈ Larg∈-→(:4(x;font-size:12(x;">1 | | {{Yes}}| {{Yes}}| {{No}}| {{Yes}}| {{Yes}}| {{No}}
|
|Concatenation Larg∈-→(:4(x;font-size:12(x;">1cderiv(⋅) Larg∈-→(:4(x;font-size:12(x;">2 = wcderiv(⋅) z > w ∈ Larg∈-→(:4(x;font-size:12(x;">1 ∧ z ∈ Larg∈-→(:4(x;font-size:12(x;">2 | | {{Yes}}| {{No}}| {{Yes}}| {{Yes}}| {{Yes}}| {{Yes}}
|
|Kleene star Larg∈-→(:4(x;font-size:12(x;">1arg∈-→(:-4(x;font-size:12(x;">* = &e&(si;lon; &cu(; w cderiv(⋅) z > w ∈ Larg∈-→(:4(x;font-size:12(x;">1 ∧ z ∈ Larg∈-→(:4(x;font-size:12(x;">1arg∈-→(:-4(x;font-size:12(x;">* | | {{Yes}}| {{No}}| {{Yes}}| {{Yes}}| {{Yes}}| {{Yes}}
|
| string operations>Homomorphism|| {{Yes}}| {{No}}| {{Yes}}| {{No}}| {{No}}| {{Yes}} |
|
| string operations>e-free Homomorphism|| {{Yes}}| {{No}}| {{Yes}}| {{Yes}}| {{Yes}}| {{Yes}} |
|
| string operations>Substitution|| {{Yes}}| {{No}}| {{Yes}}| {{Yes}}| {{No}}| {{Yes}} |
|
| string operations>Inverse Homomorphism|| {{Yes}}| {{Yes}}| {{Yes}}| {{Yes}}| {{Yes}}| {{Yes}} |
|
|Reverse warg∈-→(:-4(x;font-size:12(x;">R > w ∈ L | | {{Yes}}| {{No}}| {{Yes}}| {{Yes}}| {{Yes}}| {{Yes}}
|
| Intersection (set theory)>Intersection with a Regular Language | w > w ∈ Larg∈-→(:4(x;font-size:12(x;">1 ∧ w ∈ R R text regular | | {{Yes}}| {{Yes}}| {{Yes}}| {{Yes}}| {{Yes}}| {{Yes}}
Applications
Programming languages
A compiler usually has two distinct components. A lexical analyzer, generated by a tool like lex, identifies the tokens of the programming language grammar, e.g. identifiers or keywords, which are themselves expressed in a simpler formal language, usually by means of regular expressions. At the most basic conceptual level, a parser, usually generated by a parser generator like yacc, attempts to decide if the source program is valid, that is if it belongs to the programming language for which the compiler was built. Of course, compilers do more than just parse the source code—they usually translate it in some executable format. Because of this, a parser usually outputs more than a yes/no answer, typically an abstract syntax tree, which is used by subsequent stages of the compiler to eventually generate an executable containing machine code that runs directly on the hardware, or some intermediate code that requires a virtual machine to execute. Formal theories, systems and proofs
File:Formal languages.png|thumb|300px|right|This diagram shows the syntactic divisions within a formal system. Symbols and strings of symbols may be broadly divided into nonsense and well-formed formulas. The set of well-formed formulas is divided into theoremtheoremIn mathematical logic, a formal theory is a set of sentences expressed in a formal language.A formal system (also called a logical calculus, or a logical system) consists of a formal language together with a deductive apparatus (also called a deductive system). The deductive apparatus may consist of a set of transformation rules which may be interpreted as valid rules of inference or a set of axioms, or have both. A formal system is used to derive one expression from one or more other expressions. Although a formal language can be identified with its formulas, a formal system cannot be likewise identified by its theorems. Two formal systems Scri(tFS
and Scri(tFS'
may have all the same theorems and yet differ in some significant proof-theoretic way (a formula A may be a syntactic consequence of a formula B in one but not another for instance).A formal proof or derivation is a finite sequence of well-formed formulas (which may be interpreted as propositions) each of which is an axiom or follows from the preceding formulas in the sequence by a rule of inference. The last sentence in the sequence is a theorem of a formal system. Formal proofs are useful because their theorems can be interpreted as true propositions. Interpretations and models
Formal languages are entirely syntactic in nature but may be given semantics that give meaning to the elements of the language. for instance, in mathematical logic, the set of possible formulas of a particular logic is a formal language, and an interpretation assigns a meaning to each of the formulas - usually, a truth value.The study of interpretations of formal languages is called formal semantics. In mathematical logic, this is often done in terms of model theory. In model theory, the terms that occur in a formula are interpreted as mathematical structures, and fixed compositional interpretation rules determine how the truth value of the formula can be derived from the interpretation of its terms; a model for a formula is an interpretation of terms such that the formula becomes true. See also
References
-
[Arnon Avron, What is a logical system? Chapter 8 in Dov M. Gabbay (ed.), What is a logical system?, Oxford University Press, 1994, ISBN 0198538596]
-
[Godel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid, Douglas Hofstadter]
- A. G. Hamilton, Logic for Mathematicians, Cambridge University Press, 1978, ISBN 0 521 21838 1.
- Seymour Ginsburg, Algebraic and automata theoretic properties of formal languages, North-Holland, 1975, ISBN 0 7204 2506 9.
- Michael A. Harrison, Introduction to Formal Language Theory, Addison-Wesley, 1978.
- John E. Hopcroft and Jeffrey D. Ullman, Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages, and Computation, Addison-Wesley Publishing, Reading Massachusetts, 1979. ISBN 0-201-029880-X.
- Grzegorz Rozenberg, Arto Salomaa, Handbook of Formal Languages: Volume I-III, Springer, 1997, ISBN 3 540 61486 9.
- Patrick Suppes, Introduction to Logic, D. Van Nostrand, 1957, ISBN 0 442 08072 7.
External links
- Drafts of some chapters in the "Handbook of Formal Language Theory", Vol. 1-3, G. Rozenberg and A. Salomaa (eds.), Springer Verlag, (1997):t
- Alexandru Mateescu and Arto Salomaa, "Preface" in Vol.1, pp. v-viii, and "Formal Languages: An Introduction and a Synopsis", Chapter 1 in Vol. 1, pp.1-39
- Sheng Yu, "Regular Languages", Chapter 2 in Vol. 1
- Jean-Michel Autebert, Jean Berstel, Luc Boasson, "Context-Free Languages and Push-Down Automata", Chapter 3 in Vol. 1
- Christian Choffrut and Juhani Karhumäki, "Combinatorics of Words", Chapter 6 in Vol. 1
- Tero Harju and Juhani Karhumäki, "Morphisms", Chapter 7 in Vol. 1, pp. 439 - 510
- Jean-Eric Pin, "Syntactic semigroups", Chapter 10 in Vol. 1, pp. 679-746
- M. Crochemore and C. Hancart, "Automata for matching patterns", Chapter 9 in Vol. 2
- Dora Giammarresi, Antonio Restivo, "Two-dimensional Languages", Chapter 4 in Vol. 3, pp. 215 - 267
{{Formal languages and grammars}}لغة شكليةFormalni jezikLlenguatge formalFormální jazykFormelt sprogFormale SpracheΤυπική γλώσσαLenguaje formalزبان صوریLangage formel형식 언어औपचारिक भाषाFormalni jezikLinguaggio formale (matematica)שפה פורמליתFormális nyelvФормален јазикFormele taal形式言語Formelt språkJęzyk formalnyLinguagem formalLimbaje formaleФормальный языкFormal languageFormálny jazykФормални језикFormalni jezikFormaali kieliFormella språkBiçimsel dil kuramıФормальна мова形式语言
- content above as imported from The Pseudopedia
- "formal language" does not exist on GetWiki
- time: 6:40pm EST - Sat, Mar 13 2010