Warning: Some posts on this platform may contain adult material intended for mature audiences only. Viewer discretion is advised. By clicking ‘Continue’, you confirm that you are 18 years or older and consent to viewing explicit content.
No, I have it the right way around. Artificial languages can be irregular, so your order doesn’t follow.
No regular language can be natural, though, so if you come across a regular language, you can always correctly conclude that it’s artificial through modus tollens:
“If a language is natural, then it is not regular. This language is regular, therefore it is not natural.”
Minor nitpick, you have causality inverted. Esperanto is artificial and therefore regular.
No, I have it the right way around. Artificial languages can be irregular, so your order doesn’t follow.
No regular language can be natural, though, so if you come across a regular language, you can always correctly conclude that it’s artificial through modus tollens:
“If a language is natural, then it is not regular. This language is regular, therefore it is not natural.”