amendment to liz bates' comment

[Chris Cleirigh]

liz bates wrote:

>And while we are at it, I am puzzled by the suggestion that we should
>describe language "first" before any investigation of its biology can
>be carried out.  Should physics be complete before we attempt chemistry?

A more congruent question would be:

Should chemistry be complete before we attempt physics?

On a hierarchy of emergent complexity, chemistry sits above physics
just as linguistics sits above biology.

A lot of "chemistry" was described before the discipline established
its relations with physics.  I believe it was called "alchemy".

chris