For decades, computational linguists have attempted to decipher the enigmatic Indus Valley script using advanced statistical models. Many researchers assume that applying increasingly sophisticated algorithms to the inscriptions will eventually reveal their underlying grammatical structure. However, archaeologist Bryan Wells argues that this computational focus overlooks a more fundamental obstacle: the script's brevity and extreme standardization suggest it may not encode a spoken language at all, but rather a system of non-linguistic administrative and religious symbols. Without first determining the semiotic nature of the script, Wells contends, statistical analyses of sign sequences risk finding patterns that are mathematically real but linguistically meaningless. Which choice best states the main idea of the text?
- AArchaeology and computational linguistics must work together to decipher ancient writing systems.
- BArchaeologist Bryan Wells has demonstrated that the Indus Valley script consists entirely of non-linguistic administrative and religious symbols.
- Deciphering the Indus Valley script requires first establishing whether the script is linguistic rather than relying solely on computational analysis of sign patterns.Answer
- DComputational analyses of the Indus Valley script are likely to succeed only if researchers discover new, longer inscriptions that contain bilingual text.