Reflections on Andrew Ng’s Tip: Building Small AI Projects and Its Implications for Computational Linguistics Research

Recently, I read the latest greeting from Andrew Ng in The Batch (Issue #308), where he shared a tip about getting more practice building with AI. His advice really resonated with me, especially as someone exploring computational linguistics research while balancing schoolwork and robotics competitions.


Andrew Ng’s Key Advice

In his post, Andrew Ng emphasized:

If you find yourself with only limited time to build, reduce the scope of your project until you can build something in whatever time you do have.

He shared how he often cuts down an idea into the smallest possible component he can build in an hour or two, rather than waiting for a free weekend or months to tackle the entire project. He illustrated this with his example of creating an audience simulator for practicing public speaking. Instead of building a complex multi-person AI-powered simulation, he started by creating a simple 2D avatar with limited animations that could be expanded later.


Implications for Computational Linguistics Research

Reading this made me think about how I often approach my own computational linguistics projects. Here are a few reflections:

1. Start Small with Linguistic Tasks

In computational linguistics, tasks can feel overwhelming. For example, creating a full sentiment analysis pipeline for multiple languages, building a neural machine translation system, or training large language models are all massive goals.

Andrew Ng’s advice reminds me that it’s okay — and often smarter — to start with a small, well-defined subtask:

  • Instead of building a multilingual parser, start by training a simple POS tagger on a small dataset.
  • Instead of designing a robust speech recognition system, start by building a phoneme classifier for a single speaker dataset.
  • Instead of developing an entire chatbot pipeline, start by implementing a rule-based intent recognizer for a specific question type.

2. Build Prototypes to Test Feasibility

His example of building a minimal audience simulator prototype to get feedback also applies to NLP. For instance, if I want to work on dialect detection on Twitch chat data (something I’ve thought about), I could first build a prototype classifier distinguishing only two dialects or language varieties. Even if it uses basic logistic regression with TF-IDF features, it tests feasibility and lets me get feedback from mentors or peers before expanding.


3. Overcome Perfection Paralysis

As a student, I sometimes hold back on starting a project because I feel I don’t have time to make it perfect. Andrew Ng’s advice to reduce the project scope until you can build something right away is a mindset shift. Even a basic script that tokenizes Twitch messages or parses sentence structures is progress.


4. Practicing Broad Skills by Hacking Small Projects

He also mentioned that building many small projects helps practice a wide range of skills. In computational linguistics, that could mean:

  • Practicing different Python NLP libraries (NLTK, spaCy, Hugging Face)
  • Trying out rule-based vs. machine learning vs. deep learning approaches
  • Exploring new datasets and annotation schemes

Final Thoughts

I really appreciate Andrew Ng’s practical mindset for builders. His advice feels especially relevant to computational linguistics, where small wins accumulate into larger research contributions. Instead of feeling blocked by the scale of a project, I want to keep practicing the art of scoping down and just building something small but meaningful.

If you’re also working on computational linguistics or NLP projects as a student, I hope this inspires you to pick a tiny subtask today and start building.

Let me know if you want me to share a future post listing some small NLP project ideas that I’m working on this summer.

— Andrew

Speeding Up AI for Everyone: The PaPaformer Model Making Language Tech Work on Phones and Low-Power Devices

AI has become more capable than ever, but many of the most advanced tools still require massive cloud servers to run. That means if you want ChatGPT-level performance, you usually need a reliable internet connection and a lot of computing power behind the scenes. But what if you could have that kind of AI right on your phone, even without Wi‑Fi?

That’s where the PaPaformer model comes in.

What is the PaPaformer Model?
PaPaformer is a new AI architecture developed to train large language models more efficiently and make them small enough to run smoothly on low-power devices like smartphones, tablets, or even embedded systems. You can read more about it in the original paper here: PaPaformer: Language Model from Pre-trained Parallel Paths.

Unlike most large models today that require powerful cloud servers to process requests, PaPaformer is designed so the model can be stored and run directly on your device. This means you can use advanced language technology without a constant internet connection. It also helps protect privacy, since your data stays local instead of being sent to the cloud for processing.

Why It Matters
By making AI lighter and more portable, PaPaformer could bring powerful language tools to more people around the world, including those with limited internet access or older devices. It could also make AI faster to respond, since it does not have to constantly send data back and forth to the cloud.

Examples in Action
Imagine using ChatGPT-style features on a budget smartphone in a remote area. With most current apps, like the regular ChatGPT app, you still need a strong internet connection because the AI runs on servers, not your device. But with a PaPaformer-powered tool, the AI would actually run locally, meaning you could:

  • Translate between languages instantly, even without Wi‑Fi
  • Use a speech-to-text tool for endangered languages that works entirely on your device
  • Let teachers translate lessons in real time for students in rural schools without relying on an internet connection
  • Help students write essays in multiple languages privately, without sending drafts to a remote server

This offline capability is the big difference. It is not just accessing AI through the cloud, it is carrying the AI with you wherever you go.

Looking Ahead
If PaPaformer and similar approaches keep improving, we could see a future where advanced AI is available to anyone, anywhere, without needing expensive devices or constant internet access. For someone like me, interested in computational linguistics, this could also open up new possibilities for preserving languages, creating translation tools, and making language technology more inclusive worldwide.

— Andrew

Is the Increasing Trend of Leveraging LLMs like ChatGPT in Writing Research Papers Concerning?

On August 4, 2025, Science published a tech news piece titled “One-fifth of computer science papers may include AI content,” written by Phie Jacobs, a general assignment reporter at Science. The article reports on a large-scale analysis conducted by researchers at Stanford University and the University of California, Santa Barbara. They examined over 1 million abstracts and introductions and found that by September 2024, 22.5% of computer science papers showed signs of input from large language models such as ChatGPT. The researchers used statistical modeling to detect common word patterns linked to AI-generated writing.

This caught my attention because I was surprised at how common AI-generated content has already become in academic research. I agree with the concern raised in the article, particularly this point:

Although the new study primarily looked at abstracts and introductions, Dmitry Kobak (University of Tübingen data scientist) worries authors will increasingly rely on AI to write sections of scientific papers that reference related works. That could eventually cause these sections to become more similar to one another and create a “vicious cycle” in the future, in which new LLMs are trained on content generated by other LLMs.

From my own experience writing research papers over the past few years, I can see why this concern is valid. If you have followed my blog, you know I have published two research papers and am currently working on a third. While working on my papers, I occasionally used ChatGPT (including its Deep Research) to help find peer-reviewed sources for citations instead of relying solely on search engines like Google Scholar. However, I quickly realized that depending on ChatGPT for this task can be risky. In my case, about 30% of the citations it provided were inaccurate, which meant I had to verify each one manually. For reliable academic sourcing, I found Google Scholar much more trustworthy because current LLMs are still prone to “hallucinations.” You may have encountered other AI tools like Consensus AI, a search engine tailored for scientific research and limited to peer-reviewed academic papers only. Compared to ChatGPT Deep Research, it’s faster and more reliable for academic queries, but I strongly recommend always verifying AI outputs, as both tools can occasionally produce inaccuracies.

The Science article also highlights that AI usage varies significantly across disciplines. “The amount of artificial intelligence (AI)-modified sentences in scientific papers had surged by September 2024, almost two years after the release of ChatGPT, according to an analysis.” The table below shows estimates of AI usage by field, with certain disciplines adopting AI much faster than others. James Zou, a computational biologist at Stanford University, suggests these differences may reflect varying levels of familiarity with AI technology.

While the study from Stanford and UCSB is quite solid, Data Scientist Kobak pointed out that the estimates above could be underreported. One reason for this is that some authors may have started removing “red flag” words from manuscripts to avoid detection. For example, the word “delve” became more common right after ChatGPT launched, but its usage dropped sharply once it became widely recognized as a hallmark of AI-generated text.

If you want to read the full article, you can find it here: Science – One-fifth of computer science papers may include AI content.

— Andrew

Update: Here is another more recent report from Nature.

Humanoid Robot Forum 2025: Where Industrial Innovation Takes Center Stage

If you’re as interested in the future of robotics as I am, here’s an event you’ll want to keep an eye on. The Humanoid Robot Forum 2025 is happening on September 23, 2025, in Seattle (my city), Washington. Organized by the Association for Advancing Automation (A3), this one-day event brings together experts from the robotics and AI industries to explore how humanoid robots are being developed and deployed in real-world settings.

What makes this event exciting to me is that it focuses not just on hardware, but also on how technologies like AI and simulation are shaping the next generation of human-like robots. One of the keynotes I’m especially looking forward to is from Amit Goel, Head of Robotics Ecosystem at NVIDIA. His talk, “Advancing Humanoid Robotics Through Generative AI and Simulation,” will dive into how generative AI can help design, train, and test robot behaviors in simulated environments before deploying them in the real world. As someone who’s been exploring AI and NLP through my own projects, this intersection of AI and robotics is something I’m eager to learn more about.

The full agenda includes sessions and speakers from:

  • Diligent
  • Apptronik
  • Agility Robotics
  • PSYONIC
  • GXO
  • Association for Advancing Automation (A3)
  • Boston Dynamics
  • UCSD Advanced Robotics and Controls Lab
  • WiBotic
  • Cobot
  • NVIDIA
  • Cambridge Consultants
  • Toyota Research Institute
  • Sanctuary AI
  • True Ventures

Topics will include scaling up robotic hardware, AI-driven perception and control, power management, investment trends, and more. For anyone curious about how humanoid robots might start appearing in warehouses, hospitals, or even homes, this forum gives a front-row seat to what’s happening in the field.

Even though I won’t be attending in person (I’ve got school, college apps, and robotics season keeping me busy), I’ll definitely be keeping an eye out for takeaways and speaker highlights.

You can check out the full agenda and register for the event here:
👉 Humanoid Robot Forum 2025

— Andrew

How NLP Helps Robots Handle Interruptions: A Summary of JHU Research

I recently came across an awesome study from Johns Hopkins University describing how computational linguistics and NLP can make robots better conversational partners by teaching them how to handle interruptions, a feature that feels basic for humans but is surprisingly hard for machines.


What the Study Found

Researchers trained a social robot powered by a large language model (LLM) to manage real-time interruptions based on speaker intent. They categorized interruptions into four types: Agreement, Assistance, Clarification, and Disruption.

By analyzing human conversations from interviews to informal discussions, they designed strategies tailored to each interruption type. For example:

  • If someone agrees or helps, the robot pauses, nods, and resumes speaking.
  • When someone asks for clarification, the robot explains and continues.
  • For disruptive interruptions, the robot can either hold the floor to summarize its remaining points before yielding to the human user, or it can stop talking immediately.

How NLP Powers This System

The robot uses an LLM to:

  1. Detect overlapping speech
  2. Classify the interrupter’s intent
  3. Select the appropriate response strategy

In tests involving tasks and conversations, the system correctly interpreted interruptions about 89% of the time and responded appropriately 93.7% of the time.


Why This Matters in NLP and Computational Linguistics

This work highlights how computational linguistics and NLP are essential to human-robot interaction.

  • NLP does more than generate responses; it helps robots understand nuance, context, and intent.
  • Developing systems like this requires understanding pause cues, intonation, and conversational flow, all core to computational linguistics.
  • It shows how multimodal AI, combining language with behavior, can enable more natural and effective interactions.

What I Found Most Interesting

The researchers noted that users didn’t like when the robot “held the floor” too long during disruptive interruptions. It reminded me how pragmatic context matters. Just like people expect some rules in human conversations, robots need these conversational skills too.


Looking Ahead

This research expands what NLP can do in real-world settings like healthcare, education, and social assistants. For someone like me who loves robots and language, it shows how computational linguistics helps build smarter, more human-friendly AI systems.

If you want to dive deeper, check out the full report from Johns Hopkins:
Talking robots learn to manage human interruptions

— Andrew

How Computational Linguistics Is Powering the Future of Robotics?

As someone who’s been involved in competitive robotics through VEX for several years and recently started diving into computational linguistics, I’ve been wondering: how do these two fields connect?

At first, it didn’t seem obvious. VEX Robotics competitions (like the one my team Ex Machina participated in at Worlds 2025) are mostly about designing, building, and coding autonomous and driver-controlled robots to complete physical tasks. There’s no direct language processing involved… at least not yet. But the more I’ve learned, the more I’ve realized that computational linguistics plays a huge role in making real-world robots smarter, more useful, and more human-friendly.

Here’s what I’ve learned about how these two fields intersect and where robotics is heading.


1. Human-Robot Communication

The most obvious role of computational linguistics in robotics is helping robots understand and respond to human language. This is powered by natural language processing (NLP), a core area of computational linguistics. Think about assistants like Alexa or social robots like Pepper. They rely on language models and parsing techniques to interpret what we say and give meaningful responses.

This goes beyond voice control. It’s about making robots that can hold conversations, answer questions, or even ask for clarification when something is unclear. For robots to work effectively with people, they need language skills, not just motors and sensors.


2. Task Execution and Instruction Following

Another fascinating area is how robots can convert human instructions into actual actions. For example, if someone says, “Pick up the red cup from the table,” a robot must break that down: What object? What location? What action?

This is where semantic parsing comes in—turning language into structured data the robot can use to plan its moves. In VEX, we manually code our autonomous routines, but imagine if a future version of our robot could listen to instructions in plain English and adapt its behavior in real time.


3. Understanding Context and Holding a Conversation

Human communication is complex. We often leave things unsaid, refer to past ideas, or use vague phrases like “that one over there.” Research in discourse modeling and context tracking helps robots manage this complexity.

This is especially useful in collaborative environments. Think hospital robots assisting nurses, or factory robots working alongside people. They need to understand not just commands but also user intent, tone, and changing context.


4. Multimodal Understanding

Robots don’t just rely on language. They also use vision, sensors, and spatial awareness. A good example is interpreting a command like, “Hand me the tool next to the blue box.” The robot has to match those words with what it sees.

This is called multimodal integration, where the robot combines language and visual information. In my own robotics experience, we’ve used vision sensors to detect field elements, but future robots will need to combine that visual input with spoken instructions to act intelligently in dynamic spaces.


5. Emotional and Social Intelligence

This part really surprised me. Sentiment analysis and affective computing are helping robots detect emotions in voice or text, which makes them more socially aware.

This could be important for assistive robots that help the elderly, teach kids, or support people with disabilities. It’s not just about understanding words. It’s about understanding people.


6. Learning from Language

Computational linguistics also helps robots learn and adapt over time. Instead of hardcoding every behavior, researchers are working on ways for robots to learn from manuals, online resources, or natural language feedback.

This is especially exciting as large language models continue to evolve. Imagine a robot reading its own instruction manual or watching a video tutorial and figuring out how to do a new task.


Looking Ahead

While none of this technology is part of the current VEX Robotics competition (at least not yet), understanding how computational linguistics connects to robotics gives me a whole new appreciation for where robotics is going. It also makes me excited about studying this intersection more deeply in college.

Whether it’s through smarter voice assistants, more helpful home robots, or AI systems that respond naturally, computational linguistics is quietly shaping the next generation of robotics.

— Andrew

WAIC 2025: What Geoffrey Hinton’s “Tiger” Warning Taught Me About AI’s Future

At the end of July (7/26 – 7/28), Shanghai hosted the 2025 World Artificial Intelligence Conference (WAIC), drawing over 1,200 participants from more than 40 countries. Even though I wasn’t there, I followed the conference closely, especially the keynote from Geoffrey Hinton, the so-called “Godfather of AI.” His message? AI is advancing faster than we expect, and we need global cooperation to make sure it stays aligned with human values.

Hinton’s talk was historic. It was his first public appearance in China, and he even stood throughout his address despite back pain, which was noted by local media. One quote really stuck with me: “Humans have grown accustomed to being the most intelligent species in the world – what if that’s no longer the case?” That’s a big question, and as someone who’s diving deeper into computational linguistics and large language models, I felt both amazed and a little uneasy.

His warning compared superintelligent AI to a tiger we’re raising as a pet. If we’re not careful, he said, “the tiger” might one day turn on us. The point wasn’t to scare everyone, but to highlight why we can’t rely on simply pulling the plug if AI systems surpass human intelligence. Hinton believes we need to train AI to be good from the beginning because shutting it down later might not be an option.

WAIC 2025 wasn’t all doom and gloom though. Hinton also talked about the huge potential of AI to accelerate science. For example, he highlighted DeepMind’s AlphaFold as a breakthrough that solved a major biology challenge, predicting protein structures. That shows how powerful AI can be when guided properly.

What stood out the most was the recurring theme of cooperation. Hinton and others, like former Google CEO Eric Schmidt, emphasized the need for global partnerships on AI safety and ethics. Hinton even signed the “Shanghai AI Safety Consensus” with other experts to support international collaboration. The message was clear: no single country can or should handle AI’s future alone.

As a high school student passionate about AI and language, I’m still learning how these pieces fit together. But events like WAIC remind me that the future of AI isn’t just about building smarter systems, it’s also about making sure they work for everyone.

For those interested, here’s a more detailed summary of Hinton’s latest speech: Pandaily Report on WAIC 2025

You can also explore the official WAIC website here: https://www.worldaic.com.cn/

— Andrew

ACL 2025 New Theme Track: Generalization in NLP Models

The 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2025) will be happening in Vienna, Austria from July 27 to August 1. I won’t be attending in person, but as someone planning to study and do research in computational linguistics and NLP in college, I’ve been following the conference closely to keep up with the latest trends.

One exciting thing about this year’s ACL is its new theme track: Generalization of NLP Models. According to the official announcement:

“Following the success of the ACL 2020–2024 Theme tracks, we are happy to announce that ACL 2025 will have a new theme with the goal of reflecting and stimulating discussion about the current state of development of the field of NLP.

Generalization is crucial for ensuring that models behave robustly, reliably, and fairly when making predictions on data different from their training data. Achieving good generalization is critically important for models used in real-world applications, as they should emulate human-like behavior. Humans are known for their ability to generalize well, and models should aspire to this standard.

The theme track invites empirical and theoretical research and position and survey papers reflecting on the Generalization of NLP Models. The possible topics of discussion include (but are not limited to) the following:

  • How can we enhance the generalization of NLP models across various dimensions—compositional, structural, cross-task, cross-lingual, cross-domain, and robustness?
  • What factors affect the generalization of NLP models?
  • What are the most effective methods for evaluating the generalization capabilities of NLP models?
  • While Large Language Models (LLMs) significantly enhance the generalization of NLP models, what are the key limitations of LLMs in this regard?

The theme track submissions can be either long or short. We anticipate having a special session for this theme at the conference and a Thematic Paper Award in addition to other categories of awards.”

This year’s focus on generalization really highlights where the field is going—toward more robust, ethical, and real-world-ready NLP systems. It’s not just about making cool models anymore, but about making sure they work well across different languages, cultures, and use cases.

If you’re into reading papers like I am, especially ones that dig into how NLP systems can perform reliably on new or unexpected inputs, this theme track will be full of insights. I’m looking forward to checking out the accepted papers when they’re released.

You can read more at the official conference page: ACL 2025 Theme Track Announcement

— Andrew

I-Language vs. E-Language: What Do They Mean in Computational Linguistics?

In the summer of 2025, I started working on a computational linguistics research project using Twitch data under the guidance of Dr. Sidney Wong, a Computational Sociolinguist. As someone who is still pretty new to this field, I was mainly focused on learning how to conduct literature reviews, help narrow down research topics, clean data, build models, and extract insights.

One day, Dr. Wong suggested I look into the concept of I-language vs. E-language from theoretical linguistics. At first, I wasn’t sure why this mattered. I thought, Isn’t language just… language?

But as I read more, I realized that understanding this distinction changes how we think about language data and what we’re actually modeling when we work with NLP.

In this post, I want to share what I’ve learned about I-language and E-language, and why this distinction is important for computational linguistics research.


What Is I-Language?

I-language stands for “internal language.” This idea was proposed by Noam Chomsky, who argued that language is fundamentally a mental system. I-language refers to the internal, cognitive grammar that allows us to generate and understand sentences. It is about:

  • The unconscious rules and structures stored in our minds
  • Our innate capacity for language
  • The mental system that explains why we can produce and interpret sentences we’ve never heard before

For example, if I say, “The cat sat on the mat,” I-language is the system in my brain that knows the sentence is grammatically correct and what it means, even though I may never have said that exact sentence before.

I-language focuses on competence (what we know about our language) rather than performance (how we actually use it in real life).


What Is E-Language?

E-language stands for “external language.” This is the language we actually hear and see in the world, such as:

  • Conversations between Twitch streamers and their viewers
  • Tweets, Reddit posts, books, and articles
  • Any linguistic data that exists outside the mind

E-language is about observable language use. It includes everything from polished academic writing to messy chat messages filled with abbreviations, typos, and slang.

Instead of asking, “What knowledge do speakers have about their language?”, E-language focuses on, “What do speakers actually produce in practice?”


Why Does This Matter for Computational Linguistics?

When it comes to computational linguistics and NLP, this distinction affects:

1. What We Model

  • I-language-focused research tries to model the underlying grammatical rules and mental representations. For example, building a parser that captures syntax structures based on linguistic theory.
  • E-language-focused research uses real-world data to build models that predict or generate language based on patterns, regardless of theoretical grammar. For example, training a neural network on millions of Twitch comments to generate chat responses.

2. Research Goals

If your goal is to understand how humans process and represent language cognitively, you’re leaning towards I-language research. This includes computational psycholinguistics, cognitive modeling, and formal grammar induction.

If your goal is to build practical NLP systems for tasks like translation, summarization, or sentiment analysis, you’re focusing on E-language. These projects care about performance and usefulness, even if the model doesn’t match linguistic theory.


3. How Models Are Evaluated

I-language models are evaluated based on how well they align with linguistic theory or native speaker intuitions about grammaticality.

E-language models are evaluated using performance metrics, such as accuracy, BLEU scores, or perplexity, based on how well they handle real-world data.


My Thoughts as a Beginner

When Dr. Wong first told me about this distinction, I thought it was purely theoretical. But now, while working with Twitch data, I see the importance of both views.

For example:

  • If I want to study how syntax structures vary in Twitch chats, I need to think in terms of I-language to analyze grammar.
  • If I want to build an NLP model that generates Twitch-style messages, I need to focus on E-language to capture real-world usage patterns.

Neither approach is better than the other. They just answer different types of questions. I-language is about why language works the way it does, while E-language is about how language is actually used in the world.


Final Thoughts

Understanding I-language vs. E-language helps me remember that language isn’t just data for machine learning models. It’s a human system with deep cognitive and social layers. Computational linguistics becomes much more meaningful when we consider both perspectives: What does the data tell us? and What does it reveal about how humans think and communicate?

If you’re also just starting out in this field, I hope this post helps you see why these theoretical concepts matter for practical NLP and AI work. Let me know if you want a follow-up post about other foundational linguistics ideas for computational research.

— Andrew

What Is Computational Linguistics (and How Is It Different from NLP)?

When I first got interested in this field, I kept seeing the terms computational linguistics and natural language processing (NLP) used almost interchangeably. At first, I thought they were the same thing. By delving deeper through reading papers, taking courses, and conducting research, I realized that although they overlap significantly, they are not entirely identical.

So in this post, I want to explain the difference (and connection) between computational linguistics and NLP from the perspective of a high school student who’s just getting started, but really interested in understanding both the language and the tech behind today’s AI systems.


So, what is computational linguistics?

Computational linguistics is the science of using computers to understand and model human language. It’s rooted in linguistics, the study of how language works, and applies computational methods to test linguistic theories, analyze language structure, or build tools like parsers and grammar analyzers.

It’s a field that sits at the intersection of computer science and linguistics. Think syntax trees, morphology, phonology, semantics, and using code to work with all of those.

For example, in computational linguistics, you might:

  • Use code to analyze sentence structure in different languages
  • Create models that explain how children learn grammar rules
  • Explore how prosody (intonation and stress) changes meaning in speech
  • Study how regional dialects appear in online chat platforms like Twitch

In other words, computational linguistics is often about understanding language (how it’s structured, how it varies, and how we can model it with computers).


Then what is NLP?

Natural language processing (NLP) is a subfield of AI and computer science that focuses on building systems that can process and generate human language. It’s more application-focused. If you’ve used tools like ChatGPT, Google Translate, Siri, or even grammar checkers, you’ve seen NLP in action.

While computational linguistics asks, “How does language work, and how can we model it?”, NLP tends to ask, “How can we build systems that understand or generate language usefully?”

Examples of NLP tasks:

  • Sentiment analysis (e.g., labeling text as positive, negative, or neutral)
  • Machine translation
  • Named entity recognition (e.g., tagging names, places, dates)
  • Text summarization or question answering

In many cases, NLP researchers care more about whether a system works than whether it matches a formal linguistic theory. That doesn’t mean theory doesn’t matter, but the focus is more on performance and results.


So, what’s the difference?

The line between the two fields can get blurry (and many people work in both), but here’s how I think of it:

Computational LinguisticsNLP
Rooted in linguisticsRooted in computer science and AI
Focused on explaining and modeling languageFocused on building tools and systems
Often theoretical or data-driven linguisticsOften engineering-focused and performance-driven
Examples: parsing syntax, studying morphologyExamples: sentiment analysis, machine translation

Think of computational linguistics as the science of language and NLP as the engineering side of language technology.


Why this matters to me

As someone who’s really interested in computational linguistics, I find myself drawn to the linguistic side of things, like how language varies, how meaning is structured, and how AI models sometimes get things subtly wrong because they don’t “understand” language the way humans do.

At the same time, I still explore NLP, especially when working on applied projects like sentiment analysis or topic modeling. I think having a strong foundation in linguistics makes me a better NLP researcher (or student), because I’m more aware of the complexity and nuance of language.


Final thoughts

If you’re just getting started, you don’t have to pick one or the other. Read papers from both fields. Try projects that help you learn both theory and application. Over time, you’ll probably find yourself leaning more toward one, but having experience in both will only help.

I’m still learning, and I’m excited to keep going deeper into both sides. If you’re interested too, let me know! I’m always up for sharing reading lists, courses, or just thoughts on cool research.

— Andrew


Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑