Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!torsqnt!lethe!yunexus!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcsun!unido!opal!wg
From: wg@opal.cs.tu-berlin.de (Wolfgang Grieskamp)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.functional
Subject: Re: why lambda ?
Message-ID: <2747@opal.cs.tu-berlin.de>
Date: 25 Feb 91 02:37:42 GMT
References: <1952@seti.inria.fr>
Sender: news@opal.cs.tu-berlin.de
Reply-To: wg@opal.cs.tu-berlin.de
Followup-To: comp.lang.functional.joke
Organization: Technical University of Berlin
Lines: 19
Nntp-Posting-Host: troll.cs.tu-berlin.de

ddr@margaux.inria.fr (Daniel de Rauglaudre) writes:

>There is a question of great importance in our institute: why "lambda"
>in "lambda calculus" ? Why not "alpha" or "dzeta" or any other symbol ?
>Does anybody know the origin of this choice ? Thank you for you answers.

This seems to be quite easy: lambda just sounds so nice. At least, better 
then alpha. Out of concurrence: "dzeta". Just try to think of "omega" -
terrible, and, BTW, preloaded.

Hey, you wont like to make a phonetic, psychologic, historic, what you like,
dissertation on this subject? It might be really appreciated. 

Yes, the lambda calculus induces so really deep perception again and 
again. 

--
Wolfgang Grieskamp 
wg@opal.cs.tu-berlin.de tub!tubopal!wg wg%opal@DB0TUI11.BITNET