In Alfred Korzybski’s “signs and things they represent” metaphor, Church’s untyped, typed, polymorphic, multi-typed, and hybrid polymorphic-multi-typed lambda calculi could be described as different systems of signs and symbols that are used to represent and communicate information in the form of expressions and functions.
In the case of Church’s untyped lambda calculus, the signs and symbols in the system would be the expressions and functions in the calculus, and they would be treated as if they were all of the same type. This would be analogous to a sign system in which all of the signs are treated as if they were the same type, without any distinctions or categories.
In the case of Church’s typed lambda calculus, the signs and symbols in the system would be the expressions and functions in the calculus, and they would be assigned to specific types based on the rules of the type system. This would be analogous to a sign system in which the signs are assigned to specific categories or classes, based on their meaning or function.
In the case of polymorphic lambda calculus, the signs and symbols in the system would be the expressions and functions in the calculus, and they would be able to be assigned to multiple types. This would be analogous to a sign system in which the signs can be placed in multiple categories or classes, depending on their meaning or function.
In the case of multi-typed lambda calculus, the signs and symbols in the system would be the expressions and functions in the calculus, and the type of a sign or symbol could change dynamically during the course of a computation. This would be analogous to a sign system in which the signs can change their category or class over time, depending on the context or situation in which they are used.
In the case of a hypothetical hybrid polymorphic-multi-typed lambda calculus, the signs and symbols in the system would be the expressions and functions in the calculus, and they would be able to be assigned to multiple types, as well as