In context, that claim was an explanation of what I was trying to get at with the phrase "conceptual understanding". We don't have a conceptual understanding of

In context, that claim was an explanation of what I was trying to get at with the phrase "conceptual understanding". We don't have a conceptual understanding of language. We do have a conceptual understanding of how to translate between human languages — Proof: we can translate between human languages. If you think that's not adequate proof then you're disagreeing with me on the semantics of "conceptual understanding". If you have an alternative name for that then I'd appreciate it because I think my usage is confusing. It's not a useless notion of "conceptual understanding" though, because while being able to have a program complete a task implies having the conceptual understanding necessary for that task, it's possible to have the conceptual understanding but not be able to make a program, if, for instance, it would require greater (within reason) computing resources.