I think it was Herb that mentioned the dispute going on at his university about whether skill with a computer language ought to count for the foreign language requirement.  The use of the word "language" for both competencies seems to have misled administrators.  I came across the following aside in a description of formal systems: 
 
…The above example shows clearly the enormous difference in subtlety and quality between a computer programming language and a natural human language, underscoring the dubious nature of proposals often seen in universities nowadays to substitute knowledge of a computer language for a foreign language Ph.D. language competency requirements.  Even the most elaborate and sophisticated computer languages pale by comparison with natural languages in their expressive power, not to mention the enormous cultural content that's carried along almost for free with a natural language.  For reasons such as these, many see such proposals to replace knowledge of a natural language by knowledge of a computer language as at best a shallow, anti-intellectual joke, and the theory of formal systems provides a basis for construction of rational arguments against their adoption.
 
Casti, John L., Reality Rules: I, Picturing the World in Mathematics — The Fundamentals (New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1992), p. 27.
 
Bruce
 
NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/