Sometimes I wish that the term 'language' had never been used to describe the blobs of text we use to create formal specifications for programs. This invites all sorts of comparisons/analogies/metaphors to spoken and written languages that may not necessarily be meaningful or constructive.
I think of source code as being more analogous to architectural blueprints or formal logic than someone's verbal description of an object. It's just a coincidence that source code is governed by structures and concepts that exist in human languages.
Usually when people say they want to be able to create software with natural language, what they want are better tools that allow them to more efficiently create something, with less time spent worrying about syntax or technical minutiae. This outcome doesn't require natural language, it just requires better tools.
I think of source code as being more analogous to architectural blueprints or formal logic than someone's verbal description of an object. It's just a coincidence that source code is governed by structures and concepts that exist in human languages.
Usually when people say they want to be able to create software with natural language, what they want are better tools that allow them to more efficiently create something, with less time spent worrying about syntax or technical minutiae. This outcome doesn't require natural language, it just requires better tools.