The question "Is mathematics the language of science?" is hardly a polemical or a disputative issue: most mathematicians and scientists do concur that it is.  In fact, history is replete with rather eloquent proclamations in favor of the assertion that mathematics is indeed a language, and in fact the language of science.  Galileo's claim that, "Nature's great book is written in mathematical language," Sir James Jeans' proclamation in The Mysterious Universe that the Great Architect "… now begins to appear as a pure mathematician" (p. 165), Hogben's portrayal of mathematics as " … the language of size, shape and order" and as "an essential part of the equipment of an intelligent citizen" (Hogben, 1936), are among the better known ones.  More recent arguments include articles by Eckart (1984), Adler (1991), and Manin (2000).

The more contentious and consequently the more interesting aspect of the question is why this is the case.  In this paper, we claim that the answer is closely related to one's philosophical perspective and is based on the precept of construing mathematics as a continually transmuting complex system of communication.

This paper will comprise three sections.  In the first section, we will discuss the basics of social constructivism.  We will follow this by a brief discussion of how social constructivism can be considered nominalist with respect to ontology.  We will conclude our paper by showing that mathematics is the theory of form and structure that arises within language.