Re: Machine English, Danish, Norwegian, Swedish, Dutch.

On Mar 18, 7:42 am, "cr88192" <cr88...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Quas.co.ua" <Q...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:ethvph$2qco$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Machine English, Danish, Norwegian, Swedish, Dutch.

Some times ago one person from Den Mark gave a quote here,
about if make computers to understand English,
it will be found a person or persons who do not speak English.

yes, and this would include the OP it seems.

Perhaps my observation about structures of languages close to English
from the point of view of formal (machine) analysis of texts written on
those languages.

Perhaps the closest to English is Dutch.
At the recent days this language of land many years ago belonged to
England,
has lots of common with English.
But Dutch sentence sometimes looks as long stack-based machine program.
Example from some site about Dutch:
"Ik hab 11 boeken moeder gehaben." (My excuses if misspelled.)

Modern English may be looking like this:
"I have 11 books. Those books are taken of a mother."

errm, no.

better would be:
"I have 11 books that belonged to a mother".


In English such expression, is formally not consecuental.
Becouse "have" concures with "belonged",
(even if replace "that" with "which" or "what").

For Dutch such expression is consequental.

But I'm talking not about human conversation
but about machine analysis.


or, in a different style (more typical of poetry):
"I have 11 books that to a mother belonged".

<snip>



The Swedish languages looks closer to German than to 3 above (from the
point of view of this article).
The concepts of this language are exact and certain. It use to be proposed
that the
machine knows all the possible concepts, after connecting following code
with
predefined concepts. Perhaps the closest example is a language Pascal,
where the compiler knows the best.

it could be argued that pascal compilers know less than C compilers
typically.


No.
C has minimal syntaxis when Pascal
has maximal syntaxis.

If in C you write:

int global;

void up()
{
global++;
}

int move(int some)
{
up();
return(global+some);
}

When position of elements define their value;
In Pascal everything is much than certain:

program exmaple1
var
global : integer;
begin


function move (some: integer)
procedure up
begin
global:=global+1;
end;
begin
up;
some:=global+1;
end;

{My dear compiler I know you'll may never read this,
but please forgive me if you can
for all possible misspellings.}

end.

It's not about paradigm of programming
Pascal respectes to same paredigm with C,
but it is about what programmer feels when fills
the code, and in less measure about what feel
all those who read code.



Those notes not define the values of native languages,
but connections with machine languages.
Generally those notes are very subjective, and all the 5 native languages
named in subject of this article are indeed very close.

Not without aid from this group, I found 3 examples of coding computer
programs on English.

1. Algol.
Sounds as terrible slang of formal lists and reports. Which are far from
English literature.

2. Example from some American university (it seems from Utah, but no
politics)
A good example of English creations faster begins with "A", rather than
from "There is".

3. Structured English.
Gentlemen tend not to say "end of file" to each other.

yes, when done talking they say "end of line".


Beg your pardon what's done in Amsterdam's slang ?



Thank you.
Any comments are suggested.

Few words why do I need this.
I want to make computer language which would be readable as usual English,
also the programing on this language would be looking close to writing on
English,
(in several implementations). Also this language should reflect English
traditions of expression.
But such language use to be formal programming language,
(no shades of meaning, no absurdistic speaches)
and no intention to enable computer "speak" with human on its native human
language.
The general task is obtain some native proud over the world of computers.
Also the translation from this project languages use not to be a difficult
task
even for weak microprocessors.

programming languages are gradually increasing in abstraction and becomming
ever more tolerant to variation, and as such the semantic gap between humans
and computers may be steadily closing.

however, in the eventual outcome, it is likely that the language that would
emerge would be neither like that of human languages nor like that of modern
machine languages (and we will no longer need to worry about issues like
typesystems and variable scoping).

remember that at one time, "high-level" referred to languages such as
assembler, fortran, PL/I, cobol, ..., but now, even a language like python
has a hard time holding this property.

we have moved from machine code to fixed-formatting, to lines, to tokens, to
abstractions, and beyond...

and meanwhile our speech patterns while talking about technical subjects
have become increasingly formalized (a casual speaker would, of all things,
assume thing, object, and item to be synonyms...).

and so, yes, at some point we may be faced with an issue:
there may well be at least 2 versions of english, one spoken casually by
humans, and one written by humans and also understood by machines, likely
much the same as human speakers, and we will hardly notice the difference,
apart from the fact that everyone else wont understand a damn thing we are
saying...

It looks my head was squeezzzing when I was forcing it,
to shallow your speach into the single byte.

The task
is to avoid the another English creating.
The English language is one and common.

However it is sugested to make such language,
which will be close to the native spoke, with aim on
few particular goals.

Buy the way, I wrote programs in machine code
the longest took about 40 bytes.
And it was the computer animation editor. (!)
Plus about 30 bytes player.

Looking at the modern gigabytes monsters,
it is not clear where the progress is going.

Analyzzzzing the content of memory,
of ordinary Linux station, it looks such
that the memory is full of repeated templates
of data and code.
(Being in shortage in this country where,
i've got under political persecutions,
it was not clear what for were spent money,
when +32MB of DIMMs were bought.)

In old days the almost the same RAM management subsystem,
with almost the same C compiler,
worked on 64Kbytes.

What was lost?

May be that one step of abstraction should be made,
or may be the wrong way was taken.


--Michael

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: F is evil (was: XML::LibXML UTF-8 toString() -vs- nodeValue())
    ... So Futfizes symbols by accident. ... language, no matter if the programming language makes it easy or not. ... Sometimes this is because they don't speak English too well, ...
    (comp.lang.perl.misc)
  • Re: Methodology
    ... want to go with ASP.Net and with programming in general. ... Computers are called "computers" because they always have been ... And the mathematical language of computers is binary, ... "language" was born: Assembler. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.general)
  • Re: PL/I string representations (was Re: To Richard Heathfield: enoughs enough)
    ... >> remember that the majority of computers are not even a thousandth as ... programming has more than one aspect, ... > live up to your assertion that it is a useless language. ... >> required since additional speed involves additional cost. ...
    (comp.programming)
  • Re: For Henry to enjoy:
    ... Spoken language was the question Karla. ... based programming languages. ... English has been the undisputed lingua franca for the ... language taught in Russian schools, ...
    (soc.culture.baltics)
  • Re: Leodhasach & Hearasch - Gaelic help please
    ... course our own traditional language is even more neglected than Gaelic is. ... who speak English soon get the gist of it. ... is someone who truly appreciates Scottish culture in that you won't find ...
    (soc.culture.scottish)
Loading