Skip to main content
Log in

Abstract

Three classes of the so-called natural languages for communication with data bases are defined:English-like, pseudo-English, andsimple-English. It is argued that English-like and pseudo-English languages are normally more difficult to learn and use than artificial programming languages with no overt claim to English likeness. Simple-English is presented as a family of languages in which many restrictions (which hamper learning) are removed through interaction with, and drawing inferences from, the data base and the underlying system. It is concluded, however, that English likeness and ease of learning may be contradictory notions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Y. Bar-HillelLanguage and Information (Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1964).

    Google Scholar 

  2. D. G. Bobrow and B. Raphael, “New programming languages for artificial intelligence research,”ACM Comput. Rev. 6 (3):153–174 (September 1974).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Center for Applied Linguistics,Research Trends in Computational Linguistics (Center for Applied Linguistics, Washington, D.C., 1972).

    Google Scholar 

  4. N. Chomsky,Aspects of the Theory of Syntax (MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1965).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Feature Analysis of Generalized Data Base Management Systems, CODASYL Systems Committee, ACM, New York (May 1971).

  6. P. Culicover, J. Kimball, D. Lewis, D. Loveman, and J. Moyne, “An Automated Recognition Grammar for English,” Technical Report FSC 69-5007, IBM, Cambridge, Mass. (1969).

    Google Scholar 

  7. C. Hewitt, “PLANNER, A Project MAC report,” MAC-M-386, MIT, Cambridge, Mass. (October 1968); revised August 1970.

  8. D. E. Knuth, “Structured programming with go to statements,”ACM Comput. Surv. 6(4):261–301 (December 1974).

    Google Scholar 

  9. F. W. Lancaster and E. G. Fayen,Information Retrieval On-Line (Melville, Los Angeles, 1973).

    Google Scholar 

  10. D. B. Loveman, J. A. Moyne, and R. G. Tobey, “Cue: A Processor System for Restricted Natural English,”Proceedings of the Symposium on Information Storage and Retrieval University of Maryland (1971), pp. 47–59.

  11. C. A. Montgomery, “Linguistics and information science,”J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. (May–June 1972), pp. 195–219.

  12. J. A. Moyne, “A Simulated Computer for Natural Language Processing,” Technical Report TR 00.1463, IBM (1966).

  13. J. A. Moyne, “Introduction to an Operational RELADES,” Technical Report TR 00.1442, IBM (1966).

  14. J. A. Moyne, “Proto-RELADES: A Restrictive Natural Language System,” Technical Report BPC 3, IBM, Cambridge, Mass. (1967).

    Google Scholar 

  15. J. A. Moyne, “An introduction to transformational grammars,”Int. J. Comput. Math. 2:169–181 (1968).

    Google Scholar 

  16. J. A. Moyne, “Informational retrieval and natural language,”Proc. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. 6:259–263 (1969).

    Google Scholar 

  17. J. A. Moyne, “Some Grammars and Recognizers for Formal and Natural Languages,” inAdvances in Information Systems Science, Julius T. Tou, Ed. (Plenum, New York, 1974).

    Google Scholar 

  18. M. Pacak and A. W. Pratt, “The Function of Semantics in Automated Language Processing,Proceedings of the Symposium on Information Storage and Retrieval, University of Maryland (1971), pp. 5–18.

  19. R. Rustin, Ed.,Natural Language Processing (Algorithmics Press, New York, 1973).

    Google Scholar 

  20. G. Salton,Automatic Information Organization and Retrieval (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1968).

    Google Scholar 

  21. J. E. Sammet,Programming Languages: History and Fundamentals (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1969).

    Google Scholar 

  22. S. Y. Sedelow and W. A. Sedelow,Language Research and the Computer (The University of Kansas, Lawrence, 1972).

    Google Scholar 

  23. R. M. Schwarcz, J. F. Burger, and R. F. Simmons, “A deductive question-answering for natural language inference,”Commun. ACM,13 (3):167–183 (March 1970).

    Google Scholar 

  24. “SIGPLAN, Proceedings of a symposium on very high level languages,”SIGPLAN Notices,ACM:9(4) (April 1974).

  25. G. J. Sussman, and D. V. McDermott, “From conniver to planner, a genetic approach,”Proc. FJCC (1972).

  26. D. E. Walker, “Automated Language Processing,” inAnnual Review of Information Science and Technology, Vol. 8, Carios A. Cuadra, Ed. (American Society for Information Science, Washington, D.C., 1973).

    Google Scholar 

  27. T. Winograd,Understanding Natural Languages (Academic Press, New York, 1972).

    Google Scholar 

  28. W. A. Woods, “Semantics for a Question-Answering System,” Report No. NSF 19 to National Science Foundation, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass. (1967).

    Google Scholar 

  29. W. A. Woods, R. M. Kaplan, and B. Nash-Webber, “The Lunar Sciences Natural Language Information System: Final Report,” BBN Report No. 2378, Bolt Beranek and Newman, Cambridge, Mass. (1972).

    Google Scholar 

  30. V. Yngve,COMIT, 2nd ed. (MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Moyne, J.A. Simple-english for data base communication. International Journal of Computer and Information Sciences 6, 327–343 (1977). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00998326

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00998326

Key words

Navigation