LOGO-L> RE: LOGO-L> Defining Words 
Author Message
 LOGO-L> RE: LOGO-L> Defining Words

Hi Jeff,
Please help be remember my grammar which I have not studied since school (I
am merely an Engineer/Computer consultant): You described "high", "far" and
"over" as nouns. Since these qualify the verbs are they not adverbs? Or has
such terminology become obsolete over the years?
regards
ray catzel

Quote:
-----Original Message-----


Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2000 9:22 PM

Subject: LOGO-L> Defining Words

I agree that you are defining new words, and the words can make grammatic
sense
if you use the right parts of speach.  If you think of the LOGO expression
as an
imperative sentence with "you" (the turtle) understood then the commands
should
be verbs and the operations should be nouns.

So verbs like hop, skip and jump make great commands (procedures with no
output).  Think of it as telling the turtle "(You) hop", "(You) skip",
"(You)
jump".  If you wanted to add some variety to hop, skip and jump you could
add
inputs.  You could make some nouns, operations (procedures with outputs),
like
"high", "far" and "over".  Now tell the turtle to "hop high", "skip far",
and
"jump over".

LOGO is better at English grammar than FORTH, since the verb, command, is in
the
beginning.  FORTH has the nouns, (objects and operations) before the verb,
so it
would be good for Latin ;-)

Thanks,
Jeff Sandys


> I used word in this context to try and simplify terminology a little.
> Although you are really defining procedures, in the paradigm of Logo (and
> also Forth) it's not uncommon to say that you're defining a word, since
> you're giving "meaning" to that word. It might be worth opening up for
> debate, so I hope you don't mind me forwarding it to the logo alias.

> This is the theory behind my reasoning:

> Suppose we want to tell a computer to "hop skip jump" what does hop mean?
We
> give meaning to the word hop "to hop...." Now what does skip mean? We give
> meaning to the word skip "to skip..." and finally "to jump...". We have
> defined three words, hop skip and jump. They just happen to be
(technically)
> proceedures.

> Jamie

> ----- Original Message -----


> Sent: Thursday, December 23, 1999 3:37 PM
> Subject: RE; Logo Tutorial

> > Hi Webmaster,

> > Your site looks great.

> > Just one question ...

> > In you logo tutorials you use the term "word" where I would normally use
> > "procedure". I have never seen "word" used like this (not than I am an
> > expert). Is it generally accepted and preferred to "procedure"?

> > Regards,

> > Jim Fuller M.Ed - ECU 1998
> > ECAWA Educator of the Year 1999
> > jfuller EDUCATIONAL
> > 48 Portmarnock Circle
> > MANDURAH  6210
> > Western Australia
> > phone +61 08 9535 6471
> > http://www.*-*-*.com/ ~jfuller

> ---------------------------------------------------------------



---------------------------------------------------------------



---------------------------------------------------------------






Sun, 23 Jun 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 LOGO-L> RE: LOGO-L> Defining Words
Ray,
  I, too, am merely an Engineer. "High" is an adjective, "far"
is an adjective or adverb, and "over" is a preposition, these
are all elements of a noun phrase. "Jump far" is a poor example,
let me give an example from my LOGO music workspace.

  If you were writing a procedure, a command that would take a
list of numbers and sound a sequence of tones, what name would
you give it?  Names like "song_player" or "piano" might come to
mind. For commands pick an active voice verb, like "sing". You
can test for active voice by using the imperative, "You sing!",
if it makes sense it probably is an active voice verb.
"You piano!" doesn't sound right as a command.

  Now we have a sing command, what should it sing? Active verbs
need objects, or noun phrases. One thing it could sing is the
notes, A, B, C, D, E, F, and G (and F# and Bb, etc). Since the
number "60" is a middle C on my system the procedure for C is:
        ?TO C
        >OUTPUT 60
        >END
        ?SING C ;sounds a middle C for about 1/4 of a second

  Add two additional procedures, SCALE, that adds a number to
every element of a list:
        ?PR SCALE 5 [1 2 3]
        [6 7 8]
and MAJOR that outputs a list of the intervals in a major scale:
        ?TO MAJOR
        >OUTPUT [0 2 4 5 7 9 11 12]
        >END

  Now I can command the turtle to:
        ?SING SCALE C MAJOR     ;sounds the "do, re, me ..."

  The test for nouns is "the" as in "the scale", "the C (note)",
"the major (scale)". Verbs and "the" don't go together, "the sing"
doesn't sound right. Song is a noun, "the song", so:
        ?MAKE "SONG (LIST E D C D E E E R D D D R E G G R)
where R is a rest, then:
        ?SING SONG      ;sounds mary had a little lamb

  If you want to make LOGO more English like you can add "noise"
words:
        ?TO THE :X
        >OUTPUT :X
        >END
        ?TO OF :X
        >OUTPUT :X
        >END
        ?SING THE SCALE OF A MINOR
        ?SING THE SONG

  I don't use the noise words, but my music workspace has many
procedures to manipulate lists to experiment with song writing.
All the commands are active voice verbs and all the operations
are noun phrases. It is very easy to remember and write the
LOGO expressions. If you look up the LOGO primitives in a
dictionary you will find that commands are verbs and operations
are nouns with few exceptions.

  LISP has no commands and therefore has no verbs. It is a great
language to represent and manipulate objects, but actions are
side effects of evaluating the "noun phrase". I am reminded of
Doonesbury: "Senator, we need a verb!" from Gary Trudeau's book,
"Adjectives will cost you extra".

  See "Exploring Language With Logo" by Paul Goldenberg for more
fun with grammar and LOGO.

Thanks,
Jeff Sandys

Quote:

> Hi Jeff,
> Please help be remember my grammar which I have not studied
> since school (I am merely an Engineer/Computer consultant):
> You described "high", "far" and "over" as nouns. Since these
> qualify the verbs are they not adverbs? Or has such
> terminology become obsolete over the years?
> regards
> ray catzel

> -----Original Message-----


> Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2000 9:22 PM

> Subject: LOGO-L> Defining Words

> I agree that you are defining new words, and the words can make
> grammatic sense if you use the right parts of speach.  If you
> think of the LOGO expression as an imperative sentence with
> "you" (the turtle) understood then the commands should be verbs
> and the operations should be nouns.

> So verbs like hop, skip and jump make great commands (procedures
> with no output).  Think of it as telling the turtle "(You) hop",
> "(You) skip", "(You) jump".  If you wanted to add some variety to
> hop, skip and jump you could add inputs.  You could make some
> nouns, operations (procedures with outputs), like "high", "far"
> and "over".  Now tell the turtle to "hop high", "skip far", and
> "jump over".

> LOGO is better at English grammar than FORTH, since the verb,
> command, is in the beginning.  FORTH has the nouns, (objects
> and operations) before the verb, so it would be good for Latin ;-)

> Thanks,
> Jeff Sandys

<snip>


Sun, 23 Jun 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 
 [ 3 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. LOGO-L> Logo 15-Word Challenge Update

2. LOGO-L> Logo 15-Word Challange Update

3. LOGO-L> Re: Logo 15-Word Challenge

4. LOGO-L> Logo 15-Word Challenge

5. LOGO-L> Logo 15-word challenge update

6. LOGO-L> Logo 15-Word Challenge Update

7. LOGO-L> Logo 15-Word Challenge Update

8. LOGO-L> Apple logo/MSW Logo

9. LOGO-L> Reseach Machines Logo (RM LOGO)

10. WTD: 'ls -lR '->HTML code

11. logo-l-digest V4 #24 >Re: LOGO-L> Difference between MicroWorlds and (Logo + Kidpix + Word + PowerPoint)

12. LOGO-L> Word Sculpturing

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software