Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #25832 > unrolled thread

automatically correct the parts of speech of a document

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.javascript

Contents

  automatically correct the parts of speech of a document Anupam Jamatia <anupamjamatia@gmail.com> - 2014-09-13 00:13 -0700
    Re: automatically correct the parts of speech of a document "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-09-13 09:39 +0200
      Re: automatically correct the parts of speech of a document Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-09-13 09:35 +0100
      Re: automatically correct the parts of speech of a document Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-09-13 16:33 +0200
        Re: automatically correct the parts of speech of a document "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-09-13 16:56 +0200
          Re: automatically correct the parts of speech of a document Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-09-13 17:10 +0200
        Re: automatically correct the parts of speech of a document Joao Rodrigues <groups_jr-1@yahoo.com> - 2014-09-13 12:02 -0300
          Re: automatically correct the parts of speech of a document Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-09-13 17:24 +0200
            Re: automatically correct the parts of speech of a document Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-09-13 18:01 +0100
              Re: automatically correct the parts of speech of a document Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-09-13 19:44 +0200
                Re: automatically correct the parts of speech of a document John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2014-09-13 19:37 +0100
                Re: automatically correct the parts of speech of a document Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-09-13 20:36 +0100
                  Re: automatically correct the parts of speech of a document Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-09-14 01:48 +0200
      Re: automatically correct the parts of speech of a document John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2014-09-13 19:48 +0100
    Re: automatically correct the parts of speech of a document Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-09-13 12:16 +0100

#25832 — automatically correct the parts of speech of a document

Hi friends, Please help me out. Any idea to write a program which will automatically correct the parts of speech of a document.

Example: say in my document I have 
My/PRONOUN  name/PRONOUN is/VERB Jhon/NOUN. He/PRONOUN is/VERB going/ADJ to/PREPOSITION school/NOUN

Now I need to chenge 
My/PRONOUN  name/NOUN is/VERB Jhon/NOUN. He/PRONOUN is/VERB going/VERB to/PREPOSITION school/NOUN

Any one can do manually, but How to do using java. The document may contain 100 lines tagged with parts of speech.

Thanks and Regards

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#25833

Anupam Jamatia <anupamjamatia@gmail.com> wrote on 13 sep 2014 in
comp.lang.javascript: 

> Hi friends, Please help me out. Any idea to write a program which will
> automatically correct the parts of speech of a document. 

A document has no speech in this sense, 
speech is the vocalized form of human communication.

"A" speech is something different again, 
the text of which could be put in a document. 

Perhaps you mean "language" or even "grammar"?

> Example: say in my document I have 
> My/PRONOUN  name/PRONOUN is/VERB Jhon/NOUN. He/PRONOUN is/VERB going/ADJ
> to/PREPOSITION school/NOUN 
> 
> Now I need to chenge 
> My/PRONOUN  name/NOUN is/VERB Jhon/NOUN. He/PRONOUN is/VERB going/VERB
> to/PREPOSITION school/NOUN 

Is this schoolwork you want us to do for you?

This NG is not about human language.
 
> Any one can do manually, but How to do using java. The document may
> contain 100 lines tagged with parts of speech. 

Ah, a single document, definitely schoolwork.

This NG is about Javascript, NOT about [a script of] Java.

Java is a totally different language from Javascript,
sorry for the confusion made in the last century 
when others named Javascript Javascript.

Now please go to a NG that is on topic.

-- 
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25834

In article <XnsA3A762481163Deejj99@194.109.133.133>, Evertjan.
<exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> wrote:

> Anupam Jamatia <anupamjamatia@gmail.com> wrote on 13 sep 2014 in
> comp.lang.javascript: 
> 
> > Hi friends, Please help me out. Any idea to write a program which will
> > automatically correct the parts of speech of a document. 
> 
> A document has no speech in this sense, 
> speech is the vocalized form of human communication.
> 
> "A" speech is something different again, 
> the text of which could be put in a document. 
> 
> Perhaps you mean "language" or even "grammar"?

<wags finger> 

No he doesn't. "Parts of speech" is a perfectly correct English
expression that can refer to words in a documents. Examples are noun,
verb, etc.

-- 
"I am enclosing two tickets to the first night of my new play; bring a
friend.... if you have one." - GB Shaw to Churchill "Cannot possibly
attend first night, will attend second...  if there is one." - Winston
Churchill, in response.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25836

Evertjan. wrote:

> Anupam Jamatia […]:
>> Example: say in my document I have
>> My/PRONOUN  name/PRONOUN is/VERB Jhon/NOUN. He/PRONOUN is/VERB going/ADJ
>> to/PREPOSITION school/NOUN
>> 
>> Now I need to chenge
>> My/PRONOUN  name/NOUN is/VERB Jhon/NOUN. He/PRONOUN is/VERB going/VERB
>> to/PREPOSITION school/NOUN
> 
> Is this schoolwork you want us to do for you?

Possibly, and that would be a bad idea.  See also 
<http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html> as referred by the FAQ.
 
> This NG is not about human language.

In a way it it is.  Formal languages are but an extension of the natural 
ones; linguistics overlaps with computer science.  Formal languages can be 
used to process and generate the latter, and I think that use will increase.
  
>> Any one can do manually, but How to do using java. The document may
>> contain 100 lines tagged with parts of speech.
> 
> Ah, a single document, definitely schoolwork.
> 
> This NG is about Javascript, NOT about [a script of] Java.

This newsgroup is not about Javascript as there is no such language.
It is not about Java either, though.  What it is about can be derived from 
the tagline and, partially, the FAQ.
 
> Java is a totally different language from Javascript,

That is correct: one exists, the other does not.

> sorry for the confusion made in the last century
> when others named Javascript Javascript.

Nobody named a programming language „Javascript“ in the last century; 
Brendan Eich developed a programming language that was eventually named 
“JavaScript” and became the first implementation of ECMAScript.

Misguided people in *this* century named something “Javascript” as they were 
under the misconception that it were necessary, and would be wise, to use 
that word as an umbrella term for the implementations of ECMAScript, at 
least, that are very different from one another instead.
 
> Now please go to a NG that is on topic.

A newsgroup cannot be on-topic.  A subject can be either on-topic or off-
topic in a newsgroup; probably you meant *that*.

Having such poor command of the English language as yourself, it is not a 
good idea to lecture others about it.
 
-- 
PointedEars
FAQ: <http://PointedEars.de/faq> | SVN: <http://PointedEars.de/wsvn/>
Twitter: @PointedEars2 | ES Matrix: <http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix>
Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25837

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote on 13 sep 2014 in 
comp.lang.javascript:

> A newsgroup cannot be on-topic.  A subject can be either on-topic or off-
> topic in a newsgroup; probably you meant *that*.

Nonsense. That must be your personal definition of on-topicness.
 
> Having such poor command of the English language as yourself, it is not a 
> good idea to lecture others about it.

Please look at yourself.

-- 
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25839

Evertjan. wrote:

> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn […]:
>> A newsgroup cannot be on-topic.  A subject can be either on-topic or off-
>> topic in a newsgroup; probably you meant *that*.
> 
> Nonsense. That must be your personal definition of on-topicness.

AISB, you prove time and again that you have great difficulty understanding 
texts written in English *properly*.  At this point further explanations to 
you *in English* become futile.  Perhaps it would be best to find someone 
who can explain your mistake to you in Dutch; perhaps unfortunately, I am 
not that person yet.
  
-- 
PointedEars
FAQ: <http://PointedEars.de/faq> | SVN: <http://PointedEars.de/wsvn/>
Twitter: @PointedEars2 | ES Matrix: <http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix>
Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25838

On 09/13/2014 11:33 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:

> Nobody named a programming language „Javascript“ in the last century; 
> Brendan Eich developed a programming language that was eventually named 
> “JavaScript” and became the first implementation of ECMAScript.

You're wrong: The first edition of ECMAScript appeared 2 years after the
advent of JavaScript in May, 1995 by Brendan Eich. Then, it is illogical
that JavaScript has become "the first implementation of ECMAScript".

According to the "Brief History", in ECMA-262 3rd (1999):

"ECMA Standard is based on several originating technologies, the most
well known being JavaScript (Netscape) and JScript (Microsoft). The
language was invented by Brendan Eich at Netscape and first appeared in
that company’s Navigator 2.0 browser. It has appeared in all subsequent
browsers from Netscape and in all browsers from Microsoft starting with
Internet Explorer 3.0.
The development of this Standard started in November 1996. The first
edition of this ECMA Standard was adopted by the ECMA General Assembly
of June 1997."

-- 
Joao Rodrigues

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25840

Joao Rodrigues wrote:

> On 09/13/2014 11:33 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> Nobody named a programming language „Javascript“ in the last century;
>> Brendan Eich developed a programming language that was eventually named
>> “JavaScript” and became the first implementation of ECMAScript.
> 
> You're wrong:

I am not.

> The first edition of ECMAScript appeared 2 years after the
> advent of JavaScript in May, 1995 by Brendan Eich.

True, but irrelevant.

> Then, it is illogical that JavaScript has become "the first implementation
> of ECMAScript".

Your logic is flawed.  I wrote “eventually” on purpose.  Netscape JavaScript 
1.3 was designed as an implementation of the first Edition of ECMAScript; 
subsequent versions and implementations by other vendors were designed as 
implementations of that and other Editions of ECMAScript.

<https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Guide/JavaScript_Overview#JavaScript_and_the_ECMAScript_Specification>

(That text has survived from the original Netscape JavaScript 1.x Guide, see 
also 
<http://web.archive.org/web/19991012135105/http://developer.netscape.com/docs/manuals/js/client/jsguide/intro.htm#1013654>

-- 
PointedEars
FAQ: <http://PointedEars.de/faq> | SVN: <http://PointedEars.de/wsvn/>
Twitter: @PointedEars2 | ES Matrix: <http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix>
Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25841

In article <3287130.HeXyGakYei@PointedEars.de>, Thomas 'PointedEars'
Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:

> Joao Rodrigues wrote:
> 
> > On 09/13/2014 11:33 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> >> Nobody named a programming language „Javascript“ in the last century;
> >> Brendan Eich developed a programming language that was eventually named
> >> “JavaScript” and became the first implementation of ECMAScript.
> > 
> > You're wrong:
> 
> I am not.
> 
> > The first edition of ECMAScript appeared 2 years after the
> > advent of JavaScript in May, 1995 by Brendan Eich.
> 
> True, but irrelevant.

What's irrelevant is your fixation with the capitalisation of
javascript, and your general pedantry. Not only irrelevant but childish
too.

-- 
"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without 
evidence."
-- Christopher Hitchens

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25843

Tim Streater wrote:

> […] Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn […] wrote:
>> Joao Rodrigues wrote:
>> > The first edition of ECMAScript appeared 2 years after the
>> > advent of JavaScript in May, 1995 by Brendan Eich.
>> True, but irrelevant.
> 
> What's irrelevant is your fixation with the capitalisation of
> javascript,

There is no fixation.  A false conclusion was drawn by Joao and refuted.  

There is no “javascript” in the first place, so there cannot be a 
“capitalisation” of it.  As I have showed repeatedly, it is more appropriate 
to refer to “javascript” as the potentially misleading lowercase variant of 
“JavaScript”, indicating that there would be only one such programming 
language when there is not.

> and your general pedantry. Not only irrelevant but childish too.

Nice try.
 
-- 
PointedEars
FAQ: <http://PointedEars.de/faq> | SVN: <http://PointedEars.de/wsvn/>
Twitter: @PointedEars2 | ES Matrix: <http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix>
Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25844

On Sat, 13 Sep 2014 19:44:40 +0200, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
<PointedEars@web.de> wrote:

  <snip>
>As I have showed repeatedly, it is more appropriate 
>to refer to “javascript” as the potentially misleading lowercase variant of 
>“JavaScript”, indicating that there would be only one such programming 
>language when there is not.
  <snip>

A false conclusion from the given premise.

  John

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25846

In article <2590187.bqdmLbB4lb@PointedEars.de>, Thomas 'PointedEars'
Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:

> Tim Streater wrote:
> 
> > […] Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn […] wrote:
> >> Joao Rodrigues wrote:
> >> > The first edition of ECMAScript appeared 2 years after the
> >> > advent of JavaScript in May, 1995 by Brendan Eich.
> >> True, but irrelevant.
> > 
> > What's irrelevant is your fixation with the capitalisation of
> > javascript,
> 
> There is no fixation.  A false conclusion was drawn by Joao and refuted.  
> 
> There is no “javascript” in the first place, so there cannot be a 
> “capitalisation” of it.  As I have showed repeatedly,

"shown".

Except that you haven't. You've merely asserted it in your childish and
pedantic way.

> it is more appropriate 
> to refer to “javascript” as the potentially misleading lowercase variant of 
> “JavaScript”, indicating that there would be only one such programming 
> language when there is not.

Stuff and nonsense, child. Go back to your teddy-bear. A Steiff, for
preference.

-- 
Anyone who slaps a 'this page is best viewed with Browser X' label on
a Web page appears to be yearning for the bad old days, before the Web,
when you had very little chance of reading a document written on another
computer, another word processor, or another network. -- Tim Berners-Lee

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25848

Tim Streater wrote:

> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> Tim Streater wrote:
>> > […] Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn […] wrote:
>> >> Joao Rodrigues wrote:
>> >> > The first edition of ECMAScript appeared 2 years after the
>> >> > advent of JavaScript in May, 1995 by Brendan Eich.
>> >> True, but irrelevant.
>> > 
>> > What's irrelevant is your fixation with the capitalisation of
>> > javascript,
>> 
>> There is no fixation.  A false conclusion was drawn by Joao and refuted.
>> 
>> There is no “javascript” in the first place, so there cannot be a
>> “capitalisation” of it.  As I have showed repeatedly,
> 
> "shown".

Both forms are correct as the past participle of “(to) show”.
 
> Except that you haven't.

Well, I have, but you prefer to ignore all the evidence, including this 
thread.

> You've merely asserted it in your childish and pedantic way.
> 
>> it is more appropriate to refer to “javascript” as the potentially
>> misleading lowercase variant of “JavaScript”, indicating that there would
>> be only one such programming language when there is not.
> 
> Stuff and nonsense, child. Go back to your teddy-bear. A Steiff, for
> preference.

How very eloquent.

Unfortunately, you do not realize that seeking the truth is anything but 
childish when the latter term is understood in a negative way.  However, in 
fact, attempting to deride something by calling it “childish” ignores the 
fact that children are usually and naturally more eager to learn, and to 
check and replace their misconceptions, than adults – a quality that you 
seem to have lost.  You do well in the other area that is usually attributed 
to immaturity, though: not listening to factual arguments, and posing with
ad hominem arguments instead.

I think I will stop discussing with you before you make a threat referring 
to your big brother, and you cause the level of discussion to drop below the 
gutter.

-- 
PointedEars
FAQ: <http://PointedEars.de/faq> | SVN: <http://PointedEars.de/wsvn/>
Twitter: @PointedEars2 | ES Matrix: <http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix>
Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25845

On Sat, 13 Sep 2014 09:39:41 +0200, "Evertjan."
<exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> wrote:


  <snip>
>Now please go to a NG that is on topic.

This isn't the most beautiful English literature; on the other hand
it's perfectly understandable and is the kind of abbreviated language
that is spoken in England (among other locations).

  John

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25835

Anupam Jamatia <anupamjamatia@gmail.com> writes:

> Example: say in my document I have 
> My/PRONOUN name/PRONOUN is/VERB Jhon/NOUN. He/PRONOUN is/VERB
> going/ADJ to/PREPOSITION school/NOUN
>
> Now I need to chenge 
> My/PRONOUN name/NOUN is/VERB Jhon/NOUN. He/PRONOUN is/VERB going/VERB
> to/PREPOSITION school/NOUN
>
> Any one can do manually, but How to do using java. The document may
> contain 100 lines tagged with parts of speech.

This is not the right place to get help for this.  If you must Java,
post in a Java group, but I would urge you to consider a language
specifically designed for string and text processing.  For more
recommendations about that, and for advice on the linguistic parts of
this problem, you could ask in sci.lang.

-- 
Ben.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.javascript

csiph-web