|
Items in cart [0] |
Questions? Call 888-624-8373 |
| Copyright © 2009. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page R1
LANGUAGE
AND
MACHINES
COMPUTERS IN TRANSLATION AND LINGUISTICS
A Report by the
Automatic Language Processing Advisory Committee
Divi
lesion of Behav
loral Sciences
National Academy of Sciences
National Research Council
Publication 1416
National Academy of Sciences
National Research Council
Washi ngton, D. C. 19 66
OCR for page R2
First printing, November 1966
Second printing, February 196 7
Third printing, December 196 7
Available from
Printing and Publishing Office
National Academy of Sciences
2101 Constitution Avenue
Washington, D.C. 20418
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 66-61843
OCR for page R3
'I 'l
Dear Dr. Seitz:
August20,1965
In April of 1964 you formed an Automatic Language Processing
Advisory Committee at the request of Dr. Leland Haworth, Director
of the National Science Foundation, to advise the Department of
Defense, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the National Science
Foundation on research and development in the general field of
mechanical translation of foreign languages. We quickly found that
you were correct in stating that there are many strongly held but
often conflicting opinions about the promise of machine translation
and about what the most fruitful steps are that should be taken now.
In order to reach reasonable conclusions and to offer sensible
advice we have found it necessary to learn from experts in a wide
variety of fields (their names are listed in Appendix 20~. We have
informed ourselves concerning the needs for translation, considered
the evaluation of translations, and compared the capabilities of
machines and human beings in translation and in other language
processing functions.
We found that what we heard led us all to the same conclusions,
and the report which we are submitting herewith states our common
views and recommendations. We believe that these can form the
basis for useful changes in the support of research aimed at an in-
creased understanding of a vitally important phenomenon—language,
and development aimed at improved human translation, with an
appropriate use of machine aids.
We are sorry that other obligations made it necessary for
Charles F. Hockett, one of the original members of the Committee,
to resign before the writing of our report. He nonetheless made
valuable contributions to our work, which we wish to acknowledge.
Sincerely yours,
J. R. Pierce, Chairman
Automatic Language Processing
Advisory Committee
Dr. Frederick Seitz, President
National Academy of Sciences
2101 Constitution Avenue
Washington, D .C . 2 0418
OCR for page R4
OCR for page R5
Ply 27, 1966
Dear Dr. Seitz:
In connection with the report of the topic Language Pro-
cessing Advisory Committee, Nabona1 Research Councit which
Ads reviewed by the Committee on Science and PubUc Policy on
Parch 13, John R. Pierce, the chairman, Ads asked to prepare ~
brief statement of the support needs for computationa1 Un~istics,
as distinct from automatic lounge translation. This retest was
prompted by ~ fear that the committee report' read in isolation,
might result in termination of research support for computation~1
Un~istics as well as in the recommended reduction of support
aimed ~ relatively short-term goals in translation.
Dr. Piercels recommendation states in part as follows:
Ibe computer has opened up to Un~1sts ~ boat of cballenges, Portia
insights, Ed pote~i~l~ies. We believe these can be aptly compared with
the challenges, problems, Ed insights of particle physics. Certainly, 1~-
~age is second to no phenomenon in importance. Ed the tools of computa-
bon~1 Un~istics are considerably less costly than the ~hibiMion-volt
accelerators of particle physics. Ibe new linguistics presets ~ attractive
as well as ~ extremely important challenge.
Ibere is every reason to believe tab facing up to this challenge will
uldm~ely lead to imported contributions in many herds. ~ deeper kno~l-
edge of lunate could beg:
1. To teach foreign linkages more effectively.
2. To team Eat the nature of lunate more electively.
3. To use n~ura1 linkage more electively in instruction Ed
. .
cow ~ nlc~lon.
4. lo enable us to engineer arti~cia1 lounges for special purposes
(e.g., pilot-to-co~rol-to~er linkages).
5. To enable us to make me~in~1 psychological experiments in 1~-
age use ~~ in Amen com~nic~ion Ed though Unless He know what
linkage is He done know w~ He must explain.
6. To use machines as aids in tr~nsl~ion and in inkrmation retrieval.
However, the state of Un~istics is such tab excelled research that bus
vane in itself is essenti~1 ~ bn~istics is ultimately to make such
co~r~ubon~
Cab rese~rcb must Eve use of computers. The data He must examine
in order to kind out Rout linkage is over~belming both in Entry Ed in
complexity Computers give promise of helping us control the problems
relit to the tremendous volume of dam, and to ~ lesser extent the prob-
lams of dam complexity. But He do not yet bee good, easily used, com-
mon~ known methods for bang computers dew Bob lunate dam.
OCR for page R6
Therefore, among the important kinds of research that need to be done
and should be supported are (1) basic developmental research in computer
methods for handling language, as tools to help the linguistic scientist
discover and state his generalizations, and as tools to help check proposed
generalizations against data; arid (a) developmental research in methods to
allow linguistic scientists to use computers to state in detail the complex
kinds of theories (for example, grammars and theories of meaning) they
produce, so that the theories can be checked in detail.
The most reasonable government source of support for research in com-
putational linguistics is the National Science Foundation. Hold much support
is needed? Some of the work must be done on a rather large scale, since
sn~all-scale experiments and work with miniature models of language have
proved seriously deceptive in the past, and one can come to grips with real
problems only above a certain scale of grammar size, dictionary size, and
available corpus.
We estimate that work on a reasonably large scale can be supported in
one institution for $600 or $700 thousand a year. We believe that work on
this scale would be justified at four or five centers. Thus, an annual ex-
penditure of $2.5 to $3 million seems reasonable for research. This figure
is not intended to include support of work aimed at immediate practical
applications of one sort or another.
This recommendation, which I understand has the endorsement
of Dr. Pierce's committee, was also sent out for comment to the
membership of the Committee on Science and Public Policy. While
the Committee on Science and Public Policy has not considered the
recommended program in computational linguistics in competition
with other National Science Foundation programs, we do believe that
Dr. Pierce's statement should be brought to the attention of the
National Science Foundation as information necessary to put the
report of the Advisory Committee in proper perspective.
Sincerely yours'
Harvey Brooks, Chairman
Committee on Science and Public Policy
Dr. Frederick Seitz, President
National Academy of Sciences
2 101 Constitution Avenue
Washington, D. C . 20418
OCR for page R7
In computational linguistics and automatic language translation,
we are witnessing dramatic applications of computers to the advance
of science and knowledge. In this report, the Automatic Language
Processing Advisory Committee of the National Research Council
describes the state of development of these applications. It has
thus performed an invaluable service for the entire scientific
community.
Frederick Seitz, President
.
National Academy of Sciences
OCR for page R8
OCR for page R9
AUTOMATIC LANGUAGE PROCESSING
ADVISORY COMMITTEE
John R. Pierce, Bell Telephone Laboratories, Chairman
John B. Carroll, Harvard University
Eric P. Hamp, University of Chicago*
David G. Hays, The RAND Corporation
Charles F. Hockett, Cornell Universityt
Anthony G. Oettinger, Harvard University
Alan Perlis, Carnegie Institute of Technology
STAFF
A. Hood Roberts, Executive Secretary
Mrs. Sandra Ferony, Secretary
*Appointed February 1965
"Resigned December 1964
OCR for page R10
OCR for page R11
Preface
The Department of Defense, the National Science Foundation, and
the Central Intelligence Agency have supported projects in the auto-
matic processing of foreign languages for about a decade; these
have been primarily projects in mechanical translation. In order
to provide for a coordinated federal program of research and de-
velopment in this area, these three agencies established the Joint
Automatic Language Processing Group (JALPG).
Early in its existence JALPG recognized its need for an advisory
committee that could provide directed technical assistance as well
as contribute independent observations in computational linguistics,
mechanical translation, and other related fields. In October 1963
the Director of the National Science Foundation, Leland J. Haworth,
requested on behalf of the three agencies that the National Academy
of Sciences establish such a committee.
This was done, and in April 1964, with funds made available by
the three agencies, the Automatic Language Processing Advisory
Committee of the National Academy of Sciences—National Research
Council, under the chairmanship of John R. Pierce, held its first
meeting.
The Committee determined that support for research in auto-
matic language processing could be justified on one of two bases:
(1) research in an intellectually challenging field that is broadly
relevant to the mission of the supporting agency and (2) research
and development with a clear promise of effecting early cost
reductions, or substantially improving performance, or meeting
an operational need.
It is clear to the Committee that the motivation for support of
much of the work in automatic language processing has been the
practical aim represented in (2) above. In the light of that objective,
the Committee studied the whole translation problem. This report
presents the findings and recommendations of the Committee.
