: : Table of Contents Introduction Importance of Understanding Written Technical Information Performance Standard Procedure The Language Background What

What is a Language? A Language is a System of Communication A History of Language Study Definition of Language Sapir Block and Trager Hall Robins Chomsky Hornby The Usage of Technical Language Technical Word-Formation Adopted by CINTCE Characteristics Associated with Formation of New Words The Importance of Technical Language Ten Fundamental Technical Language Skills The Importance of Code Validation It's about Standards References Bibliography

Introduction The Importance of Understanding Written Technical Information Performance Standard

Hudson (1980: P. 32), states that students will use the SQ3R reading strategy (surveying, questioning, reading, reciting, reviewing) to preview a text and make predications about the reading. They will then read the text and complete the remaining steps of the reading strategy. The teacher will evaluate the questions and outline, using the attached rubic accordingly: Surveying / Questioning (prior to Reading): answer questions; predict text context; and Reading / Reciting / Reviewing the outline (After Reading): include significance main points from the text; include details that support the main points.

Procedure
1. In order to apply reading strategies to improve understanding fluency, students should experience sufficient learning opportunities to develop the following: - Use previewing and predicting before reading and questioning during reading; - Relate reading with information from other sources (e.g., prior knowledge, personal experience, other reading / using a variety of strategies; - Clarify meaning of text by focusing on the key ideas presented explicitly or implicitly; and - Identify how different content areas require different organizational structures (e.g., science text, literary text). Individual employed in industrial related occupation are often required to read manuals concerning the setup or operation of sophisticated equipment or the interpretation of job specifications. This assessment aligns with the Illinois workplace skills D4 (communicating on the Job / prepare written communication) and D5 (communicating on the Job / Follow written directions). 2. Have students review and discuss the assessment task and how the rubric will be used to evaluate their work. 3. Industrial students need to be familiar with SQ3R reading strategy. 4. Student will have practiced SQ3R on several technical manuals prior to the assessment. 5. Select a technical manual from available subject areas and formats. 6. Each industrial students will apply SQ3R to the technical manual to preview and ask questions about the content, organizational structure and author's purpose of writing.

7. Each students will read the technical manual and complete the remaining steps of the reading strategy. 8. Evaluate each student's performance using the rubric. Add each student's scores to determine the performance level. (Ibid: P. 33) Rowe (2004: P. 39), illustrates that a key problem in indexing technical information and language is the interpretation of technical words and words senses, expressions not used in everyday language. This is important for captions on technical images, whose often pithy descriptions can be valuable to decipher. We describe the natural-language processing for MARIE-2, a natural-language information retrieval system for multimedia captions. Our approach is to provide general tools for lexicon enhancement with the specialized words and words senses, and to learn word usage information (both on word senses and word-sense pairs) from a training corpus with a statistical parser. Innovations of our approach are in statistical inheritance of binary co-occurrence probabilities and in weighting of sentence subsequences. MARIE-2 was trained and tested on 616 captions (with 1009 distinct sentences) from the photography library of a Navy Laboratory. The captions had extensive nominal compounds, code phrases, abbreviations, and acronyms, but few verbs, abstract nouns, conjunctions, and pronouns. This study sought to isolate and assess the effects of technical language on acceptance of a common reductive intervention, time-out.

The Language Background What is a language? (1)

1. How do you begin to think about this? The question seems so general as to be almost of content. How one goes about answering such a question depends very much on one's reasons for asking it in the first place. It would not be far from the truth to say that one could really understand the question only in the light of particular answers to it. Different thinkers about language have answered it in their different ways and, in doing so, have given the question a different significance. A natural answer often given is: 2. A language is a system of communication. It would be understandable if at this stage you felt that this was a rather dry, unappealing answer to our question, one that fails to do justice to any sense the wonder of language. It was Noam Chomsky, professor of Linguistics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who early in his career suggested that thinking of a language in this way (as a set of sentences) opened up an interesting and fruitful a venue of thought on the nature of language, more interesting and accurate than any other idea around at that time. If a language really is a set of being made up of different sets of sentences. Two people will speak exactly the same language if (and only if) the set of sentences in each of their languages are exactly the same. A consequence of this is that, almost certainly, no two people speak exactly the same language. If a language is a set of sentences, then the job of describing a language consists in indicating, for every sequence of words, whether or not that sequence counts as a

grammatical sentence of the language. The idea that a language is a set of sentences suggests to many people encounting if for the first time that you should be able together all the sentences of a language together, make a list of them, and say 'This is the complete language.' Man is the only being who can communicate his thoughts, ideas, and feelings to others; as such he is the only creature on this earth that can use articulated speech. It is the true that some animals use cries for communication or for showing some sort of argue feeling, desire or want, but these cries can't be termed articulation or speech, for there is no system to be found in such sounds. Nevertheless, it is true that the native speakers of any language, while they react to the sounds of their own language, usually have difficulty in answering any question about their language simply because, to them, language is a tool for communication, rather than a subject for investigation. An ordinary English man, for example, would not be able to tell you what the subject and predicate of a sentence are; he can speak neither about various uses of the different degrees of adjectives, nor about positions of adverbs in sentences. This is true of the native speakers of all languages, because the use of language is only a natural process and the outcome of socialization for the native speakers. However, language is the human activity that all individuals participate in and use more than any other activity they practice. One can't help noticing that when a baby is born, it is totally unable to produce any meaningful sounds, but as it grows it starts to produce certain sounds that carry no intrinsic value. With the progress of time and as it continues to live with its parents and other people it learns by imitation a set of sounds which are parents in such a manner as to convey meaning to others. We then say that the child has learned to speak, i. e., he has assimilated one of the most important parts of the culture of his community or nation. It is to be oted that the acquisition of the native language is done subconsciously. It is the acquisition of this set of finely-patterned sounds that makes the child capable of communicating with the other members of his group. It is, therefore, necessary to realize that any individual who does not know the language of a group will not be able to get along with that group. Khalil Al-Hamash (11976: P. 8), states that the study of language goes back to the time of the Greek Empire, that is, to the fifth century B. C. Interested in language study shifted to Alexandria in the third century B. C., when that city became the centre of literary and linguistic research. When the Roman Empire came into being its scholars studied and adopted the Greek Culture, among which was the research in language. It was only in the beginning of the 19th century that any worthwhile scientific research in language started. The first works revolved around what is known as comparative linguistics or philosophy. In 1816 Franz Bopp wrote a treatise on the inflectional endings of verbs in Sanskirt, Greek, Latin, Persian, and Germanic. In the following years many other works were published that broadened man's knowledge about languages. Some of outstanding figures were Jacob Grim, August Schleicher and Karl Brugmann. (Ibid: P. 9)

The native speaker of any language learns the sounds and the structure of his language in an unconscious way and uses both expression and content very easily. But any person learning a foreign language finds the sounds and the structure very difficult to master. The reason is that the learner has already acquired certain language habits that are more or less different from those of the new language. It, therefore, becomes exceedingly hard to learn the new linguistic habits unless the learning is done through a scientific method, which means no less than: 1. Hearing and making new sounds; and 2. Understanding and making new patterns. Which have to become completely automatic and which the learner has to use and respond to unconsciously (Ibid: P. 14) Language has form and content (meaning). The latter is difficult to describe objectively, since it is largely a non-linguistic phenomenon. Form can be analyzed and dissected, and thus it can be scientifically handled. Modern grammar should, therefore; concentrate on form rather than meaning. (2) Language is chiefly a system of linguistic contrasts. Points are clear only in contrast to other points in the same system. Modern grammars tend to stress those contrastive points rather than "explain" or discuss patterns at length. Language is a set of habits and a foreign learner is equipped with a set of his own native linguistic habits. Such native habits influence the mastery of the foreign language.

A History of Language Study

The study of language has a long history, although linguistics as we now know it has come into being mainly in the last century and a half. Man has probably wondered about language for as he has habit. Cultures very often reflect man's natural concern with language. In some cultures, knowing the real name of a being is believed to give the possessor of this knowledge a certain power over that being. In some Australian tribes, a word substituted of it when that person dies. The language of religious rituals is quite commonly considered sacred any threaten the efficacy of the ceremony. (Roanald, 1967: P. 7)

Our own culture is no exception. The Old Testament contains explanations for the origion of language and its diversity: Adam was called upon to name every living creature, and linguistic diversification is related in the story of the Tower of Babel. More recently, many Roman Catholics opposed the decision to allow the Mass to be conducted in the vernacular world of marketing, where considerable emphasis is laid on finding a suitable name for a new product, or in the realm of standards of conduct, where a college students maybe expelled for using a four-letter word. (Ibid: P. 8)

Ronald (1967: P. 10), states that a language is a complicated system that changes slowly through the centuries. To understand the changes that occur in such a system, the linguist must first have some knowledge of the structure of the system at one or more points in time. Descriptive linguistics, then, is logically prior to historical linguistics, though it emerged as a distinct and self-conscious discipline only in the twentieth century.

Our purpose here is not to examine the intricacies of competing linguistic theories in order to show how they differ. Rather than wandering aimlessly through theoretical disputes and terminological thickets, we will attempt to say as disputes and directly as possible what language is and how it is put together. Because we want to understand ourselves, it is important that we try to understand this psychological entity which permeates our mental and social life. To the extent that linguistics sheds some light on the nature and structure of language, it is a subject of interest to all of us. (Ibid: P. 11)

Definitions of Language(3)
(i) According to Sapir (1921: P. 8): "Language is a purely human and non-instinctive method of communicating ideas, emotions and desires by means of voluntarily produced symbols." However broadly we construe the terms 'ideals', 'emotion' and 'desire', it seems clear that is much that is communicated by language is not covered by any of them; and 'idea' in particular is inherently impressive. On the other hand, there are many systems of voluntarily produced symbols that we only count as languages in what we fell to be an extended or metaphorical sense of the word 'language'. For example, what is now popularly referred to by means of the expression 'body-language'-which makes use of gestures, postures, eye-gaze, etc. would seem to satisfy this part of Sapir's definition. Whether it is purely human and non-instinctive is, admittedly, open to doubt. Definitions alone are not sufficient to know a technical language and it is not necessary to be able to define a technical language in order to know it. definitions provide information about the technical language; however, students also need to know how the technical language functions in different fields and contexts. For students to learn the technology, they benefit from a meaningful explanation of the technology, rather than simply a definition. Stahl and Fair banks (1986) found that providing students with both definition and contextual information significantly improves comprehension. So, technology is really played such a very salient and paramount roles in life. It enters in most of life's fields by the help of language. So, technology without being connected with language is useless due to it is the key to learn the world development and progress. The interest and the computer's programme are newly appeared within the twentieth century, but they are well-known by the help of the English language. In other words, people import and export goods

(ii)

(iii)

(iv)

(v)

and work in trade through using their principles and procedures; but they do have to learn and understand these things by the help of language. Once again, English learners and special needs students approach language with unique challenges. In order for these students to experience success with vocabulary instructions, special considerations are necessary. Explicitly teaching vocabulary helps students learn technology that represent complex concepts which are not part of the students' everyday experiences. Direct instruction of specific technology and technology-learning strategies relevant to a given content leads to better comprehension. In their Outline of Linguistic Analysis Bloch and Trager wrote (1992: P. 5): "A language is a system of arbitrary vocal symbols by means of which a social group co-operates." What is striking about this definition, in contrast with Spir's, is that it makes no appeal, except indirectly and by no implication, to the communicative function of language. Instead, it puts all the emphasis upon its social function, and in doing so, it takes a rather narrow view of the role that language plays in society. The Bloch and Trager definition differs from Sapir's in that it brings in the property of arbitrariness and explicitly restricts language to spoken language. However, language is logically independent of speech, in all natural languages, speech is historically, and perhaps biologically. In his Essay on Language, Hall (1968: P. 158), tells us that language is "the institution whereby humans communication and interact with other by means of habitually use auditory arbitrary symbols." First of all, the fact that both communication and interaction are introduced in to the definition ('interaction' being broader than and, in this respect, better than 'co-operation') and, second, that the term 'oral-auditory' can be taken to be roughly equivalent to 'vocal', differing from it only in that 'oral-auditory' makes reference to the hearer as well as to the speaker (i.e. to the receiver as well as the sender of the vocal signals, treats language as a purely human institution; and the term 'institution' makes explicit the view that the language that is used by a particular society is part of that society's culture. Robins (1979: P. 14) does not give formal definition of language: he rightly points out that such definitions "tend to be trivial and uninformative, unless they presuppose some general theory of language and of linguistic analysis." But he does list and discuss a number of salient facts that "must be taken into account in any seriously intended theory of language." "From now on I will consider a language to be a set (finite or infinite) of sentences, each finite in length and constructed out of a finite set of elements." This definition is taken from Chomsky's Syntactic Structure (1957: P.13), whose publication inaugurated the movement known as transformational grammar. It is intended to cover much more besides natural languages. But, according to Chomsky, all natural languages, in either their spoken or their written form, are languages in the sense of his definition: since (a) each natural language has a definite number of sounds in it (and a finite number of letters in its alphabet-on the assumption that it has an alphabetic writing system); and (b) although there maybe infinitely many distinct sentences in the language, each sentence can be

(vi)

represented as a definite sequence of these sounds (or letters). It is the task of the linguist describing some particular natural language to determine which of the finite sequences of elements in that language are sentences and which are non-sentences. Here, we could understand that the last definition of Chomsky has on emphasis on the technical language in terms of using a Mathematical and functional as well as formulated styles in constructing the finite and nonfinite sentences. This definition has a contrast due to its concepts and ways in applying it both in style and in content. Therefore, it says nothing about the communicative function of either natural and non-natural languages; it says nothing about the symbolic nature of the elements or sequences of them. Its purpose is to focus attention upon the purely structural properties of languages and to suggest that these properties can be investigated from a Mathematically in this field. A. S. Horby (2000: PP. 1335-1336) defines the word "technology" as the scientific knowledge used in practical ways in industry, foe example, in designing new machines or machinery or equipment designed by using technology. Whereas, the word "technical" means the practical use of machinery, methods, etc. that are connected with skills needed for a particular job, sport, art, etc. Also technology or technical terms connects with a particular subject and therefore difficult to understand if you don't know about that subject as well as it connects with the a low or set of rules.

The Usage of Technical Language (4)

It is understand that Science and Technology Minister Professor Tissa Vitharana is desirous of extending computer education to the rural areas. Apparently, he is of the view that the lack of adequate knowledge of the English language should not be in the way of understanding communication technology and accordingly the national languages are to be used for the purpose. This approach is, indeed, highly commendable. Considering the Sinhala language, the initial and essential requirement is to compile a glossary of thought of manner, which is in keeping with the genius of the Sinhala language. The purpose of this present assessment is to assist in achieving a Sinhala technical glossary suited to guarantee the success of this all-important national venture.

Sometimes ago, this task was undertaken by the computer and information technology council of Sri Lanka (CINTEC) and a pamphlet entitled "Glossary of Technical TermsComputer Science" was released by CINTEC around June, 1991.

However, CINTEC has now been replaced by a new state organization called "Information and Communication Technology Agency (ICTA). Apparently, the ICTA is in the throes of urgently meeting the need for Sinhala technical terms in the field of communication

technology. The glossary produced by CINTEC was not the work of a set Mediocre persons. It was, indeed, produced by the luminaries such as, Professor V. K. Samaranayke, Chairman CINTEC, and etal. Unfortunately, this glossary was unsuited for the desired purpose, as the basic requirements in the formation of the words had been overlooked. The development of Sinhala technical language for centuries, the Sinhala language had been used for the generation of technical terms I order to meet the need of unsurpassed technical development. For about two thousand years, the Sinhala people engaged themselves in the manufacture of steel from iron ore. Our present day steel factory ingots, roll them into steel bars, and also draw them into steel wire. On the other hand, from ancient time, the Sinhala people converted iron ore into steel itself not only for home consumption but also for export.

The famous "Damascus" swords were produced from the steel imported Srilanka. The technical terms necessary to express such technology was certainly generated by the Sinhal language. Similarly, the technical terms necessary for the famous hydraulic projects were also supplied by the Sinhala language. Indeed, Mr H. Parker the British irrigations Engineers, in his book entitled "Ancient Ceylon", says: "Such was the function bisokotunsa of the Sinhala engineers: they were the first inventors of the value-pit, more than 2100 years ago." It will be noticed that in coining the word bisokotuwa the ancient Sinhala engineers recognized the salient fact that by this contrivance the water of the reservoir could be led down in a controlled manner to the level of the paddy fields. Therefore, it was natural for them to call it baswauakatuwa.

This was one of the techniques available in the Sinhala language to generate new terms. When we recognize the fact that technical terms had been generated in a bundance through the many years by the Sinhala language there is no question the technical terms now required can be produced in a similar manner using the Sinhala language itself. Therefore, begging for terms from foreign languages such as Sanskrit is not only unnecessary but also such procedure is inimical to the establishment of an effective Sinhala technical language.

Technical Word-Formation Adopted by CINTCE

The terms of reference given to the CINTEC committee were to develop technical terms based on the Sinhala language, for it was the intention to use Sinhala as the medium for technical education. Instead of keeping to this essential requirement it was a national tragedy that the committee was only capable of merely borrowing terms from the Sanskrit or English dictionaries. It was incumbent on the committee to first study the process of word-formation inherent in the Sinhala language which had been effectively used for centuries and then develop the new words accordingly.

This, they were unable to do. Their modus operandi was merely to transliterate related words existing in the English and the Sanskrit languages. This didn't need any special expertise. To justify the puerile nature of this exercise, what was relied upon was the fact that the English themselves had borrowed their technical terms from the Latin language. Accordingly, it was considered that the Sinhala people too were duty bound to tomorrow from another language such as Sanskrit. In support of this argument, a myth, to the effect that Sanskrit was the language that gave birth to the Sinhala language, was spread to beguile the unsuspecting public. In the 3rd / 4th centuries the great Panini injected a stylized grammatical structure to a Prakrit language and created what is now known as the Sanskrit language. India, which boasts of hundreds of languages, was unable to find a common for the exchange of information amongst its people.

As Latin was used in the self same manner in the West, Sanskrit was create to meet the requirement of common language. It was Panini who created the Sanskrit language known as Sanskrit. This Sinhala language existed from much earlier times and had its own phonology, its own morphology and its own grammatical structure. It was in effective use even by King Pandukabhaya reputed for instituting the first municipal system in the world. Therefore, to argue that since the English language borrowed largely from the Latin language was also should borrow words from the Sanskrit language is preposterous.

Characteristics Associated with Formation of New Words Words

I have comprehensively analysed this aspect of effectively using the Sinhala language for the production of technical terms, as well as the fact that Sanskrit appeared on the scene much later then Sinhala, in my book entitled "Technical Terms in Sinhala" which explains the consistent manner in which words have been formed in the Sinhala language and indicates how new words could be derived based on the same technique. As example, there are over 3000 new words in their different functional forms such as verbs, nouns, adjectives, adverbs. Also, the manner in which the verbs can be conjugated is indicated.

Unfortunately, persons reputed for their knowledge of Sanskrit as well as Sinhala, though it fit not to critically analyse the contents of this book and there by denied this nation the benefits of their expertise. The time is not too late for the academics to point out the erroneous aspects, if any, of my arguments and thereby assist the Honorable Minister to achieve his objectives. Such a critical review should not be conducted in Comera but through the newspapers so that the general public could benefit by their wisdom.

Setting up of facilities to produce the required Sinhala technical terms, despite the afore said unfortunate experience, the tendency seems to be to yet again appoint academics conversant with language content as well as academics associated with the combined ability to produce satisfactory Sinhala technical terms.

In this context, one is reminded of the village tale where a blind man who was able to walk, carried on his shoulders a cripple who was unable to walk but had good eyesight, thus joining forces to gain combined ability to travel about. Unfortunately, the directions given by the cripple seated on the shoulders were not cloudy understand by the blind man carrying the cripple. The result was both persons falling into a well! It is in the same tenor that we should consider the arrangement where the scientist attempts to educate the linguist of the linguist of the subtleties of the English technical term, which resulted in the linguist giving birth to inane expressions. What the cognoscenti declare is the peculiar statement that the Sinhala people readily understood words coined using Sanskrit but were puzzled when confronted with unadulterated Sinhala terms.

This, if true, is a very curious phenomenon. For instance, the people are supposed to readily recognize and understand a Sanskrit term such as thakshanaya to be the equivalent of the English term "technology". Even Panini himself, the creator of Sanskrit, had no such knowledge! According to Panini that Anaya means "carpentry" and not technology! Let us examine though briefly, the damage that such bungling has prevented the setting up of a proper Sinhala technical glossary. Consider, the borrowed Sanskrit term thatshanaya, which is given as the equivalent of the English term "technology". What does the famous Sanskrit dictionary of Sir Manier Monier William saying as to the meaning of the word "thaksha"? The meaning is give as: "To form by cutting, plane, chisel, to cut, split, to fashion form out of wood Thakshuka, a carpenter."

Inspite of the fact that "technology" is associated with disciplines such as Medicine, Biiochemistry, Agriculture, Legal Science, Engineering, etc. These pundits, have classified those engaged in such professions, as "carpenters". Amazing is it not? I was always under the impression that Professor Vitharana, as the then Head of the Medical Research Institute, was engaged in conducting valuable research regarding the disease carrying microbes. It is only now that I realize how wrong I had been. Unknown to us, the good professor had all along engaged himself in nothing but carpentry! At a recent conference, it was claimed that, eventhough the meaning of the newly created thakshanaya is erroneous, there is no harm, as many persons are already using the term thakshanaya to mean "technology". The essence of this argument is that, if many are doing the wrong thing there should be no difficulty in accepting it as correct. To further bolster this contention reference was made to the statement "any deficiency to be supplied in line with usage."

However, the actual fact is that, it is only a part of his full statement surreptiously presented in partial form to misled the general public into believing that the pundits had acted correctly. Pathiraja Piruvan certainly didn't recommend that the usage of all and sundry be accommodated. This subterfuge is tantamount to intellectual dishonesty! If our universities are capable of employing such persons what future can we expect for our children? For the moment, let us accept their contention as correct. In other words, the reader has to be wise to understand that the researcher has referred to the syntax features of the technical language and the semantic features of the technical language have been referred to indirectly in terms of using form and content.

Then, we have to come to the conclusion that the newly formed technical term is acceptable though it does not reflect the meaning of the English counterpart.

The Importance of the Technical Language

All students enrolled in classes in the college of Applied Science and Technology are expected to exhibit proficiency in basic grammar skills. One of the major tasks of revising and polishing a paper or presentation is to correct errors in grammar, punctuation, spelling and usage. Even with years of training in this area, most writers will occasionally experience difficulty choosing the correct form (semantic) or usage (syntax). Many students erroneaously assume that as long as their writing assignments contain the proper information, they have credibility. Wrong! A reader could justify question the technical competence of a person who displays poor writing skills. All writing most have correct grammar (semantic and syntax) and usage of it is to be considered credible and noteworthy.(John, 1973: P. 13)

Ten Fundamental Technical Language Skills:

1. Understand the subject matter yourself before trying to communicate it to others; 2. Understand the nature of your audience and communicate with sincerity and authority; put yourself in the place of an interested reader or audience member; 3. Choose a publication or presentation style appropriate to the subject and audience; 4. Correct spelling, punctuation, and pronunciation Do matter; 5. Carefully choose and place words to enhance communicate and prevent confusion; 6. Use parallel construction for compound elements companies, and lists; 7. Develop sentences that are clear, concise, and complete, containing both a subject and a verb; 8. Ensure paragraphs are coherent and begin with a topic sentence;

9. Being all reports and presentations with a focused introduction, flow from one major idea to another in the body, and end with a meaningful summary or conclusion; and 10. Limit the number of major points you want to three or four. (Ibid: P. 15)

However, formal technical writings, and presentations, including conclusions and recommendations, must be based upon fact (John, 1973: P. 16). Facts give a body of word credibility. All facts must be documented to ensure that they can be later verified by a reader or an audience member. So, in most of your writing and presentation assignments, you will be expected to form some type of inference (a conclusion based upon an accumulation of facts). Opinions (personal beliefs based upon emotion, faith, or myth) are rarely used in technical writing. In such cases, all inferences or opinions should be clearly indentifiable; they should never be disguised as facts. Within the context of your work, other people's inferences and opinions are to be considered as facts; they should be appropriatedly identified within the body of the work and in the reference or bibliography section.

The Importance of Code Validation

Ronald (1986: P. 335) there has been much discussion in the past about "technical" validation, with basically two comps emerging the "so what" camp, which believes that as long as it "works"; that well formed, valid HTML documents aren't that important as long as what hits the browser is accessible to the end user. The other camp (of which I am unabashedly a member) states that you must get the fundamentals right first, and that includes authoring the markup language correctly and to the declared specification.

It's about Standards

For any large entity to function properly, it must be based upon standards. If you want to build a house in today's modern society, you must use properly engineered, standards, based blue prints. This is so that not only will your house "stand the test of time" but will also ensure that the "neighbourhood" will also survive intact and be robust, unable and safe now and into the future. Now you don't actually need blue prints and engineers to build a house and compliance to them you run the risk of ending up with a shanty town. (Ibid: P. 336)

So too with "the web". As a medium, an entity, a "neighhourhood" we are still in the early days and years of it's evolution overall it's still very much a shanty town. But if the collective "we" that are the ones who are building and maintaining this medium don't lead the way and start to take standards seriously then we are doomed to a life of shanty towns.

And while there will always be those who believe they can just "bang something together" and throw it up on the web, it will look credibility how often do you take a home made page seriously? So there is a credibility issue at stake over the long run too. (Ibid: P. 336)

The starts do exist! HTML 4.01 has been a stable robust authorizing standard since December of 1999. XHTML 1.0, the most recent standard, has been stable since August of 2002. These standards specify exactly how the authoring (or makeup) language is to be used, and established a benchmark, not only for the content authors, but for the software manufactures who are developing the next generation of user agents (browsers) as well. Authoring to these standards allows content developers a level of assurance that what they are posting to the web will be accessible not only to the popular browser of the day, but to any standards compliant user agent in the market place; including but not limited to adaptive technologies used by people with disabilities. (Ibid: P. 337)

Conclusions
Frank (2003: P. 51) states that there is a wide variety of deductive systems considered in computer science today (for example Hoare logics, type theories, type deduction systems, operational semantics specifications, first-and higher-order intuitionistic and classical logics). Mechanized support for deductive in a variety of logics and type theories has been the subject of much research.

Here we are in a similar situation, turning type the theory into a programming language. The basic idea is to give types an operational interpretation much in the same way that formulas are given an operational interpretation in a logic programming language. (Ibid: P. 51)

Informally, this operational interpretation is as follows. A B. goal zz: A. B. should succeed, if the goals x E A and y E B both succeed, and z is the pair (x,y). note x may occur in By and that therefore the two subgoals mayn't be independent. Thus x may serve as a "logical variable" except that it may also range over proofs constructed by the interpreter, something not possible in logic programming languages (Frank, 2003: P. 52)

Robert (1986: P. 30), illustrates that another important application is to mechanize typechecking for programming languages with complex type systems. The property of a pragramme to be well-typed in such a language can be formalized in ELF as an influence system in the style LF. This does not immediately head to a type-checking algorithm, unless there is also a theorem prover for some of the more complex relations (like subtypes).

Often the search space for such relations is linear and a decision procedure can be given immediately, that is, the signature itself may be used dynamically.

Ultimately, the researcher has stated obviously in the sections of: the usage of the technical language and the importance of the technical language; the two salient and essential subjects (semantic and syntax) clearly. The word "form" refers to syntax; whereas the word "content" refers to semantic. Semantics is the study of meaning which has some existence or reality. Syntax is the study of the structure of a sentence. The function of the semantic rules is to illustrate and elucidate the exact and understood meanings of words. But the real function of syntactical rules is to link conceptual structures with surface structures. S

NP

VP

PP

Np P N

V ART an ADJ old N man give past

Np ART N

to plane

air Figure (1) Syntactic System

(5)

the

Helen

Conceptual Structure

(a detective) (hunted down) (the killer)

Surface Structure

Particle Shift

(a detective) (hunted) (the killer) (down)

Surface Structure (Ibid: P. 119) Figure (2) Syntactic Rules

Notes
(1)Noel Bruton (1968) An Introduction to English Syntax. Longman: London and New York. P. 284. (2) See, for example, David Crystal, What is Linguistics?, 3rd edition, (London: Edward Arnold, 1944). P. 30. (3)John Lyons (1981). Language and Linguistics. Great Britain: Cambridge University Press. PP. 4-7. (4)Row, Neil. C. Understanding Technical Language via Statistical Parsing. New York: United States of America, 2004. P. 37. (5)This is quoted from: Ronald W. Langacker. (1967). Long Usage and Its Structure. Brace and Wold, Inc. P. 102.

References
Aitchison, J. (1972) Linguistics. England: Block Basil. Al-Hamash, K. & Abdulla, J. (1976) A Course in Modern English Grammar. Iraq: Baghdad. Crystal, D. (1995) The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

 (1974) What is Linguistics? 3rd edit. London: Edward Arnold. Frank, P. (2003) A Language for Logic Definition and Verified Meta Programming. Pennsylvania: Caregie Mellon University. Falk, J. (1973) Linguistics and Language. New York: Santa Barbara. Hornby, A. S. (2000) Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hudson, R. A. (1980) Sociolinguistics. London: Cambridge University Press. Langacker, R. (1967) Language and Its Structure. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc. Lyons, J. (1981) Language and Linguistics. New York: Cambridge. Neil, R. (2004) Technical Language via Statistical Parsing. New York: United States of America. Roberts, N. (1986) Analysing Sentences, An Introduction to English Syntax. London and New York: Longman. Schmit, N. (1980) An Introduction to Applied Linguistics. London: University of Nottingham. WardHaugh, R. (1986) An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. Great Britain: Page Bros Ltd.