Discussion:
Clueless
(too old to reply)
Jerry Friedman
2018-06-11 18:09:58 UTC
Permalink
There seems to be an increasing use of "located" in expressions of place.
At one forum I read, people posting photos are asked to say where they
were taken. Somebody posted a series of photos captioned with obscure
American place names that omitted the state. Someone else commented,
"Clueless where these locations are located."

(Evidence for increasing use:

https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=is+at%2Cis+located+at&year_start=1800&year_end=2008&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cis%20at%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cis%20located%20at%3B%2Cc0

https://tinyurl.com/yb89bgcg
)
--
Jerry Friedman
Madrigal Gurneyhalt
2018-06-11 18:41:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Friedman
There seems to be an increasing use of "located" in expressions of place.
At one forum I read, people posting photos are asked to say where they
were taken. Somebody posted a series of photos captioned with obscure
American place names that omitted the state. Someone else commented,
"Clueless where these locations are located."
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=is+at%2Cis+located+at&year_start=1800&year_end=2008&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cis%20at%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cis%20located%20at%3B%2Cc0
https://tinyurl.com/yb89bgcg
)
--
You have a very strange idea of the meaning of 'evidence'. In terms
of statistical significance that's basically a flat line and the projected
tendency is downward. What the relevance of 'is at' in comparison
might be I cannot fathom. You do realise that that includes such
phrases as 'is at the end of his tether', 'is at a loss' and many more
where 'located at' simply is not synonymous?

This is all the more silly because the simple n-gram for 'is located'
does support your observation and quite markedly so. This is not
terribly surprising though as the technical language of map-reading
has inevitably become more mainstream with the advent of digital
maps, GPS and so on.
Jerry Friedman
2018-06-11 22:10:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Jerry Friedman
There seems to be an increasing use of "located" in expressions of place.
At one forum I read, people posting photos are asked to say where they
were taken. Somebody posted a series of photos captioned with obscure
American place names that omitted the state. Someone else commented,
"Clueless where these locations are located."
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=is+at%2Cis+located+at&year_start=1800&year_end=2008&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cis%20at%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cis%20located%20at%3B%2Cc0
https://tinyurl.com/yb89bgcg
)
--
You have a very strange idea of the meaning of 'evidence'. In terms
of statistical significance that's basically a flat line and the projected
tendency is downward. What the relevance of 'is at' in comparison
might be I cannot fathom. You do realise that that includes such
phrases as 'is at the end of his tether', 'is at a loss' and many more
where 'located at' simply is not synonymous?
This is all the more silly because the simple n-gram for 'is located'
does support your observation and quite markedly so.
That might result from an increase in the corpus in talking about where
things are. If "is located" increased by a factor of two and other
locative phrases such as "is at" increased by a factor of four, then "is
located" would be decreasing compared to the alternative ways of saying
the same thing. Possibly plotting the ratio would have made that more
fathomable.

You may well be right that other uses of "is at" are making the increase
less obvious. Here's a plot of the ratio I just mentioned and that
between "is north" and "is located north".

https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=is+located+at%2Fis+at%2Cis+located+north%2Fis+north&year_start=1800&year_end=2008&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2C%28is%20located%20at%20/%20is%20at%29%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2C%28is%20located%20north%20/%20is%20north%29%3B%2Cc0

https://bit.ly/2JAhwXi

The more recent decrease that you point out also becomes clearer. Maybe
the day of "where these locations are located" is coming to an
end--though the data only go to 2008.

Didn't I read somewhere that the default endpoint for ngram plots is
2000 because the GB corpus changed around that year? Previously it had
been what university librarians decided to scan, but publishers started
putting their books at GB on limited preview.
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
This is not
terribly surprising though as the technical language of map-reading
has inevitably become more mainstream with the advent of digital
maps, GPS and so on.
Are you telling me that "is located" is part of the technical language
of map-reading? I haven't taken part in technical discussions of
map-reading. I don't recall seeing that use of located on Google Maps
or Mapquest, the digital maps I've used. I don't have much experience
with GPS.

And if I want to find out where Parma Heights is, and get an answer in
technical language, why would I be told that it's located in
northeastern Ohio or at such and such a latitude and longitude or
whatever, instead of the same phrases without "located"?
--
Jerry Friedman
Horace LaBadie
2018-06-11 18:54:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Friedman
There seems to be an increasing use of "located" in expressions of place.
At one forum I read, people posting photos are asked to say where they
were taken. Somebody posted a series of photos captioned with obscure
American place names that omitted the state. Someone else commented,
"Clueless where these locations are located."
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=is+at%2Cis+located+at&year_start
=1800&year_end=2008&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cis%20at%3B
%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cis%20located%20at%3B%2Cc0
https://tinyurl.com/yb89bgcg
)
I don't think that that usage is recent or increasing. It is common and
has been for a very long time.
Jerry Friedman
2018-06-11 22:12:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Horace LaBadie
Post by Jerry Friedman
There seems to be an increasing use of "located" in expressions of place.
At one forum I read, people posting photos are asked to say where they
were taken. Somebody posted a series of photos captioned with obscure
American place names that omitted the state. Someone else commented,
"Clueless where these locations are located."
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=is+at%2Cis+located+at&year_start
=1800&year_end=2008&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cis%20at%3B
%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cis%20located%20at%3B%2Cc0
https://tinyurl.com/yb89bgcg
)
I don't think that that usage is recent or increasing. It is common and
has been for a very long time.
That depends on your definition of "very long time" (and possibly "is"
in "is increasing"). Here's the plot I gave in my response to Madrigal.

https://bit.ly/2JAhwXi
--
Jerry Friedman
Richard Tobin
2018-06-11 19:57:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Friedman
There seems to be an increasing use of "located" in expressions of place.
At one forum I read, people posting photos are asked to say where they
were taken. Somebody posted a series of photos captioned with obscure
American place names that omitted the state. Someone else commented,
"Clueless where these locations are located."
This reminds me of the use of "transpire" to mean "happen".

-- Richard
Peter T. Daniels
2018-06-11 20:47:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Jerry Friedman
There seems to be an increasing use of "located" in expressions of place.
At one forum I read, people posting photos are asked to say where they
were taken. Somebody posted a series of photos captioned with obscure
American place names that omitted the state. Someone else commented,
"Clueless where these locations are located."
This reminds me of the use of "transpire" to mean "happen".
James Michener in his scandalized review of the Merriam-Webster Third
International Dictionary (1961) reported his chagrin at being quoted
under the 'happen' sense of "transpire."
Madhu
2018-06-12 01:46:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Friedman
There seems to be an increasing use of "located" in expressions of place.
At one forum I read, people posting photos are asked to say where they
were taken. Somebody posted a series of photos captioned with obscure
American place names that omitted the state. Someone else commented,
"Clueless where these locations are located."
In computering, I would use "Which directory is the file located?"
"where is the directory located?"
following from file-locations, and the locate program in unix.
Does this run afoul of the rule?
Richard Tobin
2018-06-12 09:45:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Madhu
In computering, I would use "Which directory is the file located?"
That would have to be "Which directory is the file located in?"
or "In which directory is the file located?".

Both are verbose alternatives to "Which directory is the file in?".

-- Richard
Madhu
2018-06-12 14:50:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Madhu
In computering, I would use "Which directory is the file located?"
That would have to be "Which directory is the file located in?"
or "In which directory is the file located?".
Both are verbose alternatives to "Which directory is the file in?".
Alright but what about "NIL is located at address 0x0" in the context of
memory locations.

And would the alternative for (mis)uses of "located" be "situated" or
rather, "situate" ?
Richard Tobin
2018-06-12 15:27:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Madhu
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Madhu
In computering, I would use "Which directory is the file located?"
That would have to be "Which directory is the file located in?"
or "In which directory is the file located?".
Both are verbose alternatives to "Which directory is the file in?".
Alright but what about "NIL is located at address 0x0" in the context of
memory locations.
"Memory locations" is a standard term, so "located at" seems quite
reasonable. But you could equally well say "NIL is at address 0" or
"the address of NIL is 0".
Post by Madhu
And would the alternative for (mis)uses of "located" be "situated" or
rather, "situate" ?
"Situated" sounds like something an estate agent would say. A
situationist estate agent could tell you where the hacienda is
located, but you'll never see it.

-- Richard
Peter Moylan
2018-06-13 00:38:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Madhu
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Madhu
In computering, I would use "Which directory is the file
located?"
That would have to be "Which directory is the file located in?"
or "In which directory is the file located?".
Both are verbose alternatives to "Which directory is the file in?".
Alright but what about "NIL is located at address 0x0" in the
context of memory locations.
"Memory locations" is a standard term, so "located at" seems quite
reasonable. But you could equally well say "NIL is at address 0" or
"the address of NIL is 0".
Yes, but to a computer programmer all of those statements are wrong. The
value of a pointer and the location of a pointer are two distinct things.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Madhu
2018-06-13 00:51:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Madhu
Alright but what about "NIL is located at address 0x0" in the
context of memory locations.
"Memory locations" is a standard term, so "located at" seems quite
reasonable. But you could equally well say "NIL is at address 0" or
"the address of NIL is 0".
Yes, but to a computer programmer all of those statements are
wrong. The value of a pointer and the location of a pointer are two
distinct things.
No, NIL is an object which is at address 0. (It doesn't have to be - it
is the language implementor's choice to place it there. You may say it
is my poor choice of example from lisp because there is no concept of a
null pointer involved)
Tak To
2018-06-13 17:56:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Madhu
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Madhu
Alright but what about "NIL is located at address 0x0" in the
context of memory locations.
"Memory locations" is a standard term, so "located at" seems quite
reasonable. But you could equally well say "NIL is at address 0" or
"the address of NIL is 0".
Yes, but to a computer programmer all of those statements are
wrong. The value of a pointer and the location of a pointer are two
distinct things.
No, NIL is an object which is at address 0.
Wrongity-wrong. However, the *internal representation* of nil
is often <address 0>.
Post by Madhu
(It doesn't have to be - it
is the language implementor's choice to place it there.
The implementor would be very silly if the content of
address 0 is volatile.
Post by Madhu
You may say it
is my poor choice of example from lisp because there is no concept of a
null pointer involved)
Lisp has no concept of pointers, period. Nil is a special object
defined by, among other rules, (cdr nil) -> nil.
--
Tak
----------------------------------------------------------------+-----
Tak To ***@alum.mit.eduxx
--------------------------------------------------------------------^^
[taode takto ~{LU5B~}] NB: trim the xx to get my real email addr
Richard Tobin
2018-06-13 08:44:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Madhu
Alright but what about "NIL is located at address 0x0" in the
context of memory locations.
"Memory locations" is a standard term, so "located at" seems quite
reasonable. But you could equally well say "NIL is at address 0" or
"the address of NIL is 0".
Yes, but to a computer programmer all of those statements are wrong. The
value of a pointer and the location of a pointer are two distinct things.
I assume the reference is to an implementation of a programming
language where NIL is an object in the language. Some Lisp
implementations had NIL (the empty list) at address 0 for example.
Probably more used the address 0 to represent NIL without actually
putting an object there.

-- Richard
Garrett Wollman
2018-06-13 17:24:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Tobin
I assume the reference is to an implementation of a programming
language where NIL is an object in the language. Some Lisp
implementations had NIL (the empty list) at address 0 for example.
Probably more used the address 0 to represent NIL without actually
putting an object there.
Probably more still use the value 0 to represent the integer
(Fixnum[1]) constant 0, and a tagged representation to represent
constants of other types. (As I recall, in both Emacs Lisp and Ruby
interpreters there is a constant "Qnil" which is the tagged
representation of the constant value nil -- similarly for true, false,
and other non-fixnum values. This does somewhat constrain the
implementation: not all values represented in a machine word can be
used as fixnums.)

-GAWollman

[1] A fixnum is one kind of integer; the rest are bignums. Some
implementations may have additional intermediate sizes. All of the
integers, together with the rationals, decimals, floats, and complex
floats, make up the numeric types, and the math functions are
typically defined to operate on any numeric value.
--
Garrett A. Wollman | "Act to avoid constraining the future; if you can,
***@bimajority.org| act to remove constraint from the future. This is
Opinions not shared by| a thing you can do, are able to do, to do together."
my employers. | - Graydon Saunders, _A Succession of Bad Days_ (2015)
Tak To
2018-06-14 16:39:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Garrett Wollman
Post by Richard Tobin
I assume the reference is to an implementation of a programming
language where NIL is an object in the language. Some Lisp
implementations had NIL (the empty list) at address 0 for example.
Probably more used the address 0 to represent NIL without actually
putting an object there.
Note that an "object" needs not be referenced via a pointer.
Thus, I would say rephrase the above as "some Lisp implementation
had NIL *represented* by address 0".
Post by Garrett Wollman
Probably more still use the value 0 to represent the integer
(Fixnum[1]) constant 0, and a tagged representation to represent
constants of other types.
A tag is always needed, whether it resides with the datum
or not. (By "residing with", I mean that both <tag> and
<datum> can be retrieved with one memory fetch.)
Post by Garrett Wollman
(As I recall, in both Emacs Lisp and Ruby
interpreters there is a constant "Qnil" which is the tagged
representation of the constant value nil -- similarly for true, false,
and other non-fixnum values. This does somewhat constrain the
implementation: not all values represented in a machine word can be
used as fixnums.)
Nowadays the data bus width of most advanced CPUs is 64 bits.
I don't think limiting fixnums to 63 bits is too much of
a constrain.
Post by Garrett Wollman
-GAWollman
[1] A fixnum is one kind of integer; the rest are bignums. Some
implementations may have additional intermediate sizes. All of the
integers, together with the rationals, decimals, floats, and complex
floats, make up the numeric types, and the math functions are
typically defined to operate on any numeric value.
--
Tak
----------------------------------------------------------------+-----
Tak To ***@alum.mit.eduxx
--------------------------------------------------------------------^^
[taode takto ~{LU5B~}] NB: trim the xx to get my real email addr
RH Draney
2018-06-13 11:38:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Richard Tobin
"Memory locations" is a standard term, so "located at" seems quite
reasonable.  But you could equally well say "NIL is at address 0" or
"the address of NIL is 0".
Yes, but to a computer programmer all of those statements are wrong. The
value of a pointer and the location of a pointer are two distinct things.
To a computer scientist, a pointer, like everything else, has an L-value
and an R-value....r
Madrigal Gurneyhalt
2018-06-13 11:55:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by RH Draney
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Richard Tobin
"Memory locations" is a standard term, so "located at" seems quite
reasonable.  But you could equally well say "NIL is at address 0" or
"the address of NIL is 0".
Yes, but to a computer programmer all of those statements are wrong. The
value of a pointer and the location of a pointer are two distinct things.
To a computer scientist, a pointer, like everything else, has an L-value
and an R-value....r
Ah, how one yearns for the simple sharpened stick!
Tak To
2018-06-13 17:09:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by RH Draney
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Richard Tobin
"Memory locations" is a standard term, so "located at" seems quite
reasonable.  But you could equally well say "NIL is at address 0" or
"the address of NIL is 0".
Yes, but to a computer programmer all of those statements are wrong. The
value of a pointer and the location of a pointer are two distinct things.
To a computer scientist, a pointer, like everything else, has an L-value
and an R-value....r
Not "everything else". While some objects have "reference semantics"
(e.g., a file), others have "value semantics" (e.g., an integer).
--
Tak
----------------------------------------------------------------+-----
Tak To ***@alum.mit.eduxx
--------------------------------------------------------------------^^
[taode takto ~{LU5B~}] NB: trim the xx to get my real email addr
Loading...