[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontological Assumptions of FOL

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: paola.dimaio@xxxxxxxxx
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2007 15:32:33 +0700
Message-id: <c09b00eb0703180132o4e5bf3f8h6dcaed52a7c39086@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >There was a comment in another recent post about the Chinese
> >language, and how it appears to be based on a fundamentally different
> >metaphysics as Western languages.
> I would like to hear a defense of this idea made
> by a professional linguist.    (01)

Pat, I have not yet had the time to formally study the relationship between
chinese semantic and common logic.
>From my cursory investigation it appears such relationship is not obvious
, at least, is not the same way as in western thinking.    (02)

 Someone cited the 'white horse is not a horse' idea earlier on this list    (03)

There is lots more fun to be had in working out the logical model of Chinese
language The language seems to reflect in part the different logical
inferences that they make.    (04)

take a look at this (refers mostly to philosophy and language but
shows the rationale behind their thinking)
(shared this link earlier with JSowa)    (05)

When it comes to science, they also seem to have different paradigms,
to some extent (think of Chinese medicine)    (06)

Not sure what implications this has for the validity of common logic across
cultures, still studying here    (07)

Paola Di Maio    (08)

Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (09)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>