I just got around to read the responses to my last mail; and I am little
surprised. (01)
My goal was just to explain to Sean how "semantics" and "pragmatics"
have been defined originally and I also warned him that the boundary
often is drawn differently, including what I called 'garbage can
definition'. (02)
Of course there are many ways of dividing the study of languages, and
many of them have been proposed by philosophers and linguists. One
reason for the confusion surrounding the terms "semantics" and
"pragmatics" is that they have been linked to different proposals. I
certainly did not intend to claim that any of the distinctions that
mentioned in my email is particularly useful. If it was up to me I'd
trash the terms and replace the distinction with something better (maybe
inspired from CSP). However, to paraphrase the great American
philosopher DR: (03)
"As you know, you communicate with the terms you have, not the terms you
might want or wish to have at a later time." (04)
Thus, for now we are stuck with "semantics", and as long as the W3
consortium pushes for the 'semantic web', the word is not going to go away. (05)
Best
Fabian (06)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (07)
|