Pat and all (01)
correct use of the language should reflect the evolution of belief
sysems and information systems should be able to capture/represent
that, (02)
> But there are also new lapses. The popularity of
> some English comedy movies has introduced the US
> to a new range of English slang in a kind of
> pre-euphemised context, so that US folk seem to
> be unaware of their real meanings. (03)
Thats a serious problem (04)
I saw a
> perfectly normal middle-aged wife walking last
> week with a bag which said "I just got shagged at
> the mall" in huge red lettering. I'm sure she had
> no idea what it meant (for non-UK readers: 'shag'
> is pretty much a synonym for 'f**k'). I guess
> that in Florida it now means something different. (05)
now, that about t-shirts maybe a different phenomenon, maybe she was
going through a phase and really trying to make a statement :-) (06)
here in asia too, some girls wear that kind of shirt, and I never
really bothered to ask (07)
but when this happens among the so called educated elite in academic
circles (that they use words without knowing their meaning, not that
they wear t-shirts) it is a bit more serious (08)
> Another example is the loss of the original
> meaning of "yahoo", which for my grandfather was
> about the most insulting word in his vocabulary. (09)
please refer to my initial statement above
>
>
> >I think when we design for the future we should try to embed
> >'correctness'
>
> I think, au contraire, that we should ignore it.
> It is impossible to predict what will become
> politically correct in the future: the whims of
> linguistic fashion are indeed truly chaotic. (010)
please read again my initial statement above, and the one just below
>
>
> >, and be able to gauge the correctess values according to
> >our value system (011)
its just rules, like all rule-sets, they can be updated with new rules
thats new technology, right? (012)
some people are proud to be able to maintain top careers despite
limited literacy, and
an arrogant and offesive nature. some people take pleasure in using
deliberatelly vitriolic language, and I agree that's their
prerogative, - we all do it at times, at our discretion. more or less
graciously dependin on our disposition (013)
but yet again it should be my prerogative to obliterate that kind of
input from my channel
same as pornography. (014)
I was of course only half serious in thinking of a polite web service
that would allow me to parse the lack of correctness out of texts, I
dont think it can be done easily but maybe a system can be trained,
one instance at the time, to recognise behavioural deviations and
personailty abherations that emerge from language abuse (015)
But I am serious when I think that this is in principle nothing more
than an advanced 'vocabulary' plus fact checking routine, applied
within an ontology (thats where the belief system gets represented) (016)
if the sentence contains 'man' check that statement is referring to
people of male gender, if not, offer alternative (did you mean to say
person?} (017)
of course understanding this (still speculative) potential requires an
appreciation for NLP
and I would not expect old guard to meet the challenges of next
generation intelligent systems :-) (018)
Then I can switch my 'correctness filter' on, and you switch yours
whatever way you like folks (019)
hows that (020)
pdm (021)
--
Paola Di Maio
School of IT
www.mfu.ac.th
********************************************* (022)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (023)
|