ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Adverbs (was Anthropology of Colour)

To: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Christopher Spottiswoode" <cms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 15:55:29 +0200
Message-id: <025701c889c8$e7ca2bb0$0100a8c0@Dev>
I have popped back in this thread to resume it at a more logical point to introduce the simple MACK way:
 
ButtersSlowly Implies Butters.
 
Then if you want you might also for some multiple inheritance say:
 
ButtersSlowly Implies DoesSlowly.
 
Then with John as subject and toast as object, the obvious factual implications hold.
 
If you wished to make the distinction, and all else being equal, you may choose which of the two MIed base properties you regard as the verb and which the adverb, even though "does slowly butteringly", for example, would seem rather odd.
 
The MACK 'Implies' is thus like rdfs:subPropertyOf, but with the major difference (to repeat my point from my "2nd instalment") that the type of John-the-slow-doer would be e.g. SlowlyDoer, and not Human or whatever else may be the subjecttype of Butters, or SlowBreakfaster (to take a more extreme example) of ButtersSlowly.
 
In general, and as we shall see in more detail in my 3rd instalment, such abstraction-level distinctions can be very important from many semantic points of view, including security and privacy.  (We shall also see how there is not in general that kind of useless explicit multiplication of fine subtype distinctions!)
 
Christopher
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Pat Hayes
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 5:23 PM
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Adverbs (was Anthropology of Colour)

At 7:23 PM -0400 3/17/08, Ed Barkmeyer wrote:
Christopher Menzel wrote:
> Ed Barkmeyer wrote:
>> I wrote:
>>
>>>> That is the point I thought should not be lost: Formalization turns
>>>> adjectives, including colour attribution, into predicates ("verbs").
>> Pat Hayes wrote:
>>> I wouldn't say for a second that predicates in FOL have any clear
>>> connection with verbs in English.
>> Upon reflection, I have to agree.  Logical predicates seem to
>> represent nouns, adjectives, verbs and adverbs without prejudice.
>
> Not adverbs, typically.  In a standard logical language, sentences like
>
> (1) John buttered the toast
>
> and
>
> (2) John buttered the toast slowly
>
> would have to be represented using completely different predicates, one
> for "buttered" and another for "slowly buttered", e.g., "Bjt" and "Sjt"
> or "Buttered(john,thetoast)" and "SlowlyButtered(john,thetoast)".  This
> is very unsatisfactory, however, as sentence (1) obviously follows from
> (2), whereas "Bjt" obviously does not follow from "Sjt".

Chris is quite right, of course.
Having recently been exposed to some IKL-like phrasing, I have seen
things like:

(WasSlowly (THAT (Buttered John Toast)))
But that is most definitely NOT FOL.

True, but it is closely related to something that is legal CLIF (if not GOFOL):

(and (WasSlowly A)
        (iff (A)(Buttered John Toast))
)

A here stands for the nested THAT-proposition. But although this is legal, I don't think its a very good analysis of the meaning. What it says is that the proposition that John buttered toast is slowly. Doesn't seem right to me.

Pat




-Ed

--
Edward J. Barkmeyer                        Email: edbark@xxxxxxxx
National Institute of Standards & Technology
Manufacturing Systems Integration Division
100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8263                Tel: +1 301-975-3528
Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8263                FAX: +1 301-975-4694

"The opinions expressed above do not reflect consensus of NIST,
  and have not been reviewed by any Government authority."

 
_________________________________________________________________
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
 


-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC               (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
40 South Alcaniz St.       (850)202 4416   office
Pensacola                 (850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502                     (850)291 0667    cell
http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes      phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us
http://www.flickr.com/pathayes/collections



_________________________________________________________________
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
 

_________________________________________________________________
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    (01)

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