You've caught me out. I haven't been following Ontolog. Why are you
replying now to this early message from a long thread eight months
Do you think it is relevant to something on Ontolog recently? What
caused you to suddenly bring it up again? (03)
Perhaps someone could give me a quick summary of what's been discussed
on Ontolog over the last eight months. (04)
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 8:50 AM, Pat Hayes <phayes@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Rob Freeman wrote:
>> Pat Hayes, and anyone else looking for ways to extract meaning from the Web.
>> General meaningful classes are accessible by clustering words on their
>> context. Classes found in that way don't have names until you give
>> them names, and we have still have no way of reasoning with them
> Exactly. These are not classes in any sense useful for ontology
>> , but
>> basic meaningful classes can be found.
>> See for instance Hinrich Schuetze's "Dimensions of Meaning":
>> I don't see why it should not prove possible to reason with classes so
> You may be right. However, this paper was written in 1991, and AFAIK
> nobody in the intervening 17 years has yet come up with any way to
> perform such reasoning. Until someone does, I will not hold my breath.
>> I believe indeed that natural language can be thought of as a
>> formal system over such classes (a formal system as distinct from a
> You may believe what you like, but the overwhelming empirical evidence
> suggests that natural language is not a formal system of any kind. But
> I would be delighted if you could prove this wrong, by demonstrating
> that it is indeed a formal system.
> Pat (07)
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (08)