> -----Original Message-----
> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-
> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Pat Hayes
> Sent: 31 January 2009 07:20
> To: [ontolog-forum]
> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontology and Category Theory
>
>
> On Jan 31, 2009, at 12:49 AM, FERENC KOVACS wrote:
>
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > n my understanding of categories (semantic primitives), besides
> > objects,
> > properties and relations there are twin concepts that are the
> > subject of
> > semantic transformations.
> > Basics: ...
>
> Allow me to ask. This perspective, of which you have given us this
> terse summary: what is it, exactly?
[*] It is an excerpt from my - say book - in the making, a multidisciplinary
PhD thesis centeruing around language, cognition and computing tags. (01)
Your email reads like a sketch of
> a rather complicated philosophical position,
[*] It looks only complicated, because there are a number of gaps to be
filled by the reader. That is what I call harmonisation. By the nature of
the forum, I cannot dump all my text on you, just try to tes how far we are
away in understanding the same reality aroun dus. (02)
one that would take a
> book to expound fully. Does this book-length exegesis exist?
[*] I agree, it is about a book's length size, and as I said it is in the
making. I have already indicated here once that I am using the opportunity
to post ideas here to see if I can hamroize with people advanced in produing
in formal logic, something I appreciate, but find totally wrong in using for
NLP in its current from despite boasting like this
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/2009.01.endbracket.aspx . Juszt
find out from translation practitioners what they think about it.
Interpretation (and) translation <LANTRA-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
We should agree that there is one world seen by different people and
described in different terms but that does not mean that a discipline can
have the truth about the whole without vetting its basic terminology with
other those of fields proven the their own. For instance, the defintion of
spacetime as provided by phyisics should be good enhough for all of us as
they have the evidence and proof for that. (03)
Is there
> any literature you can point us to which will help us understand what
> you are talking about? [*] I would like to point nout that I am doing a
synthesis, a multidisciplinary account of what those three tags above
represent to me, and hopefuly to you as well as soon as I am finsihed with
my writing. The literature that could help you is of course there. The terms
that need to be defined are familiar to you, but there is some difference in
use between us. A crucial category for example is definition, and definition
of definition is best described by John Dewey in How we think. Thus concept
is defined for me as I have outlined just before, and there are some more
twin concepts such as generic and specific, body and soul, space-time, that
should be valid across all disciplines, otherwise the whole exercise of
learning and teaching is a mess. (04)
[*] (05)
Have these ideas been discussed, debated or
> analyzed by anyone in any public forum?
[*] Tis forum is not the first palce, but so far the most tolerant.
Wikipedia would not tolerate anything since they term if ORM and delete it.
I have published one article on meaning where a new definition is provided ,
but there are about 50 concepts to be detailed and shared publicly. My
problem is that many of my ideas need copyright protection and I a looking
for people who at least get a hang of what I am saying and would team up
with me. You mut pardon me for that but when you speak about translation you
sound you still speak about flogistone in the 21st century. The fact that
you get funds for various automatzed tast is another issue. Your sponsors
logic is centered around making money and they believe that automated
weaponry will be the next big issue, therefore they are happy to get on the
bandwagon of NLP, ontologies etc. (06)
>
[*] I hope you have more questions, and should you be interested in my
subject and be a position to help, I am willing to send you some longer
materials in private.
Cheers and thank you (07)
Frank/Ferenc
> Pat Hayes
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Config Subscr: 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 join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
> To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
> Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.15/1923 - Release Date:
> 29/01/2009 07:13 (08)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: 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 join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (09)
|