----- Original Message -----
From: "John F. Sowa" <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> 2. Many linguists, such as Anna Wierzbicka and others, have proposed
> or discovered a universal set of primitives that underlie all the
> world's languages. Practical applications of primitives include
> Ogden's Basic English and the LDOCE list of defining terms.
> 2. Goddard, Wierzbicka, Ogden, LDOCE, and others *never* claim
> their primitives are as precisely defined as a mathematical
> theory or a programming language. In fact, their examples
> show that their primitives are just as "squishy" -- i.e.,
> just as vague and fuzzy as any words in any of the languages
> they are trying to define.
Putting on my Engineer's hat, I would say Wierzbicka, et al
have given us a good first approximation.
This might be used for high-level reasoning in the initial stages
of processing. In the final stages of processing, we would need
to trade in the Wierzbicka ontology for a more detailed ontology
which is precise enough to finish the processing.
In other words, we would use multiple ontologies,
not a single ontology. (01)
> John Sowa
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
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 (03)