On Wed, October 13, 2010 11:17, John Bottoms said:
> Doug,
>
> It appears you are using a classic, but common, definition of grammar.
> It results in a rather static definition of language that is not useful
> for semantic applications. (01)
I defined grammar as "a description of how that language is normally
used." This allows for a non-static language. I intended the reader
to understand that a grammar for a natural language is changeable. (02)
I did not limit grammar to purely syntactic descriptions. I don't see
how this definition results in any definition of language, much less
one that is not useful for semantic applications. (03)
The question i addressed was whether grammar was the logic of a language,
not what type of grammar is the best for Natural Language Processing. (04)
> Austin's definitions of language are more
> functional, although a bit primitive. (05)
> What we need is a dictionary that shows us the linguistic uses of words
> that can be used with semantic applications. It should show the context
> for usage, and what action should take place as a result of usage. This
> follows along the work of Austin and I think many would agree with this
> approach. (06)
I'm not sure if the pragmatics (what action should be taken) is
needed in order to obtain the semantics. (07)
> WordNet tries to do some of this, (08)
I fail to see that WordNet shows context for usage of its synsets
or specifies what action should be taken as the result of usage.
Often, different words in a synset are for use in different contexts. (09)
The only connection i see between WordNet and grammar is its
classification of synsets by part of speech. (010)
-- doug (011)
> but it is only a beginning
> and relies on the reader to extract what is needed. (012)
> -John Bottoms
> FirstStar
>
> On 10/13/2010 10:24 AM, doug foxvog wrote:
>> Pavithra wrote:
>>
>>> Isn't grammar the logic of the language? The verbs and the nouns and
>>> what should follow what?? )
>>
>> Grammar in a natural language is a description of how that language is
>> normally used. If an accepted grammar is not followed that means either
>> that the usage is somehow "improper", or that the grammar inadequately
>> describes the normal usage of the language.
>>
>> Grammatical rules can be expressed using a logical formalism, but
>> that does not mean that the grammar itself is a logic.
>>
>> -- doug
> (013)
=============================================================
doug foxvog doug@xxxxxxxxxx http://ProgressiveAustin.org (014)
"I speak as an American to the leaders of my own nation. The great
initiative in this war is ours. The initiative to stop it must be ours."
- Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
============================================================= (015)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (016)
|