Hi Leo, (01)
I am not sure I understand your use of the term 'term' - so maybe we are
engaging in the conversation you discuss below.
What puzzles me is why you feel that there always has to be a many-many
relation, and that one cannot (in some situations) regard this as a one-many
relation, given that we accept that an utterer/inscriber will know the
reference of the utterance. (02)
One can regard a term, 'bank' as a type whose tokens are all its
utterances/inscriptions. In this case, the relationship is many to many.
Or, one can have a finer grained conception. One can regard a term, 'bank'
as a type whose tokens are all its utterances/inscriptions that refer to a
particular sense - bank of a river. There will be another term 'bank' whose
tokens are all its utterances/inscriptions refer to a type of financial
institution.
(As you probably know, Strawson used this tactic to explain the shifting
reference of indexicals such as 'here')
In this case, we get a one-many relation. (03)
One may want to use the different tactics in different implementations, but
is some it is useful to have one-many as one (whether machine or human) can
then mark the particular token utterances/inscriptions as an instance of the
sense - and so recover the reference. (04)
I am taking your comments to mean that you believe the one-many tactic is,
in principle, impossible. Have I misunderstood?
Or maybe we are just using the term 'term' in different ways. (05)
Regards,
Chris (06)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Obrst, Leo J. [mailto:lobrst@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: 31 March 2011 00:15
> To: mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; '[ontolog-forum] '
> Subject: RE: [ontolog-forum] Fact Guru, Controlled NLs, and OOR
>
> Yes, Chris, the different hearers would typically know which reference is
> intended, or if it is not known, will interact with the participant or
conversant(s)
> (if I may coin a phrase) in a conversation (or when reading, refer back to
other
> texts, etc.) and determine the reference. However, machines do not (yet)
have
> this ability. And without interaction in conversation, the hearers could
have
> different referents. "The same context" covers potentially a lot of ground
here.
> The conversation or discourse extends and refines the context so that at a
> certain point the reference is (mostly) unambiguous. As the utterer (or
writer), I
> would know what I intend to refer to (with the usual technical hand-waving
> about reference and its determination).
>
> When I say "person" or "people", you probably clearly understand what I
mostly
> mean by this, because you know English and all the knowledge behind the
> scenes, i.e., how terms refer and what they refer to, generally, and also
> specifically here when I mention "person", and of course the ontology of
the
> world. However, perhaps idiosyncratically, I extend the reference of
"person"
> (actually, more colloquially "people") to higher mammals, and this is true
in my
> own house to my dogs. You don't know that (unless I tell you that), and so
you
> will not necessarily know my reference, but you can ascertain it in
conversation
> with me over time. You may not agree with my term->concept mapping, but
you
> understand my term->concept mapping. And by doing so, I think, perhaps
only
> for the duration of our conversation, you are mapping "people" into a kind
of
> temporary ontology or local interpretation, which in turn maps to your
more
> permanent ontology.
>
> Thanks,
> Leo
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Partridge [mailto:partridge.csj@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 6:03 PM
> To: Obrst, Leo J.; '[ontolog-forum] '
> Subject: RE: [ontolog-forum] Fact Guru, Controlled NLs, and OOR
>
> Hi Leo,
>
> Can I clarify?
> Is the idea that a single utterance of these phrases can be understood by
> different hearers in the same context as having different references,
because
> they are ambiguous?
> And wouldn't the utterer know which reference is intended?
>
> Chris
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Obrst, Leo J. [mailto:lobrst@xxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: 30 March 2011 21:41
> > To: mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; [ontolog-forum]
> > Subject: RE: [ontolog-forum] Fact Guru, Controlled NLs, and OOR
> >
> > Thanks, Chris. Yes, I admit we should aspire to 1 term - many
> > referents,
> but with
> > potentially ambiguous/synonymous terms (especially when they are
> > phrases),
> it
> > will be many-to-many, since there may be many ways to refer to the
> > same concept, just as there may be many ways to refer to many concepts.
> >
> > E.g., notoriously, "timed flies", perhaps "criminal lawyers",
> > "half-empty
> tanks",
> > "half-full tanks", etc.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Leo
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-
> > bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Chris Partridge
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 3:50 PM
> > To: '[ontolog-forum] '
> > Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Fact Guru, Controlled NLs, and OOR
> >
> > Hi Leo,
> >
> > > And note that there is not a 1-1 relationship between terms and
> > > concepts, but a many-many, depending on the language and of course
> > > the ontology.
> >
> > Depends on what you think of as the term. If you have an
> utterance/inscription
> > view, it is one-many.
> >
> > Chris
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-
> > > bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Obrst, Leo J.
> > > Sent: 30 March 2011 20:17
> > > To: [ontolog-forum]
> > > Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Fact Guru, Controlled NLs, and OOR
> > >
> > > The way to distinguish terminology and ontology is that you use
> > > terms
> > (natural
> > > language words, phrases) to refer to "concepts" (ideas, referents,
> > categories,
> > > etc.) So the former is semantics, i.e., ways of referring (quite
> > > often
> > just lexical
> > > semantics, but you can imagine a phrase "gasoline tank" or "steel
> > crankshaft,
> > > corroded and discarded"), the latter is ontology, i.e., what is
> > > referred
> > to,
> > > typically real world objects or categories.
> > >
> > > You may also use a term as a label for a concept, which is fine if
> > > you
> > understand
> > > the distinction, but the concept could be labeled KDKJKDLK123 in the
> > ontology
> > > and that really is just as valid, if perverse (though you cannot
> > > interpret
> > it
> > > semantically as an English speaker unless you see the term in the
> > terminology
> > > that refers to it). And note that there is not a 1-1 relationship
> > > between
> > terms and
> > > concepts, but a many-many, depending on the language and of course
> > > the ontology.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Leo
> > > _____________________________________________
> > > Dr. Leo Obrst The MITRE Corporation, Information Semantics
> > > lobrst@xxxxxxxxx Information Discovery & Understanding, Command &
> > > Control Center
> > > Voice: 703-983-6770 7515 Colshire Drive, M/S H305
> > > Fax: 703-983-1379 McLean, VA 22102-7508, USA
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-
> > > bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike Bennett
> > > Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 1:07 PM
> > > To: [ontolog-forum]
> > > Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Fact Guru, Controlled NLs, and OOR
> > >
> > > We made a point of not including words / lexical terms as ontology
> > objects, i.e.
> > > no use of OWL Equivalent Class.
> > >
> > > As Mike Atkin puts it, people will argue forever about the meaning
> > > of a
> > word,
> > > but will soon reach consensus on the concepts themselves. To include
> > > those
> > in
> > > the ontology actually makes the ontology harder to explain to
> > > business stakeholders.
> > >
> > > Also does that mean you have two separate theories of meaning within
> > > the same model? How do you distinguish those e.g. is there is some
> > > obvious
> > visual
> > > distinction between the sets of terms that come under the two
theories?
> > >
> > > Mike
> > >
> > > On 30/03/2011 17:49, Matthew West wrote:
> > > > Dear Mike,
> > > >
> > > > One of the things we did in ISO 15926 was to distinguish logical
> > > > terms/concepts/meanings from their representation by words/lexical
> > > > terms/phrases, but treating the lexical terms as first class
> > > > objects in the ontology itself, rather than things outside it.
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > >
> > > > Matthew West
> > > > Information Junction
> > > > Tel: +44 1489 880185
> > > > Mobile: +44 750 3385279
> > > > Skype: dr.matthew.west
> > > > matthew.west@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > http://www.informationjunction.co.uk/
> > > > http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/
> > > >
> > > > This email originates from Information Junction Ltd. Registered in
> > > > England and Wales No. 6632177.
> > > > Registered office: 2 Brookside, Meadow Way, Letchworth Garden
> > > > City, Hertfordshire, SG6 3JE.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >> -----Original Message-----
> > > >> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > >> [mailto:ontolog-forum- bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> > > >> Mike Bennett
> > > >> Sent: 30 March 2011 16:50
> > > >> To: [ontolog-forum]
> > > >> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Fact Guru, Controlled NLs, and OOR
> > > >>
> > > >> That does sound interesting. I had a sort of "Aha" moment last
> > > >> week when we were talking about synonyms and heteronyms at an OMG
> > > >> / EDM Council event. It struck me that an ontology has formal
> > > >> definitions of concepts with synonyms, whereas a terminology is a
> > > >> set of words, with one or more meanings per word, and therefore has
> heteronyms.
> > > >> That's why for instance we have no concept of heteronym in our
> > > >> ontology. Nor (for similar reasons) do we have homonyms.
> > > >>
> > > >> No doubt for most people that's this week's glimpse into the
> > > >> obvious, but it made things come clear for me - ontologies and
> > > >> terminologies are complementary but different, so any tool that
> > > >> formally relates one to the other has to be good.
> > > >>
> > > >> Mike
> > > >>
> > > >> On 30/03/2011 15:05, John F. Sowa wrote:
> > > >>> We have discussed the relationships between ontologies and
> > > >> terminologies
> > > >>> in many email threads. Some people blur the distinction by
> > > >>> saying
> > > >> that
> > > >>> their terminologies are ontologies, and others make a sharp
> > > >> distinction
> > > >>> between them. But one point is clear: the people who use
> > > >> applications
> > > >>> only see terminologies, and the developers need to relate
> > > >>> ontologies to terminologies.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> A few weeks ago, I sent a note that mentioned Fact Guru by Doug
> > > >>> Skuce as tool that could help bridge the gap between
> > > >>> terminologies and ontologies. In particular, FG could simplify
> > > >>> the task of mapping the terms of an terminology to the more formal
> ontology.
> > > >>> After the development of the ontology, FG could be used to
> > > >>> display either or both, side by side. For the Open Ontology
> > > >>> Repository, FG could be useful, but only if the software were
> > > >>> available as open
> > source.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Therefore, I had a discussion with Doug about the possibility of
> > > >>> releasing the Fact Guru software as open source under the LGPL.
> > > >>> Doug agreed, and he is also planning to attend the Ontology
> > > >>> Summit on April 18. He would be happy to discuss the use of FG
> > > >>> with anyone who may be interested. On the cc list above, I
> > > >>> added the email for Doug Skuce and for John Talbot, who did most
> > > >>> of the
> > implementation.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> In the links below, note the wide range of sophistication of the
> > > >>> possible applications. The Animals example was implemented by
> > > >>> Doug's 9-year-old daughter as a school project. The SUMO
> > > >>> example was downloaded from the actual SUMO ontology. For each
> > > >>> term in SUMO, FG shows both the English-like text and the axioms
> > > >>> written in KIF.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> John Sowa
> > > >>>
> > > >>> -------- Original Message --------
> > > >>> Subject: Fact Guru
> > > >>> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2011 21:31:05 -0500
> > > >>> From: John F. Sowa<sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >>> To: [ontolog-forum]<ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >>> CC: Doug Skuce<drskuce@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I was talking with an old friend, Doug Skuce, who taught AI and
> > > >>> knowledge engineering at the University of Ottawa for many years.
> > > >>> He and his students and colleagues have developed some software
> > > >>> that could be valuable for designing and supporting ontologies.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> In the late 80s he developed a knowledge acquisition tool called
> > > >>> CODE (Conceptually Oriented Development Environment) in Smalltalk.
> > > >>> Since CODE did not run on the web, he designed a new version
> > > >>> called Fact Guru in the late 90s. FG can be used to organize a
> > > >>> knowledge base of any kind and present it in a highly readable
> > > >>> way;
> > > >>>
> > > >>> http://www.site.uottawa.ca/~tcl/factguru1/FactGuru.pdf
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Following is a blurb from the web site:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> With Fact Guru you can improve understanding by:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> * storing facts grouped by subject in a highly structured
> > > >>> knowledge base.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> * searching the knowledge base to find just the fact you
> > > >>> need
> > > >>>
> > > >>> * comparing subjects to see a comparison matrix of
> > > >>> differences
> > > >>>
> > > >>> * viewing subjects as a graph to see relationships
> > > >>> between
> > > >> them
> > > >>> For a beginner's example that uses only English, see the
> > > >>> knowledge base of Canadian Animals, which was implemented by
> > > >>> Doug's nine year old daughter. Click on any animal name to find
> > > >>> a collection of information about it:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> http://www.site.uottawa.ca/~tcl/factguru1/animals/index.html
> > > >>>
> > > >>> More important for ontology is the use of Fact Guru to import,
> > > >>> organize, and display the top-level ontology of SUMO:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> http://www.site.uottawa.ca/~tcl/factguru1/sumo/index.html
> > > >>>
> > > >>> For an example of a knowledge base about a technical subject,
> > > >>> see the Fact Guru KB about the Java programming language, which
> > > >>> Doug used for teaching a course on Java:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> http://www.site.uottawa.ca/~tcl/factguru1/java/index.html
> > > >>>
> > > >>> This KB is important for two reasons: (1) it is cross linked to
> > > >>> an associated HTML document about Java; and (2) it is written in
> > > >>> a version of controlled English called ClearTalk.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Doug is currently working with some programmers who are
> > > >>> reimplementing Fact Guru with the Drupal content management
> > > >>> software in order to organize and relate multiple knowledge bases.
> > > >>> This could be useful for the Open Ontology Repository.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I thought that participants in Ontolog Forum might express their
> > > >>> wish list about features that would be useful for supporting
> > > >>> ontologies and their applications.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> John Sowa
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > >
> >
> _________________________________________________________________
> > > >>> 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
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >> Mike Bennett
> > > >> Director
> > > >> Hypercube Ltd.
> > > >> 89 Worship Street
> > > >> London EC2A 2BF
> > > >> Tel: +44 (0) 20 7917 9522
> > > >> Mob: +44 (0) 7721 420 730
> > > >> www.hypercube.co.uk
> > > >> Registered in England and Wales No. 2461068
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> _________________________________________________________________
> > > >> 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
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> _________________________________________________________________
> > > > 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
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Mike Bennett
> > > Director
> > > Hypercube Ltd.
> > > 89 Worship Street
> > > London EC2A 2BF
> > > Tel: +44 (0) 20 7917 9522
> > > Mob: +44 (0) 7721 420 730
> > > www.hypercube.co.uk
> > > Registered in England and Wales No. 2461068
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> _________________________________________________________________
> > > 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
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> _________________________________________________________________
> > > 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
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> _________________________________________________________________
> > 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
> > (07)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (08)
|