On Wed, January 23, 2013 16:13, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
> On 1/11/13 11:45 AM, Ed Barkmeyer wrote:
>> Kingsley, (01)
>> I generally agree. A proposition is a sentence. Technically, the
>> general notion of 'sentence' includes "modalities": declarative,
>> interrogative, imperative, hortative. So if your logic includes enough
>> modalities, every sentence is a proposition. I think you are talking
>> about "declarative sentences", when you refer to "statements". (02)
>> But making a sentence/proposition into a 'datum' requires one more
>> element -- the acceptance that the proposition is true. A 'datum' is a
>> proposition that is taken to be true. Interestingly, however, when one
>> deals with "outlier data" in a statistical analysis, one asks whether
>> there is some uncontrolled variable or the outliers are "dubious
>> observations", i.e., propositions that might not actually be true as
>> reported. (03)
>> I also agree, BTW, that a paragraph is just a small corpus -- a
>> collection of 1 or more sentences/propositions. And 'data' is a
>> collection of propositions that we take to be (simultaneously) true. (04)
>> BTW, we are not distinguishing here between the mental proposition (the
>> "meaning") and its expression, but that seems to be a big issue to other
>> contributors. That is, they see a 'sentence' as a particular form of
>> expression, which is, for example, distinct from a table of values. (05)
Note that Ed has been discussing propositions, not the expression/coding
of the proposition, as sentences. (06)
>> ... So we really have to be careful how we
>> use these words. (07)
>> In my view, a table for which you don't know how to interpret
>> a row is not 'data'; it is just an image. It might as well be a
>> JPEG of a drawing. One might say that it is 'data' in the sense
>> that the interpretation is "In row 3, column B is 5", but then
>> that is a sentence. (08)
>> -Ed (09)
>> On 1/11/2013 10:35 AM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>>> <snip>
>>> So building on the above, a Sentence is a Datum. Likewise, a Paragraph
>>> is Data.
>>> The paragraph above expressed in Turtle notation as: (010)
>>> <#Sentence> <#sameAs> <#Datum> .
>>> <#Paragraph> <#sameAs> <#Data> . (011)
The English form "A(n) X is a Y" translates to <#kindOf>, not <#sameAs>.
Thus:
<#Sentence> <#kindOf> <#Datum> .
<#Paragraph> <#kindOf> <#Data> . (012)
>>> Or with more specificity: (013)
>>> <#Proposition> <#kindOf> <#Sentence> .
>>> <#Statement> <#kindOf> <#Sentence> .
>>> <#Proposition> <#sameAs> <#Statement> .
>>> <#Proposition> <#sameAs> <#Datum> .
<#Proposition> <#kindOf> <#Datum> . (014)
>>> <#Statement> <#sameAs> <#Datum> .
<#Statement> <#kindOf> <#Datum> . (015)
>>> <#Paragraph> <#sameAs> <#Data> .
<#Paragraph> <#kindOf> <#Data> . (016)
> Ed, (017)
> Are we still okay re. the additions to above that follow?
>
> ## Additions -- still in Turtle Notation ## (018)
> <#Sentence> <#hasContainer> <#Paragraph> . (019)
I guess by this formulation, you mean that instances of the first
concept may be related by the specified binary predicate to
instances of the second type. (020)
Below, you move into NL, from Ontology. (021)
> <#Word> <#hasContainer> <#Sentence> . (022)
You are no longer discussing propositions, but Linguistic Objects, now.
But i'm not sure what kind of objects, yet. Do you mean a pattern, or
something spatio-temporal? Does this include spoken sentences as well
as written ones? If i repeat the words you say, is that the same sentence,
or a different one? Is the pattern of pixels on my screen the same
sentence as the pattern of pixels on your screen? Is it the same sentence
if it uses a different case or a different font? Is it the same sentence if
it is misspelled? ... written vertically instead of horizontally? ...
encrypted?
... mispronounced? ... translated into a different language? (023)
I'll assume that by sentence here you mean an ordered set of one of more
words in a language (or more than one language) that encodes a
proposition. I'll call this <#Sentence2>. An instance of <#Sentence2>
can be instantiated in numerous ways, with the instantiations being
instances of <#Sentence3>. Typographical structures for sentences, i.e.
with specified font, line breaks, etc., i'll call <#Sentence4>. (024)
> <#Subject> <#partOf> <#Sentence> . (025)
? "Subject" seems to describe (different) roles in <#Sentence>,
<#Sentence2>, and <#Sentence3>. (026)
Not every <#Sentence2> has a filler for the <#Subject> role.
Perhaps what you want is to create:
<#SentenceWithSubject> <#kindOf> <#Sentence2>
<#SentenceWithSubject> <#hasRole> <#subject>
<#subject> <#subRelationOf> <#partOf> (027)
> <#Subject> <#Altlabel> "Entity" . (028)
I find such a label misleading. The subject of a <Sentence2> is a
word, with a meaning that is (likely to be) the subject of the
<#Sentence>. That word could refer to a type of object or a type of
action, as well as an individual thing. Is "Sentence" an "Entity"? How
about "reading"? (029)
> <#Predicate> <#partOf> <#Sentence> . (030)
<#SentenceWithPredicate> <#kindOf> <#Sentence2>
<#SentenceWithPredicate> <#hasRole> <#predicateOfSentence>
<#predicateOfSentence> <#subRelationOf> <#partOf> (031)
> <#Predicate> <#Altlabel> "Attribute" . (032)
That seems like a narrower role, to me. (033)
> <#Predicate> <#sameAs> <#Verb> . (034)
Is <#Verb> here intended to be a role? (035)
> <#Object> <#partOf> <#Sentence> .
> <#Object> <#Altlabel> "Value" . (036)
<#SentenceWithObject> <#kindOf> <#Sentence2>
<#SentenceWithObject> <#hasRole> <#objectOfSentence>
<#objectOfSentence> <#subRelationOf> <#partOf> (037)
> <#Paragraph> <#hasContainer> <#Page> . (038)
The same paragraph may be printed on page 220 in one printing of a book,
on page 198 in a second printing, and be split between pages 259 and 260
in a third printing. Here you may be referring to <#Paragraph3>, a
physical instantiation of a <#Paragraph2> (an ordered set of
<#Sentence2>s), or a <#Paragraph4> (a typographical structure of
encodings of <#Paragraph2>s). I'm guessing <#Paragraph4>, which
includes specification of everything needed for printing a copy: font,
character size, line and page breaks. Two instantiations of the same
<#Paragraph4> would be in different physical objects (books, journals,
etc.) (039)
> <#Page> <#hasContainer> <#Chapter> . (040)
Since <#Page> here means either a physical page or a typographical
structure, <#Chapter> here probably means either a physical page
or a typographical structure as well. (041)
This seems to ignore that a page can have parts of more than one
chapter on it. (042)
> <#Page> <#kindOf> <#Document> . (043)
I understand "document" to mean a type of propositional conceptual
work or instantiation thereof. A page of a conceptual work often does
not represent the complete conceptual work. I would not consider
an incomplete document to be a document. (044)
> <#Page> <#hasContainer> <#Book> . (045)
Some pages (<3> or <4>) are parts of books (<3> or <4>). But
many are not. (046)
> <#Index> <#partOf> <#Book> .
> <#Index> <#references> <#Page> .
> <#Index> <#references> <#Topic>. (047)
I'd suggest <#indexTopic> as a relation. The key thing about indexes,
is that they are sets of index entries, each entry linking the entry's topic
to a page. (048)
<#BookSection> <#partOf> <#Book>
<#BookIndex> <#kindOf> <#BookSection>
<#IndexEntry> <#partOf> <#BookIndex>
<#IndexEntry3> <#pageReference> <#Page4>
<#IndexEntry4> <#pageReference> <#Page4>
<#IndexEntry> <#indexTopic> <#Thing> (049)
I don't find any meaning for <#Topic> so would leave out the next 3.
> <#Subject> <#kindOf> <#Topic> .
> <#Predicate> <#kindOf> <#Topic> .
> <#Object> <#kindOf> <#Topic> . (050)
> <#Glossary> <#partOf> <#Book> . (051)
<#BookGlossary> <#kindOf> <#BookSection> (052)
> <#Chapter> <#partOf> <#Book> . (053)
<#BookChapter> <#kindOf> <#BookSection> (054)
> <#Book> <#sameAs> <#Database> . (055)
<#Book1> <#kindOf> <#KnowledgeBase>
<#Database> <#kindOf> <#KnowledgeBase> (056)
> ## Some Predicate Definitions (057)
> <#hasContainer> <#type> <#transitivePredicate> ;
> <#equivalentPredicate> <#partOf> ;
> <#domain> <#Word>, <#Sentence>, <#Paragraph>,
> <#Page>, <#Chapter>, <#Book> ;
> <#range> <#Sentence>, <#Paragraph>, <#Page>,
> <#Chapter>, <#Book> . (058)
This seems a way too restrictive domain and range for <#partOf>. (059)
> <#kindOf> <#type> <#transitivePredicate> . (060)
Yes. (061)
-- doug f
> --
>
> Regards,
>
> Kingsley Idehen
> Founder & CEO
> OpenLink Software
> Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
> Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
> Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
> Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
> LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
> (062)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (063)
|