ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Fwd: MOVED: Re: [ontology-summit] Hackathon: BACnet

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Hassan Aït-Kaci <hak@xxxxxxx>
From: "Barkmeyer, Edward J" <edward.barkmeyer@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2013 00:28:15 -0400
Message-id: <63955B982BF1854C96302E6A5908234417DC9B29E3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Actually, John, the last observation is slightly inaccurate.  'give' is a 
predicate.  A is not connected to 'give' but rather to some "event" x that 
satisfies 'give', and similarly, B and C.  Moreover, the 3 dyadic relations 
capture the notion of distinct "roles" in the 'give' event.  I prefer to speak 
of the existentialized event x as a "giving" (the gerund).  It is my 
recollection that Adam Pease also explicitly uses the term 'gerund' in 
describing the CELT (KIF) model of A gives B to C.    (01)

-Ed    (02)

--
Edward J. Barkmeyer                       Email: edbark@xxxxxxxx
National Institute of Standards & Technology
Engineering Laboratory -- Systems Integration Division
100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8263               Office: +1 301-975-3528
Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8263               Mobile: +1 240-672-5800
________________________________________
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
[ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx 
[sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 5:44 AM
To: Hassan At-Kaci; [ontolog-forum]
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Fwd: MOVED: Re: [ontology-summit] Hackathon: 
BACnet Ontology    (03)

Two points:    (04)

1. It is certainly true that you can map A gives B to C into a form that uses 
only dyadic relation.    (05)

2. But Peirce was trying to explain that you have simply converted one triad 
into a triad of a different form.    (06)

I'll just use predicate calculus notation, since it's easy to type.  But the 
point is obvious when you use a graph notation.    (07)

With a triadic relation:    (08)

     gives(A,B,C)    (09)

With three dyadic relations and a monadic relation give(x):    (010)

     (Ex) give(x) & agent(x,A) & theme(x,B) & recipient(x,C)    (011)

In the first version, you have a triadic connection of A, B, and C to the 
relation named gives.    (012)

In the second version, you have a triadic connection of A to agent to give, B 
to theme to give, and C to recipient to give.    (013)

You still have a triad, but the central node is called give instead of gives.    (014)

John    (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    (016)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>