Ed,
You have convinced me to add 'bark' of a tree to the COSMO as well.
There already was fruit coverings such as rind, and animal part coverings,
such as skin. Maybe 'bark' of a tree is primitive because of its texture
and uses, though it could be described well enough to recognize, using other
more basic words. (01)
Pat (02)
Patrick Cassidy
MICRA Inc.
cassidy@xxxxxxxxx
908-561-3416 (03)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-
> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Barkmeyer, Edward J
> Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2013 12:41 PM
> To: [ontolog-forum]
> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] 15,000-year-old ancestral language
>
> Pat,
>
> This is presumably resolved by consulting the source of the 200 common
> meanings cited in the article.
> I assumed that the authors used the "noun" designation to refer to the
> rind of trees, and would have used the "verb" designation if they had
> meant the gerund "bark" = "barking".
>
> I seem to recall reading that wild dogs and wolves don't "bark",
> although coyotes do, and "barking" is actually only a common behavior
> of domesticated dogs. Further, the dog is the oldest domesticated
> animal, and my recollection is that that is estimated to have occurred
> sometime around 15 kya, which would be about the time of the unifying
> protolanguage the article posits. Taken together, it suggests that
> the "bark" of a dog would not be common in origin.
>
> Also, "bark" is echoic, like "woof" and "howl", and it is easy to
> imagine that similar echoic words would have been invented in the
> languages of cultures that had domesticated dogs, whether or not there
> was a common origin. In a similar way, it has been suggested before
> that "ma" is a sound that frequently comes out of the mouths of babes
> experimenting with the their linguistic apparatus, and if mothers
> reinforce it, it becomes a word for "mother" in the home and in the
> language. The issue of accidental reinvention is a known problem in
> language genetics. By comparison, "bark" referring to the rind of a
> tree has no such problems.
>
> -Ed
>
>
> --
> Edward J. Barkmeyer Email: edbark@xxxxxxxx
> National Institute of Standards & Technology
> Systems Integration Division
> 100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8263 Work: +1 301-975-3528
> Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8263 Mobile: +1 240-672-5800
>
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-
> > bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Patrick Cassidy
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2013 10:57 AM
> > To: '[ontolog-forum] '
> > Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] 15,000-year-old ancestral language
> >
> > Yes, I interpret this 'bark' as a noun - the audible waveform that
> sounds like
> > the bark of a dog.
> > The action 'to bark' is what causes ('produces') the sound, in the
> COSMO
> > ontology view of things.
> >
> > What I found interesting is that, although I am guessing that sound
> primitives
> > will include pure tones and syllables, the notion of animal sounds
> being very
> > basic had not occurred to me, nor appeared in the works I have seen.
> It is
> > possible that the brain research being done these days may provide
> some
> > objective data to indicate which concepts are actually primitive from
> a human
> > thinking point of view. Stay 'tuned'. ;-)
> >
> > Pat
> >
> > Patrick Cassidy
> > MICRA Inc.
> > cassidy@xxxxxxxxx
> > 908-561-3416
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-
> > > bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Barkmeyer, Edward J
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2013 12:50 AM
> > > To: [ontolog-forum]
> > > Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] 15,000-year-old ancestral language
> > >
> > > Pat,
> > >
> > > The article says that 'bark' is a noun.
> > >
> > > Beyond the pronouns, I would not attach too much significance to
> the
> > > handful of survivors of 15000 years of social change. English
> alone
> > > tells us that the "half life" of important words can be
> significantly
> > > altered by social and military history. Words of the conqueror
> will
> > > displace words of the conquered; words of the dominant trade people
> > > will displace words of the consumers. Words for tools might change
> > > when you switch from stone to bronze. Even words for eating might
> > > change when your diet changes. (And in the latter half of the 20th
> > > century it became commonplace in our trade to re-invent the same
> old
> > > wheels every 5-10 years with a whole new set of terms to suggest
> that
> > > there was a "new" technology. While that might be an egregious
> case,
> > > I'm sure it has happened in some form many times in 15000 years.)
> > >
> > > -Ed
> > >
> > > --
> > > 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 Patrick Cassidy
> [pat@xxxxxxxxx]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2013 11:16 PM
> > > To: '[ontolog-forum] '
> > > Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] 15,000-year-old ancestral language
> > >
> > > Interesting. The word "bark" (or "barking") is not included in the
> > > Longman defining vocabulary.
> > > It is defined as "the sharp sound made by a dog" (all those words
> are
> > > in the defining vocabulary), and as similar sounds.
> > >
> > > This may be one of the semantic primitives missing from the Longman
> > > defining vocabulary; though it can be "defined" (in the dictionary
> > > sense), the understanding depends on the reader having had the
> > > perception experience of hearing a dog bark.
> > >
> > > I just added this to the COSMO ontology. Thanks.
> > >
> > >
> > > Pat
> > >
> > >
> > > Patrick Cassidy
> > > MICRA Inc.
> > > cassidy@xxxxxxxxx
> > > 908-561-3416
> > > (04)
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
> (05)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (06)
|