Re: [ontolog-forum] Body Parts and Early-Learned Verbs

[Mike Bennett <mbennett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Bill, that does look like a promising avenue to explore.

We've looked at commitments and obligations and so on in FIBO, and tied together the views of some obligation "in the round" and the view of it from the perspective of some party (as reflected for example in accounting systems) but there are a lot of loose ends at present. Connecting the commitment to the speech act as done here, looks like one of the missing pieces. And it's compatible with Searle, which makes a lot of sense to me.

Mike

On 04/09/2013 14:01, William Frank wrote:

also, the ISO enterprise language is indeed based on speech act concepts.  

the key speech act being an act of commtiment, which may create a contract among the commiting entities (or  objects, in ODP-speak) in a community.   I have attached the relevant diagram. 

i was wrong, this is an adopted standard,

 http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-X.911/en

On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 8:26 PM, William Frank <williamf.frank@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Myself, I find  most depth in the (draft) ISO 15414 Open Distributed Process Reference Model - Enterprise Language. 
 
The core concept there is 'community', to which are tied clusters of concepts around 'objectives', 'policies', and 'accountability'.

I suspect that it is in learning about family, chess, football, the cool way to talk, and the after-market auto parts business, one is learning about these four broad concept clusters. 

But Mike Bennet and Ray Martin talk about *A* business, and how we learn about that one thing.  I don't think we can learn about one business entity at a time.  *A* business makes sense as a community in the context of some larger communities, and made up of some smaller ones, all with their own objectives, policies, and accountabilities.
 

So, I think these ideas above are *specialized* by the Business Motivation Model.   

Wm

On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 6:57 PM, Ray Martin <marsaviator@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Mr. Bennett and all,

Would you consider BMM (Business Motivation Model) by OMG as a starting point for the considerations of your paragraphs? Or are you envisioning something entirely different?

Thanx,

Ray

On Sep 3, 2013, at 11:06 AM, Mike Bennett <mbennett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

It seems to me that for ontologies that are relevant to businesses, there must be a similar but separate grounding requirement, to that of a child or other mammal.

If one can identify the first, early arm and leg movements of the corporation, the rest would presumably follow from there. This would be things like Searle's social constructs (leading on into commitments, agreements, contracts, transactions etc.), the basic concepts of double-entry book-keeping (profit, loss, asset, liability), and so on. This would form the basic vocabulary, the basic geometry if you will, from which other more complex concepts are derived, and which are relevant in perceivign the semantics of things within the business's environment (buildings, shipping, payment systems etc.).

Mike

On 03/09/2013 13:40, Sandro Rama Fiorini wrote:

Hello all!

Linda Smith's work in developmental psychology is quite interesting to ontologists. Her research in the development of whole/part recognition in children is particularly intriguing.

Sowa said:

This study is one of many that show how the semantics of natural
language is grounded in the neural mechanisms of perception and action.

Isn't that what the symbol grounding problem is all about?

When I try to use ontologies to do something useful in a computer a frequently have to overcome the problem of converting data patterns into symbols and symbols into actions. There is still relatively little research in how to bridge this semantic gap, if you considering how important it is.

best,
Sandro Rama Fiorini
  Phd Candidate
 Institute of Informatics
 Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)
 Brazil
 Website: www.inf.ufrgs.br/~srfiorini

 
_________________________________________________________________
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
 

_________________________________________________________________
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

_________________________________________________________________
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
 

 
_________________________________________________________________
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
 

_________________________________________________________________
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    (01)