Re: [ontolog-forum] English number of words/concepts that cannot be comp

[joel luis carbonera <joelcarbonera@xxxxxxxxx>]

Recently, I've read this interview with Prof. Stevan Harnad.

http://www.aass.oru.se/~sci/Interview%20Harnad.pdf

He was the first author that has explicitly discussed the so called "symbol grounding problem".

http://cogprints.org/3106/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbol_grounding

In that interview he said that in recent works, he and his collaborators analyze dictionaries for determining the properties of the smallest number of words from which all the rest can be dened by words alone.

I haven't read these works yet. But this idea led me to think about a "minimal core ontology" that would support all concepts that are represented in dictionaries.

Of course, it is important to notice that Harnad talks about words/symbols instead of concepts. So, I don't  know how useful his analisys for this purposes.

Also, I don't know how much this approach can be successful, due to the problem of defining concepts in the classical way (sufficient/necessary condicions).

Best regards.

--

____________________________________

CV: http://lattes.cnpq.br/0044387433155250

_________________________________________________________________
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)