John F. Sowa wrote:
I believe that the reason why is,
or should be, obvious: a child
(or an adult learning a second
language) begins with pragmatics,
then semantics, and finally
syntax. Of the three, syntax is of
the most value for understanding
fine details. But the main
points can be understood even with
badly mangled syntax. (01)
Would you give some exemplars of kids using first
pragmatics then semantics and finally syntax? I
suppose pragmatics comes in when the infant is
hungry, or has a messy diaper, or other motive to
signal the humans around her. Semantics in a 3
year old? A good example would help. (02)
-Rich (03)
Sincerely,
Rich Cooper
EnglishLogicKernel.com
Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com
9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2 (04)
-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of John F Sowa
Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2014 7:15 PM
To: [ontolog-forum]
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Paraconsistent Logic (05)
Leo and Rich, (06)
Leo
> the semantics and the syntax are associated at
each point in the NL
> derivation (in a compositional fashion), though
each uses different
> "logics" that are correlated. (07)
That short description summarizes the fundamental
Fregean principle,
which has been very successful for implementing
parsers for formal
languages. But NLs are not formal languages. (08)
Leo
> This is of course old-fashioned symbolic
computational linguistics,
> not new-fangled corpus-based computational
linguistics -- though
> of course both styles should be reconciled. (09)
I agree that any method that has had some
successful applications
should be taken into consideration. Most of the
successes of the
corpus-based methods come from processing large
amounts of actual
data -- instead of Chomsky's naval gazing. (010)
But their semantic representations are weak or
almost nonexistent. (011)
Rich
> can anyone shed some more light on why how and
what you would
> use a labeled deductive system for? (012)
For YAFMFNLP (Yet Another Formal Method For NLP).
Following is a
quotation from the last paragraph of the LDS paper
by Finger et al. (013)
FKGK
> The interpretation of natural language
expressions qua expressions is,
> as before, strictly syntactic -- a set of
metalevel procedures on the
> building of logical configurations. (014)
The formal system that devoted the longest, most
sustained effort
to this strategy is probably Ron Kaplan's group at
Xerox PARC, which
was spun off as PowerSet, which was bought by
Microsoft to enhance
the capabilities of Bing, and which was finally
disbanded as one
more formal failure. (015)
There were many very intelligent people working on
these systems,
who devoted many person-centuries to their
development. But none
of them can understand language as well as a
3-year-old child. (016)
I believe that the reason why is, or should be,
obvious: a child
(or an adult learning a second language) begins
with pragmatics,
then semantics, and finally syntax. Of the three,
syntax is of
the most value for understanding fine details.
But the main
points can be understood even with badly mangled
syntax. (017)
John (018)
__________________________________________________
_______________
Message Archives:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-f
orum/
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?WikiHomePa
ge#nid1J (019)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (020)
|