On Fri, May 4, 2012 14:04, Obrst, Leo J. wrote:
> The problem is that linguistic aspect [1] occludes our characterizing of
> ontology events, in addition to tense. The argument structure of the
> predicate largely remains the same. (01)
I thought that we were dealing with ontological issues, not NL issues. (02)
> The same notion linguistically often passes from one kind of event (e.g.,
> an action) to another (e.g., a state).
>
> John is marrying Sue on Sept. 28, 2003.
> John married Sue Sept. 28, 2003.
> John is still married to Sue.
> John was happily married to Sue.
> When John was married to Sue, he was a happy man.
> John's marriage to Sue ended on Nov. 23, 2010.
> John hasn't been married to Sue since Nov. 23, 2010. (03)
> When we nominalize the verb that (often) denotes the event (marry -->
> marriage), we typically change from an instantaneous occurrence (John and
> Sue were married at 11:30 am, Sept. 23, 2003) to a state (being married). (04)
>...
> Typically when verbs get nominalized they do transform from "action" (near
> instaneous) events to "states" (persistent), but differentiate in many
> ways, e.g., achievements, accomplishments, etc. [In the following, '*'
> means that it is anomalous or doesn't exist in typical language.] (05)
> Marry/Marriage
> Destroy/Destruction
> Annoy/Annoyance
> Kill/Killing/*Killage (though sometimes we use "the kill") (06)
What would the "state" be here? The state of being killed?
Killing is the cause of another state (death), so there is no
need to generate a new word to name that state. (07)
"The kill" does not refer to the state that exists after the shooting.
It can refer to the animal that was killed -- or to the event of killing.
I note that although the second word in the first three examples
can mean the event as well as the state, they are presented to
demonstrate that they can refer to the resulting state -- the state
that by definition exists after the action is finished. (08)
> Shoot/Shooting/*Shootage (though sometimes we use "the shoot") (09)
Here there is not necessarily a resultant state from a shooting event.
"I shot a bullet into the air; it fell to earth -- i know not where." Again,
"the shoot" does not refer to any resultant state, but in this case to a
competition of which the shooting event and many others were parts. (010)
The next three refer to the standard result state of the action.
> Suggest/Suggesting/Suggestion
> Report/Reporting/Report
> Vote/Voting/Vote
> (011)
-- doug f (012)
> Thanks,
> Leo
>
> [1] Aspect: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammatical_aspect.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Steve Ray
> Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 3:24 PM
> To: 'Mike Bennett'; 'Ontology Summit 2012 discussion'; 'Cory Casanave'
> Cc: simf-rfp@xxxxxxx; simfteam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] First Model Bench Challenge
>
> Mike, I agree. Those are the concepts I intended, I just used the wrong
> words (!)
>
> I was thinking we could label the concepts, such as marriage-e for the
> event
> and marriage-s for the state.
>
> Steven R. Ray, Ph.D.
> Distinguished Research Fellow
> Carnegie Mellon University
> NASA Research Park
> Building 23 (MS 23-11)
> P.O. Box 1
> Moffett Field, CA 94305-0001
> Email: steve.ray@xxxxxxxxxx
> Phone: (650) 587-3780
> Cell: (202) 316-6481
> Skype: steverayconsulting
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Bennett [mailto:mbennett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 12:11 PM
> To: steve.ray@xxxxxxxxxx; Ontology Summit 2012 discussion; 'Cory Casanave'
> Cc: simf-rfp@xxxxxxx; simfteam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [ontology-summit] First Model Bench Challenge
>
> I would tend to frame that in a slightly different way. We are talking
> about
> words and meanings, and it's clear from this example (and from some that
> we
> have been working on) that once you consider modeling meaningful concepts,
> there are not enough words to go around - natural language speakers use a
> lot of contextual stuff to disambiguate.
>
> So there are more concepts than words. Marriage as a transition and as a
> state is (as has been noted) a not untypical example. Commitments and
> obligations in transactions are another example we are grappling with
> right
> now (the commitment when the deal is struck and the
> commitment/obligation/whatever that persists until the deal is settled).
>
> To me it therefore makes more sense to speak not in terms of wanting to
> "model every interpretation of a concept" but rather "model every concept
> that a word may be used to represent" or "model every meaning of a word"
> or
> simply "model every concept" ... and then map these to the words.
>
> That is to say, I think it is misleading to refer to words as though they
> are concepts. They are not. They are symbols.
>
> And before anyone else says it, SBVR has a good formal treatment of the
> relationships between words and meanings, i.e. vocabulary / lexicon versus
> meaningful concepts.
>
> For those who speak more than one language, the concept (the meaning) is
> what you hold in your mind while seeking for the word in the language you
> are interpreting into. For those who don't, the nearest thing I can think
> of
> is that "it's on the tip of my tongue" moment when you know what you want
> to
> say but not the words in which to say it. I don't know if that helps.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Mike
>
> --
> Mike Bennett
> Head of Semantics and Standards
> EDM Council
> Tel: +44 20 7917 9522
> Cell: +44 7721 420 730
> www.edmcouncil.org
> Semantics Repository: www.hypercube.co.uk/edmcouncil
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Steve Ray
> Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 1:47 PM
> To: 'Ontology Summit 2012 discussion'; 'Cory Casanave'
> Cc: simf-rfp@xxxxxxx; simfteam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] First Model Bench Challenge
>
> I agree that the real value of this exercise is for us to dig as deep as
> we
> possibly can to model every conceivable interpretation of the concepts.
> This
> will give us a fantastic artifact for intercomparisons & round-robin
> exercises, as well as a great way to examine the different languages.
>
>
> Steven R. Ray, Ph.D.
> Distinguished Research Fellow
> Carnegie Mellon University
> NASA Research Park
> Building 23 (MS 23-11)
> P.O. Box 1
> Moffett Field, CA 94305-0001
> Email: steve.ray@xxxxxxxxxx
> Phone: (650) 587-3780
> Cell: (202) 316-6481
> Skype: steverayconsulting
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Paul Brown
> Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 6:58 AM
> To: Cory Casanave; Ontology Summit 2012 discussion
> Cc: simf-rfp@xxxxxxx; simfteam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] First Model Bench Challenge
>
> A likely scenario drawn from this discussion is one in which one party
> views
> the marriage as the event while another party views the marriage as the
> state. They are never going to agree on a common definition, because each
> has its own concept. Yet these two concepts are definitely related: One
> marks the point of state transition that is part of the other's model.
>
> I think this is illustrative of situations (pardon the double entendre) we
> are going to encounter in the real world!
>
> -- PCB
>
> ****************************************************************************
> **************
> Paul C. Brown
> Principal Software Architect
> TIBCO Software Inc.
> Email: pbrown@xxxxxxxxx Mobile: 518-424-5360
>
> "Total architecture is not a choice - it is a concession to reality."
> Visit www.total-architecture.com
> Architecture Books:
> -- Succeeding With SOA: Realizing Business Value Through Total
> Architecture
> -- Implementing SOA: Total Architecture In Practice
> -- TIBCO Architecture Fundamentals
>
> The SOA Manifesto: soa-manifesto.org
>
> Read the TIBCO blog: www.thetibcoblog.com
> ****************************************************************************
> **************
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cory Casanave [mailto:cory-c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 12:17 AM
> To: Ontology Summit 2012 discussion
> Cc: simfteam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; simf-rfp@xxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [ontology-summit] First Model Bench Challenge
>
> I would agree - there are 2 concepts under the label "Marriage", a
> situation
> and an event. The intent of the example in the web page is the situation
> but
> you may well also represent the event for extra credit!
> -Cory
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:ontology-summit- bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Hans
>> Polzer
>> Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 9:55 PM
>> To: 'Ontology Summit 2012 discussion'
>> Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] First Model Bench Challenge
>>
>> Isn't it both? Marriage is both a state transition (the rite that
>> signals the transition to a married state from an unmarried state),
>> and a steady state condition after the state transition occurs (as in
>> "their marriage has lasted for
>> 50 years"). The word "wedding" is often used to distinguish between
>> the state transition and the steady state condition, denoting the
>> former but not the latter (although common usage isn't always precise
>> on this point, as in "wedded bliss").
>>
>> Hans
>>
>> Hans
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jack
>> Ring
>> Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 8:44 PM
>> To: doug@xxxxxxxxxx; Ontology Summit 2012 discussion
>> Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] First Model Bench Challenge
>>
>> ??
>> Marriage is a situation in which a couple BECOMES married.") On Apr
>> 30, 2012, at 1:39 PM, doug foxvog wrote:
>>
>> > Marriage is a situation in which a couple is married.")
>>
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
>> Subscribe/Config:
>> http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
>> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/
>> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-
>> bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
>> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>>
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
>> Subscribe/Config:
>> http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
>> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/
>> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-
>> bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
>> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
> Subscribe/Config:
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2411/4971 - Release Date: 05/01/12
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
> Subscribe/Config:
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2411/4971 - Release Date: 05/01/12
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
> Subscribe/Config:
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
> Subscribe/Config:
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> (013)
_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ (014)
|