ontology-summit
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontology-summit] Language, Cognition, and AI

To: "'Ontology Summit 2015 discussion'" <ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Rich Cooper" <metasemantics@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 08:12:55 -0700
Message-id: <012501d0a459$181f6660$485e3320$@com>
Wow!  What a vast reading and watching list on language and emotion 
related issues in AI.  Thanks!  It will take me a while to catch up 
though with this much stuff.    (01)

Presently, I have digested Gaerdenfors' paper on conceptual spaces. 
The various physiological gradients he points out are compelling 
evidence, and his thoughts about mapping one conversant with 
another (instead of with the usual "reality", which is usually left 
undefined for ideological purposes).    (02)

The mapping from conversant to conversant is quite messy, IMHO, and 
though it makes some sense in an abstract way, I believe the 
mapping is a whole lot more complex than he describes.  Yet his 
description is the best one I have seen yet for matching, paltry 
though the topic is.    (03)

Sincerely,    (04)

Rich Cooper,    (05)

Chief Technology Officer,
MetaSemantics Corporation
MetaSemantics AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com
( 9 4 9 ) 5 2 5-5 7 1 2
http://www.EnglishLogicKernel.com    (06)


-----Original Message-----
From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John 
F Sowa
Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2015 7:34 AM
To: Ontology Summit 2012 discussion
Subject: [ontology-summit] Language, Cognition, and AI    (07)

The fruit-fly thread raised many issues.  I'd like to cite some 
URLs for further background.  The first is a Ted page about the way 
language affects thinking and a talk about how babies learn and 
generalize:    (08)

http://ideas.ted.com/5-examples-of-how-the-languages-we-speak-can-affect-the-way-we-think/?utm_source=pocket&utm_campaign=fftutorial    (09)

The note by Jessica Gross discusses evidence from English vs 
Chinese, Australian Aboriginal languages, Spanish, Japanese, Zuņi, 
Russian, Hebrew, and Finnish.  Her note includes pointers to a Ted 
talk and some articles that go into more detail.    (010)

The Ted talk by Laura Schulz includes short video clips about the 
way babies generalize from examples of toys and how they quickly 
reach for the toys to test their hypotheses:    (011)

http://www.ted.com/talks/laura_schulz_the_surprisingly_logical_minds_of_babies    (012)


She does not believe that computer systems with the learning 
ability of young children will be developed within the lifetimes of 
herself or anyone in the audience.  Given other research in AI and 
cognitive science, I agree.  But I also believe that more can be 
done in AI.
That's the theme of http://www.jfsowa.com/talks/micai.pdf    (013)

I also heard an NPR interview with Franz de Waal, who has written 
several very good books about chimpanzees, bonobos, and humans.
For the interview and a Ted talk "Do animals have morals", see 
http://www.npr.org/2014/08/15/338936897/do-animals-have-morals    (014)

For a study of emotions, the apes are more relevant than fruit 
flies.
And the video clips in the Ted talk are hilarious.  For more, this 
page also points to other Ted talks on the theme "Animals and Us".    (015)

Among the linguists who present a "big picture" of how language, 
cognition and AI are related, Michael Halliday is one of the best.
For a review of a book by Halliday and his colleague Christian 
Matthiessen, see http://www.jfsowa.com/pubs/halliday.pdf    (016)

Among other things, Halliday was a co-founder of CLRU (Cambridge 
Language Research Unit).  The researchers in CLRU were among the 
pioneers in computational linguistics.  Another co-founder and one 
of leaders of CLRU for many years was Margaret Masterman.  The 
following review of her collected papers summarizes the issues:    (017)

    http://www.jfsowa.com/pubs/mmb_rev.htm    (018)

A 2010 conference on "Language Evolving" brought together some 
prominent researchers.  Their talks are available on YouTube.
Terry Deacon summarized the genetic mechanisms in evolution:    (019)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OT-zZ0PMqgI    (020)

The first 50 minutes address the effects of random mutations and 
"natural" selection on primates, dogs vs. wolves, the songs of wild 
vs. domesticated finches, etc.  The last 15 minutes + questions 
apply the principles to language and the debate about some "magic 
mutation"
that suddenly gave humans the ability to speak modern languages.    (021)

Short summary:  If the hypothesis of a magic mutation were true, it 
would be a strong proof for the existence of God and His work in 
(a) causing language and (b) preserving it from degradation.    (022)

In 2012, Noam Chomsky gave a talk about "Language and other 
cognitive
processes":  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6i_W6Afed2k    (023)

Chomsky gets into issues about evolution around the 18-minute mark.
He dismisses arguments (such as Deacon's) as "pop psychology".  He 
claims that language is unique and could not have evolved by 
incremental changes.  Therefore, there must have been a "magic 
mutation". For more, the side bar on the YouTube page points to 
many other talks by Chomsky.    (024)

Following is a talk by Halliday in 2010 on "Language evolving:
Some systemic-functional reflections on the history of meaning".
He doesn't use slides, but he presents many fascinating points 
about the developments in languages during recorded history, which 
means mainly written language.    (025)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nC-blhaIUCk    (026)

And following is a talk by Mattheissen, on "Language evolving:
Notes towards a semiotic history of humanity":    (027)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U15qHWJcfT4    (028)

On the right hand side of the YouTube pages are links to many 
related talks, including a few that support Chomsky and many more 
that disagree.    (029)

These talks aren't as much fun as watching the animals and babies, 
but they're informative.    (030)

Fundamental issue:  Don't expect any simple theory or mechanism to 
explain and relate all these very complex phenomena.  We don't have 
to worry about computers taking over the world -- at least not in 
the 21st century.    (031)

John    (032)

_________________________________________________________________
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/OntologySummit2015/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog-02.cim3.net/wiki/OntologySummit2015
Community Portal: http://ontolog-02.cim3.net/wiki/    (033)

_________________________________________________________________
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/OntologySummit2015/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog-02.cim3.net/wiki/OntologySummit2015  
Community Portal: http://ontolog-02.cim3.net/wiki/     (01)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>