| To: | <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| From: | "FERENC KOVACS" <f.kovacs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 6 Jul 2009 12:25:43 +0100 |
| Message-id: | <8BC8727F6A63461F954B67A2856442D6@Swindon > |
In my view Formal Logic and formal (what you call semantic) analysis (syntax parsing) of NLs, as that of the English language as it is done now by ontologists and MT champions is a misleading practice, rather than reliable scientific (sensible) endevaour with respect to creating any imperoperability between ontology terms. The reasons are simple and easy to identify as i am trying to illustrate below.
In using natural languages most communication actors heavily realy on your knowledge of the environment, that is the meaning and the context of the verbal input available only through staged in a number of layers, including the text itself, various definitions, the knowledge of the participants, the time of reading, etc.
They also rely on our basic attitude to seek sense and correct whatever deficiencies need to becorrected to change a verbal input to make sense. This stems from the confidence of normaly bred children in the adult world and that life is something with a purpose. So any disambiguities like this: ?see results of a search in calendar view? would be rephrased as 1) please check the calendar view to see the results of your search or 2) check out the results of a search performed in calendar view subject to the knowledge of the recepient.
In MT and the software used by translator agencie where TMs are produced by mechanically chunking texts taken from textual data bases for instance, and decontextualizing them just as the headwords are in dictionaries, nowadays you tend to get very funny fragments that make no senses at all.
First, some of the languages are non indo-European, so for those speakers any such decompositional exercise which produces "of the" in a cell of a table is a nightmare, and whoever assembles them again will get nonsense. Similar story concerns parameters. In a single sentence you may have as many as three different parameters all marked as.% (like in %s on %s is %s) in that order. Now unless you tag the parameters, you will suck there in translation or real semantic interpretation. English speaking journalist take pleasure in creating paradox sounding headers and titles, such as
About 235,000 Americans have their
portraits taken by professional
photographers every day.
We guarantee to
replace all defected parts.
Japanese Race Appears Reduced to Three.
He
likes to watch the sun go down on horseback.
Congress Votes for Running
Trains Over Union Workers.
City Gets 250,000ドル to Combat Drug Program.
Keep
Drinking Water From Sewage.
Doctors discovered his ankle had been fractured
in five places during
Surgery.
She was one of eight children born to
Walter and Irene Smith on
Feb.13, 1892.
The building is a home for
underprivileged children under
construction.
Food Stamp Recipients Turn to
Plastic.
Police Officers Complete Crime Course.
Lung Disorders
Meeting.
and the best f all of
And so on.
Such utterances illustrate that semantic analysis does not work through syntax only, and the underlying FOL as used today is incorrect, incomplete and inadequate, just as Formal Logic is for the semantic analysis of natural languages. I do not doubt that it is a bitter tablet, but surely one day you will have to swallow it.No to mention some other basic facts that the human mind is interpreted to consist of reason, emotion and will, of which will is in control and whatever reason or reasoning is to produce may be strongly transformed by the impact of emotion.
Regards,
Frank
_________________________________________________________________ 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 To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (01)
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Conjunction and Disjunction , Rich Cooper |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [ontolog-forum] FW: Semantic Web: 'IT Ontology' at groups.drupal.org , Ed Dodds |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [ontolog-forum] History of AI and Commercial Data Processing , Ed Barkmeyer |
| Next by Thread: | [ontolog-forum] FW: Semantic Web: 'IT Ontology' at groups.drupal.org , Ed Dodds |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |