Rich and Frank,  (01)
RC> ... is this a misspelling and you meant IS NOT?  (02)
I'm sorry. I meant to type "no" and I accidentally hit an
extra "w". Following is what I had intended to write:  (03)
JFS>> In any case, a child can learn language far better and
>> faster than any computer system today, and there is no
>> evidence that the child has much, if any built-in ontology.  (04) 
FK> I am not sure if that knowledge in a kid is an ontology of
> any kind created today on the current knowledge of humankind.  (05) 
I agree. It would be misleading to call it 'ontology'.  (06)
FK> We always forget that knowledge is also procedural, and it
> is in that form what we are all after...  (07) 
I agree. But children do use metalevel language about language
quite early. For example, see the following quotation from a
3-year-old child named Laura:  (08)
 "When I was a little girl, I could go 'geek geek' like that.
 But now I can go, 'This is a chair.' "  (09)
Somehow, Laura has learned a lot in those three years, but I
would hesitate to overanalyze or overclassify it.  (010)
What I would say, however, is that I wish I could design a
computer system that could do that.  (011)
John  (012)
_________________________________________________________________
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  (013)