Actually, the sound of language isn't just a subtle thing - it's
foundational. Language is sounds first, and letters second (or third/fourth
historically).
And the sounds aren't just sounds - they express emotions about what is
being said. Not just emphases per one earlier post.
You could in
On 5/7/08, Mike Tintner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> YKY : Logic can deal with almost everything, depending on how much effort
> you put in it =)
>
> "LES sanglots longs. des violons. de l'automne.
> Blessent mon cour d'une langueur monotone."
>
> You don't just read those words, (and most words),
YKY : Logic can deal with almost everything, depending on how much effort
you put in it =)
"LES sanglots longs. des violons. de l'automne.
Blessent mon cour d'une langueur monotone."
You don't just read those words, (and most words), you hear them. How's
logic going to hear them?
"YOY YKY?"
rcher
http://texai.org/blog
http://texai.org
3008 Oak Crest Ave.
Austin, Texas, USA 78704
512.791.7860
- Original Message
From: YKY (Yan King Yin) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 7, 2008 2:30:11 PM
Subject: Re: [agi] standard way to represent NL in l
On 5/7/08, Stephen Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have not heard about Rus form. Could you provide a link or reference?
This is one of the papers:
http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/cache/papers/cs/22812/http:zSzzSzwww.seas.smu.eduzSz~vasilezSzictai2001.pdf/rus01high.pdf
you can find some example
YKY,
The "Rus form" is also a popular logical form, have you heard of it?
I think it is complete in the sense that all English (or NL) sentences
can be represented in it, but the drawback is that it's somewhat
indirect.
I have not heard about Rus form. Could you provide a link or reference?
Che
On 5/7/08, Stephen Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> To my knowledge there is a standard style but there is of course no standard
> ontology. Roughly the standard style is First Order Predicate Calculus
> (FOPC) and within the linguistics community this is called logical form. For
> reference
On 5/7/08, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No. But it hasn't stopped people from trying.
>
> The meaning of sentences and even paragraphs depends on context that is
> not captured in logic. Consider the following examples, where a different
> word is emphasized in each case:
>
> - I di
Hi YKY,
To my knowledge there is a standard style but there is of course no standard
ontology. Roughly the standard style is First Order Predicate Calculus (FOPC)
and within the linguistics community this is called logical form. For
reference see James Allen's Natural Language Understanding,
--- "YKY (Yan King Yin)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there any standard (even informal) way of representing NL sentences
> in logic?
No. But it hasn't stopped people from trying.
The meaning of sentences and even paragraphs depends on context that is
not captured in logic. Consider the fo
10 matches
Mail list logo
