Re: Term decomposition in OntoLex

Hi,

No I don't see a better way... thanks for the suggestion!

Regards,
John


On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 10:04 AM, christina unger <
cunger@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de> wrote:

>
> Hi John,
>
> I like it!
>
> Is there anything that disallows (or discourages) "identifies" to link
> components to arguments as well? As you know, I think it's important that
> it's possible to capture discontinuous decompositions like "has <#arg>
> inhabitants", e.g. as follows:
>
> haveInhabitants#Root syntax:constituent
>   [ a :VP ; syntax:constituent
>     [ a :V ; syntax:identifies :have ] ,
>     [ a :NUM ; syntax:identifies <#arg> ] ,
>     [ a :N ; lexinfo:number lexinfo:plural ; syntax:identifies :inhabitant
> ]
>   ] .
>
> Or should there be another way to do this?
>
> Regards,
> Christina
>
>
>
> On 01/17/2014 06:27 PM, John P. McCrae wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
>  I wrote a section on representation of term decomposition here
>
>
> http://www.w3.org/community/ontolex/wiki/Syntax_and_Semantics_Module#Term_Decomposition
>
>  The summary is that I propose we introduce a class called *Component*,
> which represents a part of a lexical entry. We link lexical entries to
> components by means of a *constituent* property, and if the component can
> be represented by a lexical entry we say the component *identifies (is
> identified by?) *that entry. For convenience, there is a property *subterm
> *that shortcuts the chain to allow an entry to entry linking. Finally we
> allow components to be constituents of other components to enable the
> representation of general phrase structures.
>
>  Any comments?
>
>  Regards,
> John
>
>
>
> --
> Christina Unger, PhD
> AG Semantic Computing
> Universität Bielefeld
>
> Office: CITEC 2.311
> Phone: 0521 106 12224
>
>