Re: Summary of Telco 07.02.2014

Hi Elena,

see below

Am 13.02.14 13:13, schrieb Elena Montiel Ponsoda:
> Dear Philipp,
>
> Thanks for the updates.
> I have direclty modified the text in the specification (maybe I should 
> not?), but we can still reconsider this...
> On the one hand, I thought it is important to specify already at the 
> introduction that there is one type of variation that is established 
> between LexicalEntries (i.e., define LexicalVariants), how do you see it?

Yes fine, I should remove the restriction from Variants that requires 
LexicalSense, I will do it now.
> On the other, I was not so happy with the "terminology" used when 
> dealing with cross-lingual variants, specifically when stating that 
> Translations are literal translations...
Fair enough, if the idea is removing "literal" I am agnostic ;-)

> From the Translation discipline perspective, this would be 
> problematic, IMHO.
>
>   * I think we should refer to them as Translations or Interlingual
>     variants (in general). That is what people interested in
>     multilinguality will be looking for, I think. If you think that
>     the MultiWordNet community would be happier with Inter-lingual
>     variant is fine, but the translation or terminology community will
>     be looking for "translation". Would it be feasible to keep both
>     denominations? Since this is a lexicon model (for ontologies, of
>     course, but still we are at the lexical level), I would be
>     inclined to think that the most appropriate term is translation,
>     but I am open to change my mind... :)
>

OK, so why not having "InterlingualVariant" as a subClass of 
"TermVariant" (instead of TerminologyVariant) and then
Translation and CulturalEquivalent and "CulturalParaphase" as subclasses 
of InterlingualVariant.

Would that be appropriate?



>   * As for the types of translation we may account for, I would talk
>     of "equivalents", but not identify "translations" exclusivly and
>     explicitly with "literal translations". I was trying to make this
>     clear during out last telco, but maybe I failed... :) That is why
>     I was proposing direct equivalents, to distinguish them from
>     cultural equivalents.
>
Fair enough, if you are arguing for dropping the "literal" I am fine.

> As for the question in your e-mail referring to "paraphrase", yes, I 
> think we could put it that way...
> Best,
> Elena
>
> El 13/02/2014 10:02, Philipp Cimiano escribió:
>> Hi Elena, all,
>>
>>  I have updated the wiki reflecting the discussion of last week; 
>> however, I have not introduced SenseRelations explicitly yet. I am 
>> not sure we should.
>>
>> In any case, we agree in principle on the categories mentioned by you 
>> Elena, but I have one question on the lexical equivalent: this is 
>> essentially a paraphrase, right?
>>
>> Philipp.
>>
>> Am 07.02.14 17:27, schrieb Elena Montiel Ponsoda:
>>> Dear John,
>>>
>>> Thanks for the summary (Philipp, do not stay away... we missed 
>>> you... ;)).
>>>
>>> Regarding the Translation part, I think we had a nice discussion, 
>>> but we need to work a little bit more on that.
>>> I tend to think of Term Variants as within the same language 
>>> (intra-lingua), and Translations between languages (inter-lingua). 
>>> For this reason, I am not so sure I would like to consider 
>>> Translation a Term Variant, but I will further think about it... :)
>>>
>>> In a paper we at UPM just got accepted at the LREC conference, we 
>>> were proposing 3 different types of *translation equivalents*.
>>>
>>>  1. *direct equivalent *(what people normally understad as "pure
>>>     translation"): The two terms describe semantically equivalent
>>>     entities that refer to entities that exist in both cultures and
>>>     languages. E.g. surrogate mother, madre de alquiler, mère
>>>     porteuse. It is true that they could further be considered
>>>     *dimensional variants*, since each language/culture emphasizes a
>>>     different aspect of the concept.
>>>  2. *cultural equivalent*: Typically, the two terms describe
>>>     entities that are not semantically but pragmatically equivalent,
>>>     since they describe similar situations in different cultures and
>>>     languages. E.g., “Ecole Normal” (FR) 
 “Teachers college” (EN).
>>>     The Prime Minister and Busdeskanzler example would also be valid
>>>     here. And I think this is the type of *link or cross-lingual
>>>     alignment you would use in **Interlingual Indexes for WordNets
>>>     when no "direct equivalent" in available*.
>>>  3. *lexical equivalent*: It is said of those terms in different
>>>     languages that usually point to the same entity, but one of the
>>>     verbalizes the original term by using target language words.
>>>     E.g., “Ecole Normal” (FR) 
 “(French) Normal School” (EN). The
>>>     concept of Normal School does not exist in England, but English
>>>     people have verbalized it in English.
>>>
>>>
>>> Does it make sense?
>>> We will also work on this and update the wiki with examples/code 
>>> accordingly.
>>> Have a nice weekend!
>>> Elena.
>>>
>>> El 07/02/2014 16:59, Philipp Cimiano escribió:
>>>> Dear all,
>>>>
>>>> very nice, it seems that the telco was very productive without me, 
>>>> I should consider staying away now and then ;-)
>>>>
>>>> I will work this into the current document next week.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>>
>>>> Philipp.
>>>>
>>>> Am 07.02.14 16:29, schrieb John P. McCrae:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> So today at the telco we had myself, Paul, Francesca, Elena and Lupe.
>>>>>
>>>>> We discussed based on Philipp's proposal
>>>>>
>>>>>     I propose we go with the following four variants + translation:
>>>>>     1) FormVariant: Relation between two forms of one lexical entry
>>>>>     2) LexicalVariant: Relation between two lexical entries that
>>>>>     are related by some well-defined string-operation (e.g.
>>>>>     creating an initialism like in FAO)
>>>>>     3) TerminlogicalVariant: Relation between two lexical senses
>>>>>     (with the same reference) of two lexical entries; the lexical
>>>>>     entries are thus uniquely determined; the senses might have
>>>>>     different contextual and pragmatic conditions (register, etc.)
>>>>>     4) SemanticVariant: As 3) Relation between senses with
>>>>>     references that are ontologically related, either by
>>>>>     subsumption or are children of a common superconcept (see my
>>>>>     paella and risotto example)
>>>>>     5) Translation: As with 3), but involving entries from
>>>>>     different languages.
>>>>>     So we would have one relation between forms (FormVariant), one
>>>>>     relation between lexical entries (LexicalVariant), and three
>>>>>     relations at the sense level (TerminologicalVariant,
>>>>>     SemanticVariant and Translation).
>>>>>     We might think about introducing a SenseRelation as a
>>>>>     superclass of TerminologicalVariant, SemanticVariant and
>>>>>     Translation. Hypernym and Hyponym would also be a
>>>>>     SenseRelation in this sense.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The discussion was as follows:
>>>>> *
>>>>> *
>>>>> *Form variants*: We discussed the need to distinguish form 
>>>>> (inflectional) variants as opposed to lexical (entry) variants. 
>>>>> The primary reason for this was to separate variation between 
>>>>> LexicalEntrys and Form (as defined in the core). It was felt that 
>>>>> the distinction between form and lexical variant was too 
>>>>> fine-grained and that the modelling of this as variants is 
>>>>> probably not appropriate. For example, if we consider
>>>>>
>>>>> :Cat a LexicalEntry
>>>>>   ontolex:canonicalForm :Cat#CanonicalForm (writtenRep "cat"@eng),
>>>>>   ontolex:otherForm :Cat#PluralForm  (writtenRep "cats"@eng) .
>>>>>
>>>>> Then modelling the relationship as
>>>>>
>>>>> :Cat#CanonicalForm ontolex:plural :Cat#PluralForm
>>>>>
>>>>> is inferior to (especially in the case that there are large number 
>>>>> of inflections of a single lemma, such as an Italian verb)
>>>>>
>>>>> :Cat#CanonicalForm ontolex:number ontolex:singular .
>>>>> :Cat#PluralForm ontolex:number ontolex:plural .
>>>>>
>>>>> For these reasons, it was preferred not to introduce form variants
>>>>>
>>>>> *Term(inological)Variants/SemanticVariant: *We agreed with the 
>>>>> idea of introducing a superclass SenseRelation subsuming both 
>>>>> TermVariants and SemanticVariants as follows
>>>>>
>>>>>   * TermVariants have the same reference (e.g., diachronic,
>>>>>     diatopic etc.)
>>>>>   * SemanticVariants have different references (e.g., antonymy,
>>>>>     "similar", (maybe?) hypernymy)
>>>>>
>>>>> It was also suggested to shorten the name TerminologicalVariant to 
>>>>> TermVariant
>>>>>
>>>>> *Translation: *We discussed the idea of distinguishing between 
>>>>> (Lemma/Term) *Translation* and *Culturally-Equivalent Translation 
>>>>> *by saying *Translation * is a *TermVariant * and 
>>>>> *Culturally-Equivalent Translation* is a *Semantic Variant.*
>>>>> It was suggested that we consider introducing a class 
>>>>> *MultilingualVariant** subsuming *Translation *and*C.E.T. *and 
>>>>> subsumed by *SenseRelation, *for relations between languages, this 
>>>>> would also include broader/narrower cross-lingual alignments as 
>>>>> used in Interlingual Indexes for WordNets etc.
>>>>> * or cross-lingual variant or inter-lingual variant
>>>>>
>>>>> I attach a diagram to show the proposal
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> John
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>>
>>>> Prof. Dr. Philipp Cimiano
>>>>
>>>> Phone: +49 521 106 12249
>>>> Fax: +49 521 106 12412
>>>> Mail:cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de
>>>>
>>>> Forschungsbau Intelligente Systeme (FBIIS)
>>>> Raum 2.307
>>>> Universität Bielefeld
>>>> Inspiration 1
>>>> 33619 Bielefeld
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Elena Montiel-Ponsoda
>>> Ontology Engineering Group (OEG)
>>> Departamento de Inteligencia Artificial
>>> Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros Informáticos
>>> Campus de Montegancedo s/n
>>> Boadilla del Monte-28660 Madrid, España
>>> www.oeg-upm.net
>>> Tel. (+34) 91 336 36 70
>>> Fax  (+34) 91 352 48 19
>>
>>
>> -- 
>>
>> Prof. Dr. Philipp Cimiano
>>
>> Phone: +49 521 106 12249
>> Fax: +49 521 106 12412
>> Mail:cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de
>>
>> Forschungsbau Intelligente Systeme (FBIIS)
>> Raum 2.307
>> Universität Bielefeld
>> Inspiration 1
>> 33619 Bielefeld
>
> -- 
> Elena Montiel-Ponsoda
> Ontology Engineering Group (OEG)
> Departamento de Inteligencia Artificial
> Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros Informáticos
> Campus de Montegancedo s/n
> Boadilla del Monte-28660 Madrid, España
> www.oeg-upm.net
> Tel. (+34) 91 336 36 70
> Fax  (+34) 91 352 48 19


-- 

Prof. Dr. Philipp Cimiano

Phone: +49 521 106 12249
Fax: +49 521 106 12412
Mail: cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de

Forschungsbau Intelligente Systeme (FBIIS)
Raum 2.307
Universität Bielefeld
Inspiration 1
33619 Bielefeld