Re: Summary of Telco 07.02.2014

Hi,

The image looks good, but I wonder why you limit interlingual variants to
only semantic variants... is it not possible to have interlingual lexical
variants, e.g., "has cognate"?

Regards,
John


On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 7:16 AM, Philipp Cimiano <
cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de> wrote:

>  Dear Elena, all,
>
>  I have created a diagram (attached) that in my view summarizes the
> current state of our agreement.
>
> Elena/all: please let me know if this is not the case.
>
> Please also check the definitions on the wiki on InterlingualVariants and
> let me know if this corresponds to your understanding expressed below.
>
> Talk to you tomorrow!
>
> Philipp.
>
> 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?
> 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...
> 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... :)
>    - 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.
>
> 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, Españawww.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, Españawww.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
>
>