Re: vartrans module finished

Dear Philipp,

Thanks for your answer. Just one comment about definitions

2015-07-03 16:07 GMT+02:00 Philipp Cimiano <cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>
:

> * The definition of "Lexical Relation" seems insufficient to me. Can we
> complete it with the paragraph that are before the examples (or part of
> it)?, i.e., "By lexical relations, we understand those relations at the
> surface forms, mainly motivated by grammatical requirements, style
> (Wortklang), and linguistic economy (helping to avoid excessive
> denominative repetition and improving textual coherence)".
>
>
> Well, the thing is: examples should not be part of the definition. Even
> more that we are sometimes debating the examples ourselves (see my email to
> Elena and Lupe on the issue that some of the examples given are not
> relations between lexical entries but between forms). This is why the
> examples come right after the definition but are not part of it. I think
> anyone needs to decided what counts as a relation between lexical entries
> and what is a relation at the sense level.
>

In some sense the current definition "A lexical relation is a
lexico-semantic relation that represents the relation between two lexical
entries that are related by some lexical relation" is a tautology, that is,
does not clarify our intended meaning because we reuse the notion of
lexical relation to define lexical relation: "a lexical relation is... a
lexical relation" :-p
I am not asking to include the examples in the definition, but to add the
part containing "we understand those relations at the surface forms mainly
motivated by grammatical requirements, style..." to make clearer the
difference with semantic relations

Regards,
Jorge



-- 
Jorge Gracia, PhD
Ontology Engineering Group
Artificial Intelligence Department
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
http://jogracia.url.ph/web/