Re: vartrans module finished

Dear Lupe,

  thanks for your comments, see below...

Have a good weekend!

Philipp.


Am 03.07.15 um 17:24 schrieb Guadalupe Aguado de Cea:
>
> *
> *
>
> *Dear Philipp and all,*
>
> *Some typos and comments spotted. The typos in yellow, the comments in 
> blue*
>
> *1. In Class:Lexico-Semantic Relation*
>
> *subClassOf*: relates exactly 2 (ontolex:LexicalEntry OR ontolex: 
> LexicalSense). Blank space after the colon
>

Indeed, I have changed this.
>
> 2. In class: Sense relation: The following examples gives an example 
> of a sense relation:
>
OK, changed.

> 3. This equivalence can be expressed at different, form an ontological 
> point of view, increasingly strong ways: It seems that some words have 
> been left out.
>
I have changed this into:

"From an ontological point of view, the translation relation can be 
expressed in the following ways of increasing ontological/strength/:"

Is that better?

> 4. but the meaning are equivalent because,
>
OK, corrected.

> *5. Translation:*In this cases, the lexical entries might not denote
>
Thanks. Corrected

> 6. we do not need other machinery than introduce already above, 
> Wouldn't it be
>
> we do not need other machinery than the one introduced already above?
>

Yes, that is what I meant. Corrected.
>
> *7. Shared reference:* In this case two lexical entries of two 
> different languages are equivalent from an ontological point of view. 
> They might not be translations in a strict sense, but the meaning are 
> equivalent because, given the concepts and meaning distinctions 
> introduced by a given ontology, the denotation of these lexical 
> entries is the same.
>
> Comment. If we see the example with surrogate mother and its 
> equivalent in German, wouldn't it be better to say *:* In this case 
> two lexical entries of two different languages are equivalent from an 
> ontological point of view. They might notrealize the concept 
> linguistically with the same labels, but the meanings are equivalent 
> because, given the concepts and meaning distinctions introduced by a 
> given ontology, the denotation of both lexical entries is the same.
>

Actually I like it. Thanks for this. I changed this slightly as follows:

In this case, the denotations of two lexical entries of two different 
languages are equivalent from an ontological point of view. They might 
express the exact same meaning from a linguistic perspective, but the 
meanings are equivalent because, given the concepts and meaning 
distinctions introduced by a given ontology, the denotation of both 
lexical entries is equivalent.

> 8. whic relates two senses that can be regarded as equivalent. This 
> was also spotted by Jorge. I suppose you have it in mind
>
Yes, corrected already.
>
> 9. The following sentence is before ObjectProperty:translation and it 
> seems that some words have been deleted / or added, and it is not clear
>
> Comment.Besides the classTranslation 
> <https://www.w3.org/community/ontolex/wiki/Final_Model_Specification#Translation>that 
> reifies the translation relation between two lexical senses, as a 
> shortcut the model also allows to directly express the relation of 
> translation between lexical senses by a propertytranslation 
> <https://www.w3.org/community/ontolex/wiki/Final_Model_Specification#translation>that 
> is regarded as equivalent to the reification:
>
I think the main problem here is that there was a comma missing, is it 
clearer now:

" Besides the classTranslation 
<https://www.w3.org/community/ontolex/wiki/Final_Model_Specification#Translation>, 
which reifies the translation relation between two lexical senses, as a 
shortcut the model also allows to directly express the relation of 
translation between lexical senses by a propertytranslation 
<https://www.w3.org/community/ontolex/wiki/Final_Model_Specification#translation>that 
is regarded as equivalent to the reification:"

> 10, The*translation*property relates two lexical senses of two lexical 
> entries that stand in atranslation relation 
> <https://www.w3.org/community/ontolex/wiki/Final_Model_Specification#Translation>twoeach 
> other.
>

OK, corrected.

> 11. In the following sentence : The*translatableAs*property relates a 
> lexical entry to a lexical entry that it can be translated as 
> depending on the particular context and specific senses of the 
> involved lexical entries.
>
> Comment.I think I would add "relates a lexical entry in one language 
> to a lexical entry in another
>
OK, done.

> 12. With respect to, *subPropertyOf*: senseRel
>
> *PropertyChain*: source^-1 o translation_reflex o target (with 
> Translation equivalentClass ObjectHasSelf translation_reflex ).
>
> Comment.Does this axiom indicate that one lexical entry is Always the 
> translation of another lexical entry in a different language ?
>
No, it is supposed to indicate that translation(x,y) holds iff and only 
if there exists a t such that Translation(t) and source(t,x) and target(t,y)

The axiom this relates the property translation to the class Translation 
essentially.

> What then, if we have: En: wildlife ( equivalent in Spanish flora AND 
> fauna)
>
> Es: flora= plants and vegetation life or plant life (we cannot say 
> that the equivalent is wildlife, since half of the denotational 
> meaning is left out, the animals.
>
> So, would that axiom reflect this situation?
>
> 13. In relation to. zip code and the German equivalent, the sentence 
> proposed by Philipp , in my opinion will suffice.
> "Thus, in spite of using different concepts as references, both 
> ''Postleitzahl'' and ''zip code'' are translations of each other."
>
OK.
>
> Comment.And even more, by pointing to different concepts they could be 
> considered as cultural equivalents from the translation viewpoint, 
> since the organization of each culture and language (English and 
> German) may be different but pragmatically they have the same 
> denotational meaning
>

Hmmm... I am not fully sure about the implications of this sentence, but 
I added it for now ;-)


>
> Have a nice week end!
> Lupe
>
>
>
> El 03/07/2015 a las 16:28, Jorge Gracia escribió:
>> 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 
>> <mailto: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/
>
>
> -- 
> Guadalupe Aguado de Cea
> Departamento de Lingüística Aplicada
> Miembro del Ontology Engineering Group -OEG
> Facultad de Informática
> Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
> Campus de Montegancedo, sn
> 28660, Boadilla del Monte, Spain
>
> Home page:www.oeg-upm.net
> e-mail:guadalupe.aguado@upm.es
> Telef.: 34-91-3367415
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Avast logo <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>  
>
> El software de antivirus Avast ha analizado este correo electrónico en 
> busca de virus.
> www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
>
>

-- 
--
Prof. Dr. Philipp Cimiano
AG Semantic Computing
Exzellenzcluster für Cognitive Interaction Technology (CITEC)
Universität Bielefeld

Tel: +49 521 106 12249
Fax: +49 521 106 6560
Mail: cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de

Office CITEC-2.307
Universitätsstr. 21-25
33615 Bielefeld, NRW
Germany