- From: Armando Stellato <stellato@uniroma2.it>
- Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2017 09:29:25 +0000
- To: "public-ontolex@w3.org" <public-ontolex@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <AM4PR1001MB1410C852942E2A66C6A0398EC7180@AM4PR1001MB1410.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.>
Dear all, I was caught by the deskmate syndrome: while explaining something about Ontolex to a colleague, had the occasion to revise the specs and noticed something that doesn't add up to me. In particular, I think the definition of LexicalConcept goes against its original intention (and intension). Taken from the specs in: http://www.w3.org/2016/05/ontolex/#lexical-concept "[...] sometimes we would like to express the fact that a certain lexical entry evokes<http://www.w3.org/2016/05/ontolex/#evokes> a certain mental concept rather than that it refers to a class with a formal interpretation in some model. Thus, in lemon we introduce the class Lexical Concept<http://www.w3.org/2016/05/ontolex/#LexicalConcept> that represents a mental abstraction, concept or unit of thought that can be lexicalized by a given collection of senses. I disagree on the "can be lexicalized". The LexicalConcept was introduced to express the very nature of those elements that are created with a semasiological approach, that is: you have a lexical expression, and you create a concept representing the meaning of that word. Concepts created with an onomasiological approach (i.e. I know XXX exists, and then I look for the words referring to it), as in thesauri, are not LexicalConcepts. I remember that I suggested the name LexicalConcept, borrowing it from Miller [1], with a clear hint to WordNet synsets (but providing a more general name), which are created a-posteriori to provide meanings to the words in the WordNet lexical database. Thus, a synset in WordNet is a ontolex:LexicalConcept, a concept in Agrovoc is (should be?) just a skos:Concept, and the we should invert the definition to express the fact that LexicalConcepts provide meaning to existing Lexical Entries. Cheers, Armando P.S I might be not recalling some other discussion or the rationale for which LexicalConcept was changed to be this way, but I wondered it could just have been an inexact definition given a posteriori when we were writing the specs. [1] George A. Miller and Richard Beckwith and Christiane Fellbaum and Derek Gross and Katherine Miller. Introduction to WordNet: An On-line Lexical Database. International Journal of Lexicography, 1990.
Received on Wednesday, 19 April 2017 09:30:00 UTC