- From: Francis Bond <bond@ieee.org>
- Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 21:34:21 +0800
- To: Julia Bosque Gil <jbosque@fi.upm.es>
- Cc: John McCrae <john@mccr.ae>, Philipp Cimiano <cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>, Katrien Depuydt <Katrien.Depuydt@ivdnt.org>, "public-ontolex@w3.org" <public-ontolex@w3.org>
G'day, here is a brief discussion of the structure of an Indonesian Lexicon: the relevant point here is that most entries are based around a root, which has a vague meaning and no POS, and then has senses, derived words and compounds which will typically have a POS, definition and so forth. Here is a paper describing it: the structure is show on p517 https://elex.link/elex2017/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/paper31.pdf Yours, On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 7:00 PM, Julia Bosque Gil <jbosque@fi.upm.es> wrote: > Hi, John, all: > > 14:00h CEST works fine for me, too. > > I'll take this opportunity to announce an update of the Lexicography page. > Since spring is advancing and we mentioned that it would be nice to have a > draft of the module by summer, if I am not mistaken, I figured that a brief > summary of the content everyone provided in telcos, minutes and emails since > end of 2017 would be useful to remind us where we are in terms of decisions > concerning the module elements. You can find it at > > https://www.w3.org/community/ontolex/wiki/Lexicography#Telcos_from_December_2017_to_May_2018 > > I added a new figure at the end of that section to illustrate those > decisions. If you just missed the last telcos, scroll down to the section > March-April 2018 to catch up on the last discussion about DictionaryEntry > vs. SuperEntries and details on where that discussion comes from: > > https://www.w3.org/community/ontolex/wiki/Lexicography#March_--_April_2018 > > Also, as the goal of the module was not formally written yet and there were > questions and comments on it scattered through our minutes, I made a first > attempt at drafting it from the content everyone has provided in the > different channels since last summer. If you agree, we can polish it from > here through the email thread :) > > Goal: > >> Model existing dictionaries in a lemon-OntoLex compliant way by providing >> a conceptual/abstract model for lexicographical resources in general: build >> a common space in which entities such as "entry", "dictionary sense", etc. >> can be agreed and commonly defined. This will be done in a way in which we >> abstract from specific linguistic views so that the new module remains >> highly reuseable across dictionaries (independently of their lexicographic >> tradition) as well as useful for new linked data-based ones. By doing this, >> we bridge the gap between OntoLex commitments to what 'entries' and 'senses' >> are in other representations. In fact, we can consider this some kind of >> "compatibility module" that allows us to deal with many existent resources. > > > > I hope this helps in giving a brief overview of the work in the module > elements so far. > > Best regards and talk to you soon, > > Julia > > > 2018-04-30 11:49 GMT+02:00 John McCrae <john@mccr.ae>: >> >> Hi all, >> >> Just to clarify when this meeting will be today. I initially announced >> 13:00 CEST, but it seems Philipp in his last mail changed this to 14:00 >> CEST, is this okay with everyone? >> >> Regards, >> John >> >> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 7:41 PM, Philipp Cimiano >> <cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de> wrote: >>> >>> Dear all, >>> >>> I have not heard any complaints, so I assume we will e-meet next Monday >>> 30th of April at 14:00 CET. >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> Philipp. >>> >>> >>> Am 23.04.18 um 11:59 schrieb Katrien Depuydt: >>> >>> Hi Philip, >>> >>> >>> >>> 14:00 CET on the 30th is fine for me. >>> >>> As for the discussion on Dictionary Entry, I agree with you on this. >>> >>> >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> Katrien >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Lic. Katrien Depuydt >>> senior onderzoeker/taalkundige >>> >>> senior researcher/linguist >>> >>> +31 (0)71 527 2479 +31 (0)6 53627318 / kamer 104 >>> >>> >>> >>> /instituut voor de Nederlandse taal/ >>> >>> Rapenburg 61 / 2311 GJ / Leiden >>> >>> Postbus 9515 / 2300 RA / Leiden >>> >>> >>> >>> www.ivdnt.org >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Van: Philipp Cimiano [mailto:cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de] >>> Verzonden: donderdag 19 april 2018 8:29 >>> Aan: public-ontolex@w3.org >>> Onderwerp: Re: OntoLex minutes 9/Apr/18 >>> >>> >>> >>> Dearl all, >>> >>> thanks to John for the minutes and to Julia for the detailed response to >>> Sander. >>> >>> Personally, I am not convinved about renaming "DictionaryEntry" to >>> "SuperEntry". First "DictionaryEntry" says nothing about whether a >>> dictionary is printed. >>> >>> According to WIkipedia: A dictionary, sometimes known as a wordbook, is a >>> collection of words in one or more specific languages, often arranged >>> alphabetically (or by radical and stroke for ideographic languages), which >>> may include information on definitions, usage, etymologies, pronunciations, >>> translation, etc.[1] or a book of words in one language with their >>> equivalents in another, sometimes known as a lexicon.[1] It is a >>> lexicographical product which shows inter-relationships among the data.[2] >>> >>> >>> The relevant terms are: collection and most importantly to me >>> "lexicographical product which shows inter-relationships among data". I >>> quite like this. A dictionary is primarly a conscious and deliberate >>> arrangement of lexical entries / words into collections, making >>> lexicographic choices what to group, etc. The word "product" makes clear >>> that a dictionary is an artifact that makes choices on how to present / >>> group and describe language. It is a meta-object. >>> >>> The view of a dictionary as a lexicographic product which shows >>> inter-relationships among the data is fine for our purposes. We could in >>> fact even use this definition for our module. Under this definition it would >>> be more than appropriate to call our object DictionaryEntry. >>> >>> I am fine with having one property describes with multiple (defined) >>> ranges. >>> >>> Other than that, I would like to propose that we have our next telco on >>> the 30th of April, if possible at 14:00 CET. Leet me know if this works out. >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> Philipp. >>> >>> Am 09.04.18 um 17:13 schrieb John McCrae: >>> >>> Hi Julia, >>> >>> >>> >>> Yes that is certainly what I meant to say :) >>> >>> >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> John >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 4:03 PM, Julia Bosque Gil <jbosque@fi.upm.es> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Just a minor clarification for a line in the minutes from today: >>> >>> 'SuperEntry' is a better name than 'LexicalEntry' --> 'SuperEntry' is a >>> better name than 'DictionaryEntry' >>> >>> >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Julia >>> >>> >>> >>> 2018-04-09 14:38 GMT+02:00 John McCrae <john.mccrae@insight-centre.org>: >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> >>> >>> The minutes from today are below: >>> >>> >>> >>> Present: Julia, Francesca, Ilan, John >>> >>> >>> >>> https://www.w3.org/community/ontolex/wiki/Lexicography >>> >>> Issues raised by Sander: >>> >>> JBG: Use of two properties describesEntry and describesSense, but >>> dictionaries describe much more than entries and senses. >>> >>> JBG: Single describes property with multiple range? >>> >>> JBG:Is this sufficient to capture the structure of a dictionary >>> >>> JM: Probably sufficent, but some risk of not capturing all dictionaries >>> >>> One property with multiple ranges may be more flexible than multiple >>> properties >>> >>> Technical distinction between ranges of 'describes' but is there a >>> semantic distinction? >>> >>> JM: probably technically okay to have a single property >>> >>> JBG: SuperEntry of subEntry? >>> >>> JM: I think this is an error in my minutes. It should be SuperEntry >>> >>> FF: We aren't representing a digital version of a print dictionary, so is >>> dictionary entry the right name? >>> >>> JBG: if a dictionary entry only has senses for nouns ontolex core is >>> sufficient. however the dictionary has senses for multiple pos I must use >>> DictionaryEntry. The use of dictionary entry implies the existence of a >>> paper dictionary. >>> >>> JM: super entry is like an 'entry group' (as previously proposed) so >>> perhaps SuperEntry is a better name >>> >>> FF: shows that lexical entries do not occur by themselves >>> >>> IK: what is meant by typographical? what is the purpose of lexicography >>> module? >>> >>> aims is to represent linguistic information (JM: broadly true) >>> >>> JBG: yeah, some things are not linguistic, but somehow logical, e.g., >>> sense orderings >>> >>> JBG: In next telco we should repeat the goal of the module >>> >>> >>> >>> Key Points: >>> >>> 'describe' as a property with multiple ranges is acceptable >>> >>> 'SuperEntry' is a better name than 'LexicalEntry' >>> >>> goal of OntoLex is not same as TEI >>> >>> >>> >>> IK: how this relates to dictionaries. What about senses, when many >>> lexicographers (e.g., Kilgariff) reject them? >>> >>> JBG: we provide enough tools to represent dictionaries >>> >>> JM: OntoLex is quite opinionated as to what 'entries' and 'senses' mean, >>> so we need to bridge this with other representations >>> >>> IK: Looking at future goals is important too. 'SuperEntry' is more >>> forward-looking >>> >>> >>> >>> Next Telco: >>> >>> 23rd is difficult for some so postpone to 30 Apr, 13:00 CEST. >>> >>> >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> John >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> >>> Julia Bosque Gil >>> PhD Student >>> Ontology Engineering Group >>> >>> Departamento de Inteligencia Artificial >>> >>> Universidad Politécnica de Madrid >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> -- >>> >>> 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 >>> >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------- >>> Aan dit bericht kunnen geen rechten worden ontleend. >>> Het bericht is alleen bestemd voor de geadresseerde. >>> Indien het bericht niet voor u is bestemd, verzoeken wij >>> u dit aan ons te melden en het bericht te verwijderen. >>> >>> This message shall not constitute any obligations. >>> This message is intended solely for the addressee. >>> If you have received this message in error, please >>> inform us and delete the message. >>> ---------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> >>> -- >>> -- >>> 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 >> >> > > > > -- > > Julia Bosque Gil > PhD Student > Ontology Engineering Group > Departamento de Inteligencia Artificial > Universidad Politécnica de Madrid -- Francis Bond <http://www3.ntu.edu.sg/home/fcbond/> Division of Linguistics and Multilingual Studies Nanyang Technological University
Received on Monday, 30 April 2018 13:35:12 UTC