Re: lexical resources with n-ary translations

Am .06.2020, 11:49 Uhr, schrieb Gilles Sérasset  
<Gilles.Serasset@univ-grenoble-alpes.fr>:

> As Christian said correctly, there are indeed many dictionaries with  
> more than 2 languages. However, at least for traditional  
> printed(/printable) >dictionaries, they are “multi-target fork  
> dictionaries" (as I called them in my thesis). They have one source  
> language and several target languages. >Sometimes, you have  
> “multi-target linked directory” as the French -> English -> Malay”  
> dictionary we produced decades ago.
>
> As far as terminologies are concerned, you may find “tables” where there  
> is no (official) source languages (one language by column, one concept  
> by >line), but this is only possible when you have not meaning shifts  
> between your set of languages in the terminology. Not sure you can  
> represent such >terminologies using vartrans.

In principle, we could use vartrans:relates for undirected translations,  
but the restriction holds that a LexicoSemanticRelation must not have more  
than two of those.

BTW: At the LDL workshop earlier this week, we were briefly discussing to  
collect issues/feature requests for possible future revisions or  
extensions of OntoLex in the GitHub. Aside from permitting more than two  
vartrans:target (and vartrags:relates) per Translation, there are some  
more candidates for this that we have repeatedly discussed about and that  
might at least be documented somewhere (even if they do not feed into a  
revised OntoLex 1.1, they could be considered in the discussion of a  
future standardization effort on the basis of the current report).

Would we need a new repository for this? In principle, we could also use  
https://github.com/ontolex/ontolex/issues, but the issues here (and the  
content of the repo) are somewhat different in tone and scope than  
vocabulary development.

Best,
Christian

> For more complex domains (as we did with legal domain for the Alpine  
> convention during the LexALP project), we used the “axies” based lexical  
> >organisation proposed in my thesis and it was quite successful (and it  
> solved some of the challenges terminologists were confronted to before).
>
> Regards,
>
> Gilles,
>
>> On 26 Jun 2020, at 10:03, Christian Chiarcos  
>> <christian.chiarcos@web.de> wrote:
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> as an afterthought to the discussion on n-ary translations, I can see  
>> that MT translation tables for more than two languages are somewhat  
>> >>artificial. However, (print) dictionaries with more than one target  
>> translations are actually very common in the technical domain, see  
>> https://>>www.springer.com/de/book/9789020116670 as an example. For a  
>> possible revision of OntoLex core, it might thus be worth considering  
>> to >>drop the functional restriction for vartrans:target (but not for  
>> vartrans:source).
>>
>> Best,
>> Christian