<html><head><base href="x-msg://107/"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Bob<div>Thanks, but I didnt mean the work reported in Electric Words---that was all much later (80s-90s) and was already using electronic dictionaries as corpora. I meant the 70s!</div><div>And, Hanks and Pustejovsky and others are still continuing that tradition of early work, which they know well. It was Adam's provocation I was rising to!</div><div>Best</div><div>Yorick</div><div><br></div><div><br><div><div>On 13 Sep 2010, at 14:43, Robert Parks wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; "><div><div>Yorick,</div><div>Your "Electric Words" was indeed an enlightening work and a worthy read for lexicographers. The practical work of analysis has been mostly enriched by corpus tools, but as you note could also benefit from a close reading of AI work (as well as other developments, such as cognitive linguistics). Could you give an example of lexicographic work that might point the way toward exploiting those AI insights?<br>Thanks,</div><div>Bob</div><div><br></div><div>At 1:18 PM -0400 9/13/10, Yorick Wilks wrote:</div><blockquote type="cite" cite="" style="padding-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; ">All true, but the notion was pretty well explored by Ai work in the seventies, and has</blockquote><blockquote type="cite" cite="" style="padding-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; ">been missed by the lexicographic community (if not by Hanks himself!)--it's all there really, the norms, the extensions in context based on what we know about the word and the world--all that was missing was the hard work of the sort lexicographers are said to be good at!</blockquote><blockquote type="cite" cite="" style="padding-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; ">Yorick</blockquote><blockquote type="cite" cite="" style="padding-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; "><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite" cite="" style="padding-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; ">On 12 Sep 2010, at 17:16, Adam Kilgarriff wrote:</blockquote><blockquote type="cite" cite="" style="padding-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; "><br><blockquote type="cite" cite="" style="padding-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; ">Lothar,</blockquote><blockquote type="cite" cite="" style="padding-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; "><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite" cite="" style="padding-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; ">yes, I'm very happy to own that position!</blockquote><blockquote type="cite" cite="" style="padding-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; "><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite" cite="" style="padding-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; ">I'd add to it, the kind of thing that Ken Litkowski mentioned and Patrick Hanks has explored most deeply: that we make sense of unfamiliar uses of words by working out how what we already know of the word (its norms) can be made sense of in the context. (My own enlightenment on this front came from Geoff Nunberg's thesis, see his 'Pragmatics of Reference'). That is the cognitive process of interpreting an exploitation of the word's norms. A word's senses are then just those interpretations, which are commonly enough understood across a speech community, and over time. What counts as 'common enough', and 'the speech community' and the timespan, depends on the purposes for which we want to catalogue them</blockquote><blockquote type="cite" cite="" style="padding-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; "><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite" cite="" style="padding-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; ">Adam<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite" cite="" style="padding-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; ">On 7 September 2010 09:27, Lothar Lemnitzer <<a href="mailto:lemnitzer@bbaw.de">lemnitzer@bbaw.de</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote style="padding-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; ">Dear Laura<br><br>I do not think that this insight is so spectacular. Word senses are artifacts and lexicographers are the experts (and are perceived by society as such) in finding and defining these artifacts.<br><br>If I am allowed to give a guess I would assign this position to Adam Kilgarriff (I don't believe in word senses).<br><br>Adam, sue me if I am wrong.<br><br>Regards<br><br>Lothar Lemnitzer<br></blockquote><blockquote style="padding-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; ">2010/9/7 Laura Lofberg <<a href="mailto:Laura.Lofberg@uta.fi">Laura.Lofberg@uta.fi</a>></blockquote><blockquote style="padding-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; "><br><blockquote style="padding-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; ">Could someone with a better memory help me?<br><br>If I remember correctly, someone has said 'a word has as many meanings as a lexicographer cares to perceive' or something like that. Does anyone remember the exact wording? And who has made this brilliant comment, where and when?<br><br>Best,<br><br>Laura Löfberg<br>University of Tampere<br>Finland<br><br>_______________________________________________<br>Corpora mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Corpora@uib.no">Corpora@uib.no</a><br><a href="http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora">http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora</a><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote style="padding-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; "><font color="#888888"><br><br><br>--<br>Lothar Lemnitzer<br>DWDS<br>Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften<br>Jägerstr. 22/23<br>10117 Berlin<br></font><br>_______________________________________________<br>Corpora mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Corpora@uib.no">Corpora@uib.no</a><br><a href="http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora">http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora</a><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite" cite="" style="padding-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; "><br><br><br>--<br>================================================<br>Adam Kilgarriff <span></span> <span></span> <span></span> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="http://www.kilgarriff.co.uk/">http://www.kilgarriff.co.uk</a> <br>Lexical Computing Ltd <span></span> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="http://www.sketchengine.co.uk/">http://www.sketchengine.co.uk</a><br>Lexicography MasterClass Ltd <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="http://www.lexmasterclass.com/">http://www.lexmasterclass.com</a><br>Universities of Leeds and Sussex <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="mailto:adam@lexmasterclass.com">adam@lexmasterclass.com</a><br>================================================<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite" cite="" style="padding-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; ">_______________________________________________<br>Corpora mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Corpora@uib.no">Corpora@uib.no</a><br><a href="http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora">http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora</a><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite" cite="" style="padding-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; "><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite" cite="" style="padding-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; "><br>_______________________________________________<br>Corpora mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Corpora@uib.no">Corpora@uib.no</a><br><a href="http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora">http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora</a></blockquote><div><br></div><div><br></div><x-sigsep><pre>--
</pre></x-sigsep><div>* The best dictionary and integrated thesaurus on the web:<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="http://www.wordsmyth.net">http://www.wordsmyth.net</a><br>* Robert Parks - Wordsmyth - (607) 272-2190</div><div>* "To imagine a language is to imagine a form of life." (LW) "Philosophers have only interpreted the world. The point, however, is to change it." (KM)<br>* Community grows as we communicate, honing our words till their meanings tap the rich voice of our full human potential.<br>* A meaningful life is more important than happiness. But how can I live a meaningful life if I'm not sure of the meaning of "meaning"? <br><br> </div></div></span></blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>