[Corpora-List] What is corpora and what is not?

[Laurence Anthony]

On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 11:14 AM, Angus Grieve-Smith <grvsmth at panix.com> wrote:

>     Well, people communicate or they don't.  Or they sort of communicate.
> Any of these can happen with or without mutually accepted meanings.  That's
> what I see in my data.  What does your data tell you?

We can never have completely perfect mutually accepted meanings. So,
there is always an element of miscommunication. Scientists strive to
reduce the amount of miscommunication by being very careful with the
terms that they use.

>>>      You can decide whether or not to bury someone without any kind of
>>> definition.  You don't need the words "alive" and "dead" at all. You just
>>> need a clear set of criteria.  But no matter how clear you make the
>>> criteria
>>> there will always be hard-to-decide borderline cases where people just
>>> need
>>> to use their best judgment.
>>
>> Very true. But, isn't a "clear set of criteria" a synonym for definition?
>
>
>     Only if it's attached to a term.  I'm saying that it doesn't have to be
> attached to any particular term.

Very true. But, isn't it convenient to attach a *complex* set of
criteria to a particular term? I think doctors would prefer to write
in their reports, " The patient is dead" rather than have to list up a
very long list of properties that describe the state of the person
that is no longer with us.

Agreed definitions (mutually accepted meanings of terms) allow us to
communicate precisely and also concisely.

Laurence.

_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE from this page: http://mailman.uib.no/options/corpora
Corpora mailing list
Corpora at uib.no
http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora