[Corpora-List] WordNet vs Ontology

Wed Aug 6 23:37:18 UTC 2014

Yes, VerbNet is a very good lexical resource. You should also look at Lemon and Core-Lex, other very useful resources developed by Paul Buitelaar and colleagues: http://paulbuitelaar.net/.

Thanks,
Leo

From: corpora-bounces at uib.no [mailto:corpora-bounces at uib.no] On Behalf Of Rich Cooper
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 7:02 PM
To: 'Jim Fidelholtz'
Cc: 'CORPORA discussion forum'
Subject: Re: [Corpora-List] WordNet vs Ontology

Now that I remember it, I once pulled the verbs out of the WordNet prolog files, which are perfect for that kind of extraction.  It gives some info about the verb signatures, though nothing Lego-like that can restrict the parameters by type and by permissions, perhaps with constraints on assigning values.

Has anyone seen Verb extraction elsewhere for WordNet or VerbNet?

-Rich

Sincerely,
Rich Cooper
EnglishLogicKernel.com
Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com
9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2
From: Rich Cooper [mailto:rich at englishlogickernel.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 3:42 PM
To: 'Jim Fidelholtz'
Cc: 'John F Sowa'; 'CORPORA discussion forum'
Subject: RE: [Corpora-List] WordNet vs Ontology

Thanks Jim, I found it at:

http://www.spanishdict.com/translate/primus%20adesse

But it looks like I have to register or use the web page which only does translations.  It would be nice to have the actual English to Spanish dictionary which the offer, so the verbs in English would be enumerated.

-Rich

Sincerely,
Rich Cooper
EnglishLogicKernel.com
Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com
9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2
From: Jim Fidelholtz [mailto:fidelholtz at gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 12:16 PM
To: Rich Cooper
Cc: John F Sowa; CORPORA discussion forum
Subject: Re: [Corpora-List] WordNet vs Ontology

Rich,

I don't know too much about VerbNet, but I would recommend you take a look at ADESSE (just Google it), which is a sort of computerized verb dictionary of Spanish, with lots of information on the structural components of the verbs. While there are some clear differences between Spanish and English verbs, especially in terms of their complements, the general idea, I think, is applicable to any language (even English!).

Jim

James L. Fidelholtz
Posgrado en Ciencias del Lenguaje
Instituto de Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades
Benemérita Universidad Autónoma de Puebla, MÉXICO

On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 12:57 PM, Rich Cooper <rich at englishlogickernel.com<mailto:rich at englishlogickernel.com>> wrote:
Whatever happened to VerbNet?  Are they still
operating, and has it gotten very far with users
yet?

-Rich

Sincerely,
Rich Cooper
EnglishLogicKernel.com
Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com
9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2
-----Original Message-----
From: corpora-bounces at uib.no<mailto:corpora-bounces at uib.no>
[mailto:corpora-bounces at uib.no<mailto:corpora-bounces at uib.no>] On Behalf Of John
F Sowa
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 5:37 AM
To: corpora at uib.no<mailto:corpora at uib.no>
Subject: Re: [Corpora-List] WordNet vs Ontology
On 8/6/2014 5:57 AM, liling tan wrote:
> Is wordnet an ontology? If it is not an
ontology, what is it?

WordNet is widely used as a resource for
developing and relating
ontologies in AI, computational linguistics, and
the Semantic Web.

But most projects in those fields distinguish
lexical resources,
such as WordNet, from the formal ontologies that
are specified
in some version of logic.

> What is the definition of an ontology? Is
anything
> (words/concept/entities) under a hierarchical
structure
> some sort of linguistic ontology?

In philosophy, ontology is the study of existence.
In computational
systems, *an* ontology is a collection of formally
defined terms
that characterize the entities that exist in some
domain and the
relationships among those entities.

WordNet, Roget's Thesaurus, dictionaries,
terminologies, and other
lexical resources focus on words in various
languages.  They are
valuable as a starting point for the analysis
required to state
formal specifications.  But much more analysis is
needed to refine
those definitions for a particular theory of
ontology.

> Are linguistic ontology / information science
ontology
> subjected to only upper and domain ontology?

There is no consensus about how linguistic
resources can or
should be related to formal ontologies or how
either kind
of resource should be structured.

But it is common to have an underspecified upper
level
for general terms and lower-level specializations
(AKA
microtheories) for more specialized terms.  Some
very large
system, such as Cyc, have an upper-level,
mid-level, and
lower-level.

The categories in Cyc are rarely mapped to and
from common
words that have a huge number of word senses.
They are more
likely to be mapped to word phrases or to very
specialized
technical words.

> Any other comments about ontology and wordnet?

Following are the slides of a tutorial about
ontology, logic,
and issues of relating them to language and
computation:

http://www.jfsowa.com/talks/kdptut.pdf

John

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

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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/corpora/attachments/20140806/c32b85f3/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE from this page: http://mailman.uib.no/options/corpora
Corpora mailing list
Corpora at uib.no
http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora