[Corpora-List] WordNet vs Ontology

[Kiril Simov]

Dear Michal, dear All,

I think the hierarchy of precision is to show the boundary between shared vocabularies. Lexicons, classifications and thesauri are shared vocabularies, but not precise enough to be called ontologies in the sense used in information science. Whether WornNet is an ontology, or not is related to the question where to put the boundary. But we already have many opinions within the discussion, thus, various people could accept the most suitable opinion for them. 

With best regards,

Kiril

From: Michal Ptaszynski 
Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2014 11:16 PM
To: Kiril Simov ; corpora at uib.no ; corpora-request at uib.no 
Subject: Re: [Corpora-List] WordNet vs Ontology

Hi Kiril and others

Just a small thought. 

  - Lexicon (example, Machine Readable Dictionaries) - Vocabulary with NL definitions
  - Simple Taxonomy (example, Clasifications)
  - Thesaurus (example, WordNet) Lexical relations
  - Taxonomy plus related-terms (example, Relational Model) Light-weight ontologies - Unconstrained use of arbitrary relations
  - Fully Axiomatized Theory (Heavy-weight ontologies)

This definition makes me wonder - what is NOT an ontology? If even a simple lexicon is also an ontology, most of papers in NLP and CL describe research with the use of ontologies, even unintentionally. 

Best,
-- 
Michal Ptaszynski

Dnia 6 sie 2014 o godz. 19:43 "Kiril Simov" <kivs at bultreebank.org> napisał(a):


  Dear Liling,

  The book on Wordnet is:

  WordNet: An Electronic Lexical Database
  edited by
  Christiane Fellbaum
  MIT Press, 1998

  Thus, Wordnet is an electronic lexical database.

  Nicola Guarino in his lecture at the First OntoLex Workshop 2000
  defines precision of ontologies like:

  - Lexicon (example, Machine Readable Dictionaries) - Vocabulary with NL definitions
  - Simple Taxonomy (example, Clasifications)
  - Thesaurus (example, WordNet) Lexical relations
  - Taxonomy plus related-terms (example, Relational Model) Light-weight ontologies - Unconstrained use of arbitrary relations
  - Fully Axiomatized Theory (Heavy-weight ontologies)

  Thus, WordNet is a kind of ontology.

  With best regards,

  Kiril

  From: liling tan 
  Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 12:57 PM
  To: corpora at uib.no 
  Subject: [Corpora-List] WordNet vs Ontology

  Dear corpora linguists, 

  There is recently a discussion on stackoverflow about "wordnet vs ontology". I would like your perspective on several issues about wordnet and ontology:

  - Is wordnet an ontology? If it is not an ontology, what is it?

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

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

  - Any other comments about ontology and wordnet?

  Regards,
  liling



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  _______________________________________________
  UNSUBSCRIBE from this page: http://mailman.uib.no/options/corpora
  Corpora mailing list
  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/20140808/63d08326/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