Re: Troponym Structures?
John,
Do you consider a class of [verb + object-type] (generalized verb phrase) to
be a subclass of the verb? Or are the semantics (meaning in the one particular
sense) of a verb already implicitly determined by the class of things it can
take as an object?
Pat
John Bateman wrote:
>> A question: Why is it that ontology construction seems to be mostly
>> about nouns, and not about verbs? Are there no large ontologies
>> constructed only of language verbs? Many ontologies are built around
>> inheritance structures, hyponymns. Are there corresponding troponymic
>> ontologies for the words that transform concepts?
>
>
> There are several built around verbs (eg. EVCA and some
> more recent attempts to characterize action). But the big
> move is not from nouns to verb, but from nouns to clauses.
> Consult the Penman/Generalized Upper Model and Halliday & Matthiessen's
> Construing Experience; a move to verbs is just to stay
> in the realms of lexicology and lexical terminology. Moving
> to clauses can give an important boost to getting to something
> deeper, semantically if not ontologically. This lets you
> start getting to grips with the general structures that
> you might need, rather than those that happen to turn
> up as verbs in some language. For Natural Language
> Processing applications, the move to consider clauses is
> crucial, because it is this that gives the generalization
> to range over other possibilities, including down to nouns
> and verbs.
>
> John Bateman.
>
--
=============================================
Patrick Cassidy
MICRA, Inc. || (908) 561-3416
735 Belvidere Ave. || (908) 668-5252 (if no answer above)
Plainfield, NJ 07062-2054
internet: cassidy@micra.com
=============================================