RE: RE: SUO: Language & Effect of spelling on dyslexia
Pat,
. Thanks for this.
. Note I said 'various "logic" protagonists', and not 'all
"logic" protagonists'.
. Nevertheless, the fact is that the option fell flat for want
of someone volunteering to undertake the necessary development work for any
version of controlled English, including ACE.
. Starting from the basis of the language most participants
speak every day obviously isn't very sexy. Perhaps you recall my previous
observation that ACE sprang up in a non-English speaking country.
. I continue to be intrigued at this particular instance of
the old saying: "Familiarity breeds contempt". As someone with 50:50 German:
Scots genealogy, it is doubly intriguing to me, since so much of English is
derived from French and German.
. So, there it must rest, for at least the time being.
Cheers Graham Horn
National Data Standards Unit
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare
================================================
Phone: +61.2.6244.1094
Fax: +61.2.6244.1199
Email: Graham.Horn@aihw.gov.au <mailto:graham.horn@aihw.gov.au>
-----Original Message-----
From: John F. Sowa [mailto:sowa@bestweb.net]
<mailto:[mailto:sowa@bestweb.net]>
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2001 12:08 PM
To: standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org
<mailto:standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org>
Subject: RE: RE: SUO: Language & Effect of spelling on dyslexia
Pat,
In my recommendations for developing some version of controlled English as
an alternative (or supplementary) notation for the SUO, I never considered
it to be anything more than "syntactic sugar" for the base logic that is
expressed in KIF.
>Speaking as a "logic" protagonist, I can certainly *conceive* of it.
>If anyone knows of such a 'restricted English' which has a precise
>model theory (precise enough to settle the question of whether an
>inference in the language is valid or not), then I would be delighted
>to hear about it and would be happy to see the SUO adopt it as an
>alternative notation. But without such a model theory any formalism
>is worthless for machine use.
If a formal mapping can be done in both directions, then it is theoretically
irrelevant whether the model theory is defined for KIF or for the controlled
English.
However, for practical purposes, the syntax of KIF is simple enough that we
would not expect major changes. But any version of controlled English (or
other NL) would undoubtedly be subject to a great deal of development and
refinement in order to increase its naturalness, readability, writability,
etc.
Furthermore, we would not want to make any single NL the "official version".
Therefore, it would make more sense to adopt the KIF model theory and define
any and every version of controlled NL as a kind of syntactic sugar for KIF.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: pat hayes [mailto:phayes@ai.uwf.edu]
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2001 4:31 AM
To: Horn, Graham
Cc: standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org
Subject: RE: RE: SUO: Language & Effect of spelling on dyslexia
>Hi Linda,
> . The issue of simplified / restricted / modified /
>controlled languages was discussed at considerable length quite some time
>ago. There were some proposals to develop the SUO in one, or at least have
>such of a version of the SUO available, including Norbert Fuchs' "Attempto
>Controlled English", or a development of it. There was rampant opposition
>from various "logic" protagonists who could not conceive that any such
>language could possibly express strict logic in any reliable and
unambiguous
>way.
Speaking as a "logic" protagonist, I can certainly *conceive* of it.
If anyone knows of such a 'restricted English' which has a precise
model theory (precise enough to settle the question of whether an
inference in the language is valid or not), then I would be delighted
to hear about it and would be happy to see the SUO adopt it as an
alternative notation. But without such a model theory any formalism
is worthless for machine use.
Pat Hayes
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC (850)434 8903 home
40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office
Pensacola, FL 32501 (850)202 4440 fax
phayes@ai.uwf.edu
http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes