[Attempto] Broader the range of texts that can be mapped to ACE

[Pierre-Alexandre Voye]

Forgot one thing :
./ape.exe -cparaphrase -cdrspp  -cdrs -guess -text 'A man sees a girl with
a red skirt.'
 <paraphrase>There is a man X1.
The man X1 sees a girl with a red skirt.</paraphrase>

The two meanings are exactly the same for me.


2013/1/28 Norbert E. Fuchs <fuchs at ifi.uzh.ch>

>
> On 27 Jan 2013, at 23:53 , Simon Spero <sesuncedu at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 12:15 PM, Norbert E. Fuchs <fuchs at ifi.uzh.ch>
> wrote:
> >
> > In my view, natural English and controlled English are conceptually
> different languages that need a human translator.
>
> This sentence – seen in isolation – could be misunderstood. Perhaps I
> should have been more careful when I wrote it.
>
> In the context of Jean-Marc's message
>
> > ... Would that make sense to train a text machine learning algorithm
> witt texts in natural english and their translation in ACE? ...
>
> and the rest of my message the sentence was meant as
>
> In my view, natural English and controlled English are conceptually
> different languages and you need a human translator for the translation
> from natural English to controlled English.
>
> > ... I would claim that any controlled version C of a natural language L
> must be a subset of L,  such that every sentence in C is a sentence of L;
>
> I would write "grammatical subset" since the semantics may differ. The
> sentence "A man sees a girl with a red skirt." does have different meanings
> in English and in ACE.
>
> However, to make the grammatical rules of a controlled language
> consistent, you may end up violating the pragmatics of the respective
> natural language. An example is ACE's rule "Phrasal particles and those
> prepositions that introduce a complement of a transitive verb, must be
> hyphenated to the verb." Thus both "John turns-off the light." and "There
> is a light. John turns-off it." are accepted by the ACE parser. The first
> example obeys English pragmatics, the second not.
>
> > that every sentence in C has a single parse,
>
> Though ACE texts have a single parse, there are other controlled subsets
> of English that allow more than one parse.
>
> > and that this parse must be a possible parsing of the sentence in L.
>
> Sure.
>
> > ... A designer of a controlled version of a natural language is
> constrained by the grammar of the natural language; they  are not free to
> introduce new grammatical constructs, etc.,
>
> This depends on the application you want to use the controlled language
> for. In one instance we considered extending ACE by URLs and name-spaces
> which people might disagree as belonging to the grammar of English.
>
> > should recognize/generate as natural a set of sentences as possible, but
> must avoid ambiguity.
>
> Again, there are controlled languages that allow for ambiguity.
>
> > ... texts in ACE are understandable by speakers of English;
>
> Grammatically yes, semantically not necessarily as the above "red skirt"
> example shows.
>
> > however, these speakers need some training or guidance to produce
> correct ACE.
>
> We replaced the grammatical training by guidance in the predictive ACE
> editor and in AceWiki, though some training of the semantics is still
> needed.
>
> Regards.
>
>    --- nef
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> attempto mailing list
> attempto at lists.ifi.uzh.ch
> https://lists.ifi.uzh.ch/listinfo/attempto
>



-- 
---------------------
https://twitter.com/#!/ontologiae/
http://linuxfr.org/users/montaigne
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ifi.uzh.ch/pipermail/attempto/attachments/20130128/4e9285b9/attachment.html>