Can we say that signs are instances and concepts are types?
So that there is a line where:
Instance(sign, concept)
exists as a fact in the concept hierarchy (or semantic net) and serves as the
mapping relation between signs and concepts?
Kindly advise.
From: piagetmode...@hotmail.com
To: a...@listbox.com
Subject: RE: [agi] Semiosis
Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2013 08:18:03 -0700
"I agree with Andrew in not equating concepts and signs,but the above scheme is
OK for me as long as the semantic net or conceptual space contains sub-symbolic
nodes that do not correspond to signs." ~ AN
Why, please explain this. I know most parsing distinguishes word forms from
concepts. Is this an artificial distinction?
Kindly advise.
~PM
AGI | Archives
| Modify
Your Subscription
-------------------------------------------
AGI
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-f452e424
Modify Your Subscription:
https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
