Thanks. But Schank has fallen into disuse, no? The ideas re script algorithms just don't work, do they? And what I was highlighting was one possible reason - those primitives are infinitely open-ended and can be, and are, repeatedly being used in new ways. That supposedly minimally ambiguous language looks, ironically, like it's maximally ambiguous.
I agree that the primitives you list are extremely important - arguably central - in the development of human language. But to my mind, and I'll have to argue this at length, and elsewhere, they show something that you might not like - the impossibility of programming (in any conventional sense) a mind to handle them. ----- Original Message ----- From: Jean-Paul Van Belle To: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 5:44 PM Subject: Re: [agi] Minimally ambiguous languages Hi Mike Just Google 'Ogden' and/or Basic English - there's lots of info. And if you doubt that only a few verbs are sufficient, then obviously you need to do some reading: anyone interested in building AGI should be familiar with Schank's (1975) contextual dependency theory "which deals with the representation of meaning in sentences. Building upon this framework, Schank & Abelson (1977) introduced the concepts of scripts, plans and themes to handle story-level understanding. Later work (e.g., Schank, 1982,1986) elaborated the theory to encompass other aspects of cognition." [http://tip.psychology.org/schank.html] A number of other researchers have also worked on the concept of a few semantic primitives (one called them semantic primes) but I'd be a bad teacher if I did *your* homework for you... ;-) Jean-Paul Department of Information Systems Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone: (+27)-(0)21-6504256 Fax: (+27)-(0)21-6502280 Office: Leslie Commerce 4.21 >>> "Mike Tintner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2007/06/05 16:48:32 >>> Except that Ogden only included a very few verbs [be , have , come - go , put - take , give - get , make , keep , let , do , say , see , send , cause and because are occasionally used as operators; seem was later added.] So in practice people use about 60 of the nouns as verbs diminishing the 'unambiguity' somewhat. Also most words are seriously polysemous. But it is a very good/interesting starting point! = Jean-Paul How does that work? The first 12 verbs above are among the most general, infinitely-meaningful and therefore ambiguous words in the language. There are an infinity of ways to "come" or "go" to a place. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?&; ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?&; ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.9/832 - Release Date: 04/06/2007 18:43 ----- This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=231415&user_secret=e9e40a7e
