Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Lambengolmor] [LDB] Elements or phrases?

Expand Messages
  • Kai MacTane
    ... Sorry I ve taken so long. Do you have email but not Web access? Or do you not have a graphical browser? ... Elements are things like parma or -uva- or
    Message 1 of 16 , Jul 26, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      At 7/24/02 10:49 AM , Boris Shapiro wrote:

      >First, I have to say that I didn't have the possibility of seeing QH
      >by myself, so I'll rely on your answers and patience :)

      Sorry I've taken so long. Do you have email but not Web access? Or do you
      not have a graphical browser?

      >Does it make sense? But the question should be what do you regard as
      >an individual element and are they stored absolutely independently of
      >their context?

      Elements are things like "parma" or "-uva-" or "-llo". OTOH, "A ná X lá B"
      is also listed as one single element. They're generally stored
      context-independent, though the attestations field lists all places where
      the element is attested in use, so that people can look up the various
      contexts in which Tolkien used it.

      >I suppose I lack proper vocabulary and knowledge in programming, but
      >in my view the desired LDB [linguistic database] (or should we call it
      >_ELDA_ for "Elvish Linguistic DAtabase"? :) should be object-oriented,
      >and have a nested structure so that there are multiple levels of
      >objects like a nested doll. In my view an object is a linguistically
      >important element in of a given text stored in LDB which possesses the
      >required linguistic description. But there are different types of
      >objects: two words could be two individual lexical objects, but at the
      >same time they could be a sole syntactical object! And a sentence
      >could itself be a clause, a part of a complex sentense, thus being a
      >syntactical object, too! And all these objects viewed on different
      >levels should possess different descriptions.
      >
      >I'd like to know how does your QH deal with such information

      It doesn't. It stores things pretty much only at the morphological level,
      and leaves it to humans to do higher-level stuff.

      The sort of multi-level analysis you suggest, and which also seems to be
      suggested by Rich Alderson's mention of treebanks, might be valuable and
      useful, but it is certainly beyond the level of something I could write.

      --Kai MacTane
      ----------------------------------------------------------------------
      "But every night I burn,/Every night I call your name.
      Every night I burn,/Every night I fall again..."
      --The Cure,
      "Burn"
    • Kai MacTane
      ... I suppose we could add a category somewhere for phrases . I agree that sytactic analysis should be left to the humans, not machines -- I m honestly not
      Message 2 of 16 , Jul 26, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        At 7/24/02 02:03 PM , Beregond. Anders Stenström wrote:

        > The general idea of having collocutions registered in the
        >database seems sound. But as Rich Alderson's reply indicated,
        >this could easily become too theory-dependent to look quite
        >good to me. It seems to me that the best idea would be to register
        >all 'contexts', from two-word constructions like _Minas Tirith_ up
        >to long texts like "Namárie" (with full references, or 'attestation
        >details' for each), and then link words to all contexts they occur in.
        >The syntactical analysis can be left to fora outside the database.

        I suppose we could add a category somewhere for "phrases". I agree that
        sytactic analysis should be left to the humans, not machines -- I'm
        honestly not sure they can handle it at all yet; I know I personally can't
        make them do it. (Consider the current state of Babelfish, which has had
        years of research and the efforts of a large number of people poured into
        it. It can give you the general idea of what something means, but it's
        painfully obvious that it's not about to put professional translators out
        of business any time soon, *especially* regarding poetic and artistic works.)

        --Kai MacTane
        ----------------------------------------------------------------------
        "Deadly angels for reality and passion..."
        --Shriekback,
        "Gunning for the
        Buddha"
      • Kai MacTane
        ... Interesting point. Though I think this means that nearly any noun in ELDA would be entered at least twice: once in definite form, and then again in
        Message 3 of 16 , Jul 26, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          At 7/24/02 09:59 PM , Boris Shapiro wrote:

          >KM> [A]: Not necessary (or possible) in Quenya; no indefinite article
          >KM> exists in Quenya. Necessary in translation into English to conform
          >KM> with English grammar, which requires articles.
          >
          >That is why any noun as a syntactic object in ELDA should have as one
          >of its descriptions the indication of its definite/indefinite status,
          >linked to the word it is defined by (not necessarily and article), and
          >Q _i_ (when used as the article) should be linked to the noun it
          >describes; the same applies to virtually any word that defines
          >another.

          Interesting point. Though I think this means that nearly any noun in ELDA
          would be entered at least twice: once in definite form, and then again in
          indefinite form. (After all, most nouns can be used both definitely and
          indefinitely.)

          >That's why any object (presently, a word-object) should not be stored
          >independently from its context (on which he obviously does depend),
          >and share a date-description with the text-object it is included in.
          >Thus one should be able to search for every case of the word "elen"
          >used with chronology and other contextual conditions for search.

          Ouch! While I agree that a context-dependent database would be an
          interesting and probably very useful thing, I must admit I'm a bit confused
          about how one would use it. Would searches be things like: "_elen_, where
          used as subject (not object) and only where indefinite", and so on? (I can
          sort of see how that search should at least return "_elen síla lumenn'
          omentielvo_", while not returning "_Aiya Earendil elenion ancalima_".)

          At the moment, QH's means of dealing with context is simply to provide
          references to all attested uses of the element in the "Attestations" field.

          >Next, a lexical word-object should definitely have a vocabulary
          >description for referential purposes. That was outlined in your lines
          >three paragraphs above. Probably we'll need a dictionary module.

          Which, to figure out homonyms, will need to be able to carry out some
          actual syntactic analysis. (Which you do explicitly call for elsewhere in
          your post.) Unfortunately, I'm afraid I don't know how to get software to
          do that, and I'm especially wary of the concept of getting software to be
          able to carry out accurate syntactic analysis on poetic material.

          >And so on. I hope that gives you some idea of the nested structure we
          >need. Objects in objects in various hypostases with different
          >descriptions.

          It does give me some idea of it, yes. I think that what you propose is an
          impressive and worthwhile project, but it is one which is utterly beyond my
          abilities. I'm sorry.

          >Kai, forgive me for skipping most of your own analysis, I've seen that
          >in some aspects I simply repeat your one, but I've tried to present it
          >in a more systematic and complex way.

          No problem there; it was, after all, just an example analysis. I think it
          served its purpose, and you did right to skip large chunks of it.

          --Kai MacTane
          ----------------------------------------------------------------------
          "Then, when they spill the demon seed
          Turn and face into the wind.
          All along you still believed...
          Believed you were immune."
          --Thomas Dolby,
          "The Flat Earth"
        • Kai MacTane
          ... What sorts of search queries do you envision? Can you give me some examples? --Kai MacTane ... In another life I see you/As an angel flying high, And the
          Message 4 of 16 , Jul 26, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            At 7/26/02 01:09 AM , Boris Shapiro wrote:

            >For me that seems to be a regrettable way of development. That
            >abolishes every use (every extended search query) that I've imagined.
            >What is left then? Just basic number/gender/case descriptions? Is this
            >price good enough, and for what?

            What sorts of search queries do you envision? Can you give me some examples?

            --Kai MacTane
            ----------------------------------------------------------------------
            "In another life I see you/As an angel flying high,
            And the hands of time will free you/You will cast your chains aside,
            And the dawn will come and kiss away
            Every tear that's ever fallen from your eyes...
            --Concrete Blonde,
            "Caroline"
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.