search

globalwordnet / gwadoc

documentation for things like relations and parts of speech used by wordnets
https://globalwordnet.github.io/gwadoc/
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
11 stars 6 forks source link

Clarify the description of underspecified relations #40

Open goodmami opened 3 years ago

goodmami commented 3 years ago

Some underspecified relations, such as constitutive, are not used directly. Others, such as meronym may be (I'm not really sure) but are usually given by subtypes (mero_location, mero_substance, etc.). Providing examples for things like meronym that are actually subtypes would be confusing, so these need to be more fully specified. Also the comment at the bottom of, e.g., meronym, is inaccurate:

This is an unspecified relation that covers all the relations below. This can be computed automatically, it shouldn't be a special relation.

First, I think it's "underspecified" rather than "unspecified", and second "all the relations below" is not right because there is no clear list or hierarchy, so a reader might think it includes the rest of the relations on the page. The final sentence isn't clear, either. How about:

"This is an underspecified relation that covers Location Meronym, Member Meronym, Part Meronym, Portion Meronym, and Substance Meronym. As such, it is not specified as a relation directly by wordnets, but a wordnet application may employ it as a general relation covering all its subtypes."

(and so on for other underspecified relations)

fcbond commented 3 years ago

Hi,

good idea. I think meronym was used originally, and then was split, so there may be wordnets that use it. But in general it is not used.

On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 9:55 AM Michael Wayne Goodman < notifications@github.com> wrote:

Some underspecified relations, such as constitutive, are not used directly. Others, such as meronym may be (I'm not really sure) but are usually given by subtypes (mero_location, mero_substance, etc.). Providing examples for things like meronym that are actually subtypes would be confusing, so these need to be more fully specified. Also the comment at the bottom of, e.g., meronym, is inaccurate:

This is an unspecified relation that covers all the relations below. This can be computed automatically, it shouldn't be a special relation.

First, I think it's "underspecified" rather than "unspecified", and second "all the relations below" is not right because there is no clear list or hierarchy, so a reader might think it includes the rest of the relations on the page. The final sentence isn't clear, either. How about:

"This is an underspecified relation that covers Location Meronym, Member Meronym, Part Meronym, Portion Meronym, and Substance Meronym. As such, it is not specified as a relation directly by wordnets, but a wordnet application may employ it as a general relation covering all its subtypes."

(and so on for other underspecified relations)

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/globalwordnet/gwadoc/issues/40, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAIPZRVPWB24G2VJZUJUIDTSJERRPANCNFSM4SEC6VGA .

-- Francis Bond http://www3.ntu.edu.sg/home/fcbond/ Division of Linguistics and Multilingual Studies Nanyang Technological University

goodmami commented 3 years ago

Yes, I think it's good to leave open that possibility in the prose, but in any case the English examples do not make sense if they just say "X is a meronym of Y", so I've already changed it to "X is a part-meronym of Y" (or substance, member, etc.) in the GSOD branch, but it's not yet merged to the master branch.

See: 1619432b35113f5aaace56bd54b499ded677d7a9

edit: you might note that I did not change "B has (relation) A" to "A is a (relation) of B", but that's not out of preference. I was just fixing the immediate problem.

fcbond commented 3 years ago

@gconnect please check all the underspecified relations.

gconnect commented 3 years ago

Alright. I will check them.

On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 3:48 PM Francis Bond notifications@github.com wrote:

@gconnect https://github.com/gconnect please check all the underspecified relations.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/globalwordnet/gwadoc/issues/40#issuecomment-721160909, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFPXA4GW6Y3VB36XKO4MQ53SOAJ3JANCNFSM4SEC6VGA .

gconnect commented 3 years ago

I think this has been done