As an anonymous user, you can only add new data. If you would like to also modify existing data, please create an account and indicate your languages on your user page.

User talk:Synagonism

From OmegaWiki
Jump to: navigation, search


I have given you rights to modify existing data. If you have any questions, please ask. --Kip 09:41, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

DefinedMeaning and word class[edit]

Please see there. 08:43, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, but what you wrote is not clear. I suggest that

  1. you correct your English. For instance you wrote "the existence of MANY word-classes for ONE concept are NOT identical"! "existence" is singular, but "are" is plural.
  2. you be more precise. For instance what do you exactly mean by "NOT identical": "have not identical meaning", "have not identical use" or what? Other example, particularly unclear: "OmegaWiki must store the inflected-forms of the names of the word-classes of the generic-concepts.": concepts don't have word-classes, words do.
  3. you give examples of what you mean and suggest.

Thank you in advance. 10:44, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

First, as a 52 years old guy it is impossible now to learn not to do english mistakes. But the misunderstanding comes more because we use undefined concepts and less in my bad english. As a mathematician and a programmer I am in love with precision. But we can not have precision in a natural-language, at least in the way we are writing today. In fact, my goal is the creation of a computer-system in which all information will be unambigous, non-contradictory and translated in any human-language by the system!!!
Second, "concepts" and "DefinedMeanings" are not the same in my view. The expression "happy birthday" denotes a definedMeaning not a concept, the expression "skin" is a concept, the expression "dark skin" is another concept. I am an expert in concepts because since around 1985 I stopped writing texts and store my knowledge in concepts. I have written hundred of thousands concepts with their relations!
Third, Concepts have names eg "skin", "dark skin", "London", "human", "human being", etc. These names belong to a part-of-speech (word class) even though some names are comprised of more than one words (linguists disagree what is a word!). I insist that concepts have not 2 but many parts-of-speech (pos). What pos a concept has depends solely in its MEANING.
1) Concepts that denote PROPERTIES-of-entities, usually have "adjective-names", but when we want to talk for this property alone (same concept) we use a noun. In english: color-colorness, dark-darkness, ... When this property (same concept) is a property of a process we use "adverb-names" eg "he writes well|good".
Your example, has a clear greek adjective. But you must know that there is a greek noun that express the same concept "απεριτμητοσύνη". On the other hand (probably) you added a mongolian translation which is verb? Obviously here there is a disagreement on what is a verb in western and eastern languages. I don't know a single mongolian word, but this is what some call "stative verbs". The western expression "he is good" and the eastern "he good" denote the same meaning. And the part "good" inside both of them denotes the same concept.
2) Concepts that denote PROCESSES or RELATIONS usually have "verb-names". In english to express the same process without time usually use the present participle, "run (verb, now)", "the running". But some concepts with the same spelling denotes verb and noun, work (now), the work (timelesly). Greek have developed nouns for all its verbs. Ancient greek used his infinitive form for noun (same generic concept, but specific without time).
Languages does not have common rules to create all the "word-classes" of one concept and thus we see different created methods.
I don't have more time today. Next year! I will say more about "inflexions". Have a happy new year. --Synagonism 15:58, 31 December 2011 (UTC)