John’s last paragraph:
JFS> For example, "A gives B to C" my be replaced by three dyads and a monad: "Giving(X) and Agent(X,A) and Patient(X,B) and Recipient(X,C)". In this translation of an obligatory triad to a monad and three dyads, the act of giving X has three parts that must occur at the same time.. You can't perform the different dyads in separable actions.
This is the standard dyadic form for the description of an arbitrary ‘event’/’situation’. The event is an instance of some class of events/situations, which is usually a separate monadic predicate. In John’s example, Giving(X). Each of the ‘roles’ in the event (active or passive) is a dyadic predicate of the form <role>(<event>, <participant>). And, not coincidentally, this is exactly the 5th normal form rendering of a complex relation (which is a DBMS representation of a ‘situation’).
About one or two years ago, an incident, reported in the GuardēRtiarn, so enraged me that I wrote a brief paper about the semantics of ‘giving’. Apparently, during the Pamploma Bull Run, a self-named Wolf Pack had gang raped a young woman. The Wolf Pack included a policeman who had videoed the incident, which went before a Tribunal, that found they had all been having a jolly time appropriate for the Festival. The Tribunal seemed to regard it as a gift from the Wolf Pack. It was so bizarre, I still find it unbelievable, but it provided an suitable dramatic peg, on which to hang an important point about our semantic invariant, the SNF, Semantic Normal form, which requires a maximum of two antecedents for every affordance (anything perceived as an invariant repertoire of behaviour).
Empirically, we have yet to find an exception, because when one appears, on close examination, it is clear that the social reality has been overlooked
The act of giving is a good example. One might say “That small cloud managed to give me a soaking.” But that is a metaphor treating the cloud as an agent capable of intentinal, social behaviour; instead, prosaically one could have said, “It rained on me.” Invoking no society. where invisible preparatory antecedents to giving usually lurk.
Giving is a social act: intentionally tontransfering ownership of an object or enjoyment of a service. constrains every affordance to have only one or two affordances as direct antecedents. They may be strated explicitly or implied by the circumstances. Givingd has two preparatory conditions:
1. The giver is willing to transfer owership of the object or enjoyment of the service, free of charge
2. The intended recipient is willing to accept the ownership of the object or the enjoyment of the service (without which, the act may be interpreted as an assault rather than a gift).
Unlike the Tribunal, together with everyone I know, I guessed that the young lady had not signalled her acceptance of the second condition. Thus, making the act of supply an assault rather than a gift.
The many cases of assault on women before the courts everywhere depend on that interpretation.
Shortly, I shall restate the SNF, taking account of its successful use with several lanfuages, as a Semantic Grammar, with our usual invitation to offer a refutation, as we adoptef Karl Popper’s Refutationism as our preferred scientific method, when I moved from industry to academe, at the London School of Economics, where he chaired the department of Philosophy and Scientific Method.
Please be prepared to offer us the courtesy of propositions that threaten to Refute our hypothesis.
Incidentally, watch out for others offering a Semantic Grammar, because the paper I submitted to the Workshop on Foundation Ontologies was rejected on totally unscientific grouds, of my literary style that admits anecdotes and jokes (relevant facts,of course), potentially leaving one or both of these ANONYMOUS reviewers the opportunity to preceed me.
Aditionally, I would welcome advice on how to deal with one of my Professorial Plagiarists, whose Vice Chancellor refuses to do anything about this lack of integrity most likely becaused the two plagiarised books and numerous paper by his students citing citing them as the orign of 30+years of my work as their origin, because they attract many high-fee-paying students from the plagiarist’s country of origin.
The University has invented an imaginary commission or tribunal to investigate my claim, without it having any constitution, terms of reference or rule that they must reveal any pecuniary or other interest in the findings.
Wishing you all a life scientific, more peaceful than mine, Ronald Stamper.
All contributions to this forum are covered by an open-source license.
For information about the wiki, the license, and how to subscribe or
unsubscribe to the forum, see http://ontologforum.org/info/
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ontolog-forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ontolog-foru...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ontolog-forum/ce0c701baf774a30bb718b88e4bb9798%40bestweb.net.