Thesaurus question

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Thesaurus question

thomas.lange

Hi,

I just found this in the English-US thesaurus:
  dark has the antonym light, but light has the antonym heavy
Well, of course it isn't wrong. But maybe it is not what one would
expect either.
Thus, why is it this way? Does the thesaurus only support one antonym
per word? Or is it that dark was just not added as an additional antonym
for light?

Regards,
Thomas


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Thesaurus question

Marcin Miłkowski
Thomas Lange - Sun Germany - ham02 - Hamburg pisze:
> Hi,
>
> I just found this in the English-US thesaurus:
>   dark has the antonym light, but light has the antonym heavy
> Well, of course it isn't wrong. But maybe it is not what one would
> expect either.
> Thus, why is it this way? Does the thesaurus only support one antonym
> per word? Or is it that dark was just not added as an additional antonym
> for light?

It seems the thesaurus by default doesn't support symmetric relations -
so you need add antonyms to both words manually to have a symmetric
relation. But this is quite wrong: even though hypernymy is not
symmetric, it should be converted into hyponymy automatically. So
probably all relations should be symmetric in the thesaurus to save disk
space.

Or am I completely confused?


Regards
Marcin

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Thesaurus question

Németh László-2
Hi,

It seems, only the first antonyms of the synsets (I think, the first
elements of the antonym synsets) were used under the WordNet
conversion, but this is perfect: the thesaurus shows 44 synsets
(meanings) for dark. The first meaning "airy" has the antonym "heavy",
but the second meaning "light-colored" has the antonym "dark" (click
on the meanings to see its antonym and synonyms).

Regards,
László

2009/3/6 Marcin Miłkowski <[hidden email]>:

> Thomas Lange - Sun Germany - ham02 - Hamburg pisze:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I just found this in the English-US thesaurus:
>>  dark has the antonym light, but light has the antonym heavy
>> Well, of course it isn't wrong. But maybe it is not what one would
>> expect either.
>> Thus, why is it this way? Does the thesaurus only support one antonym
>> per word? Or is it that dark was just not added as an additional antonym
>> for light?
>
> It seems the thesaurus by default doesn't support symmetric relations - so
> you need add antonyms to both words manually to have a symmetric relation.
> But this is quite wrong: even though hypernymy is not symmetric, it should
> be converted into hyponymy automatically. So probably all relations should
> be symmetric in the thesaurus to save disk space.
>
> Or am I completely confused?
>
>
> Regards
> Marcin
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Thesaurus question

thomas.lange
In reply to this post by thomas.lange

Hi Marcin,


> Thomas Lange - Sun Germany - ham02 - Hamburg pisze:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I just found this in the English-US thesaurus:
>>   dark has the antonym light, but light has the antonym heavy
>> Well, of course it isn't wrong. But maybe it is not what one would
>> expect either.
>> Thus, why is it this way? Does the thesaurus only support one antonym
>> per word? Or is it that dark was just not added as an additional antonym
>> for light?
>
> It seems the thesaurus by default doesn't support symmetric relations -
> so you need add antonyms to both words manually to have a symmetric
> relation. But this is quite wrong: even though hypernymy is not
> symmetric, it should be converted into hyponymy automatically. So
> probably all relations should be symmetric in the thesaurus to save disk
> space.
>
> Or am I completely confused?

At least for antonyms thats what I would expect thats why I asked if
there is a reason for it not being that way.
If it is about antonyms I would even use a tool to enforce this.

But I'm not sure if that is the way to handle the 'normal' entries of
the thesaurus. It sounds normal to expect it for those as well, but I
can't proof that there won't be some good and reasonable exceptions from
that rule. Sometimes the relations to a specific synonym is somewhat
weak (yes it is there but is not necessarily what may come to mind),
whereas I consider a antonym relation as strong if it is set. And the
very meaning of antonym implies that it is (at least) a two word
relation, and that relation should be reflected in all related entries.


Thomas



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]