The basic data structures of Web Annotation

The basic data structures of Web Annotation

Web annotation

Other physicists and mathematicians at the turn of the century came close to arriving at what is currently known as spacetime. Einstein himself noted, that with so many people unraveling separate pieces of the puzzle, "the special theory of relativity, if we regard its development in retrospect, was ripe for discovery in 1905."
Interesting. This acts as evidence for the hypothesis that environments/conditions are powerful forcing functions.
It also acts as evidence against the argument of the "lone genius".
while a student at New York University in 2000. He later co-created and starred in the MTV sketch comed
test
marijuana entrepreneur and hand surgeon Jason Pirozzolo
Interesting combo.
Internet From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to navigation Jump to search Global system of connected computer networks This article is about the worldwide computer network. For the global system of pages accessed via URLs, see World Wide Web.
"connected computer networks"
"global system"
"URLs"
Social media From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to navigation Jump to search Internet services for sharing personal information and ideas Social media are interactive digitally mediated technologies that facilitate the creation or sharing/exchange of information, ideas, career interests, and other forms of expression via virtual communities and networks.[1][2] While challenges to the definition of social media arise due to the broad variety of stand-alone and built-in social-media services currently available, there are some common features:[2] Social media are interactive Web 2.0 Internet-based applications.[2][3]
Interactive Digitally Mediated technologies that facilitate creation or sharing/exchange of information
Digital economy refers to an economy that is based on digital computing technologies, although we increasingly perceive this as conducting business through markets based on the internet and the World Wide Web.[1] The digital economy is also referred to as the Internet Economy, New Economy, or Web Economy. Increasingly, the digital economy is intertwined with the traditional economy, making a clear delineation harder. It results from billions of everyday online connections among people, businesses, devices, data, and processes. It is based on the interconnectedness of people, organizations, and machines that results from the Internet, mobile technology and the internet of things
"digital" economy is focused on markets on the Internet and the world wide web.
Online connections among people
Internet, Mobile Technology, Internet of things
Virtual communities are used for a variety of social and professional groups; interaction between community members vary from personal to purely formal. For example, an email distribution list could serve as a personal means of communicating with family and friends, and also formally to coordinate with coworkers.
the purpose for some "digital" forms of texts and communities
A virtual community is a social network of individuals who connect through specific social media, potentially crossing geographical and political boundaries in order to pursue mutual interests or goals. Some of the most pervasive virtual communities are online communities operating under social networking services.
relation of social network
social media and online communities
It generally refers at least to the cultures of virtual communities,
"Virtual" as in another word for intangible medium physically that exist on a different plane (online)
Information Age
link between the Information Age and the Digital Revolution
This marks the transition from load time (and dynamic link time, if present) to run time.
2.2 billion years older than the Sun, at 6.9 billion years old
The cite and the diagram says it is 8.2 billion years old. Not 6.9 billion years old.
Pennsylvan
Note
Amazing how many muslim temples existed in Athens circa 1831, as shown in this drawing about king Otto's marriage in Greece.
these events can break the flow of the game and force the player to repeat sections until they master the event, adding false difficulty to the game.
Blessed Anna Maria Taigi (1769–1837) is the most known seer of the Three Days of Darkness and describes the event in this way:
This is sourced to a website that sells blessed candles. https://www.virgosacrata.com/three-days-of-darkness.html They in turn source it to a book "The prophets and our Times" from 1941 by Gerald Culleston. It in turn gives as its sources
Providence-Sligo: Life of Ven. Anna Maria Taigi Thompson : Life of Ven. Anna Maria Taigi
https://archive.org/stream/TheProphetsAndOurTimes/TheProphetsAndOurTimes_djvu.txt
哲学家、哈佛大学教授诺齐克(Nozick,1938—2002)写过一本书,叫《反省的人生》。他在其中谈到,苏格拉底“未经反省的人生不值得活”的说法也许有些苛刻,但是,对人生的反省虽然可能不会助人成功,给人以一种冲过终点的感觉,却能让人成熟、让生活充实,还很有可能产生一种定向或调整的作用。这种反省,就像自己创作一幅自画像,而不是自拍一幅“快照”。自画一幅油画像不可能在短时间内完成,它需要不断审视,不断修改,最后它不仅成为一个艺术品,还成为一种自己对自己的深刻认识。
A bodhisattva vow ritual text attributed to Nāgārjuna, of the second-third century CE, states the vow as follows: "Just as the past tathāgata arhat samyaksambuddhas, when engaging in the behavior of a bodhisattva, generated the aspiration to unsurpassed complete enlightenment so that all beings be liberated, all beings be freed, all beings be relieved, all beings attain complete nirvana, all beings be placed in omniscient wisdom, in the same way, I whose name is so-and-so, from this time forward, generate the aspiration to unsurpassed complete enlightenment so that all beings be liberated, all beings be freed, all beings be relieved, all beings attain complete nirvana, all beings be placed in omniscient wisdom."[31]
bodhisattva vow
![]()
Bodhisattva
![]()
An event space, which is a set of events F {\displaystyle {\mathcal {F}}} F
可以把omega看作是可能宇宙集合,事件看作是一个propostion。
The thermophoresis of a fluorescently labeled molecule A
fluorescent label is needed? here the molecule A is protein or ligand?
Influenced byC, Smalltalk
In the Camerer, Loewenstein and Weber's article, it is mentioned that the setting closest in structure to the market experiments done would be underwriting, a task in which well-informed experts price goods that are sold to a less-informed public. Investment bankers value securities, experts taste cheese, store buyers observe jewelry being modeled, and theater owners see movies before they are released. They then sell those goods to a less-informed public. If they suffer from the curse of knowledge, high-quality goods will be overpriced and low-quality goods underpriced relative to optimal, profit-maximizing prices; prices will reflect characteristics (e.g., quality) that are unobservable to uninformed buyers ("you get what you pay for").[5] The curse of knowledge has a paradoxical effect in these settings. By making better-informed agents think that their knowledge is shared by others, the curse helps alleviate the inefficiencies that result from information asymmetries (a better informed party having an advantage in a bargaining situation), bringing outcomes closer to complete information. In such settings, the curse on individuals may actually improve social welfare.
How might one exploit this effect to more proactively improve and promote social welfare?
Such research drew from Baruch Fischhoff's work in 1975 surrounding hindsight bias, a cognitive bias that knowing the outcome of a certain event makes it seem more predictable than may actually be true.[5] Research conducted by Fischhoff revealed that participants did not know that their outcome knowledge affected their responses, and, if they did know, they could still not ignore or defeat the effects of the bias.
This curse of knowledge also explains the danger behind thinking about student learning based on what appears best to faculty members, as opposed to what has been verified with students.
Are there other axes or criteria that might be used other than these two? One seems better than the other, but what appears best to teachers is potentially better than nothing. (Though in cases it could be so bad that nothing may be preferable to a teacher's viewpoint.)
The hypothesis, being insecure, needs to have practical implications leading at least to mental tests and, in science, lending themselves to scientific tests.
Exactly. The hypothesis is kind of an abstract thing to predict from. It's the predictions that you test, not the hypothesis directly. If the hypothesis lets you make predictions that turn out true with testing, then the hypothesis is more-or-less confirmed. If its predictions turn out inaccurate, then the hypothesis is falsified.
Test the hypothesis
or, more specifically, test predictions from the hypothesis.
This tendency is known as the “actor-observer effect”. What this means is that people often attribute their own behavior to situational causes, while observers attribute the actor's behavior to the personality or disposition of the actor. For example, an actor's common reason to be late is due to the situational reason, traffic. Observers’ lack of contextual knowledge about the traffic, i.e. common ground, leads to them attributing the lateness due to ignorance or laziness on the actor's part. This tendency towards dispositional attribution is especially magnified when the stakes are higher and the situation is more complex. When observers are relatively calm, the tendency towards dispositional attribution is less strong.[25]
[[actor-observer effect]]
Common ground in communication has been critical in mitigating misunderstandings and negotiations.
All the fun of watching the Newlywed Game is in seeing the communication and mis-communication in realizing how much common ground a couple has or doesn't.
It comprises the collection of "mutual knowledge, mutual beliefs, and mutual assumptions" that is essential for communication between two people.
I've seen a few people with websites that have a grouping of some of their past posts to help orient new readers into their way of thinking and understanding to help provide common grounding for new readers.
Colin Walker is an example that has had one in the past, but it looks like the move from WordPress to his new system, the original link to that data is gone now. His page was called "required" and an archived version of his example(s) can be found archived here: https://web.archive.org/web/2020*/https://colinwalker.blog/required/
Visible spectrum wrapped to join blue and green in an additive mixture of cyan
the rainbow as a continuous (repeating) circle instead of semicircle
Thinking about "just" and "simply" in technical documents.
chronicled in the New Testament.
what does this mean?
Jesus is the Christ, whose coming as the Messiah was prophesied in the Hebrew Bible, called the Old Testament in Christianity
couldn't this be a coincidence?
Structure and Interpretation of Classical Mechanics
Yoneda lemma
![]()
the interweaving of opposites – and implies the process of an object being moulded into unity.
interweawing of opposites
object moulded into unity
art created as a result of such a chance-determined process
art by chance
for compositions resulting from "actions made by chance"
creations resulting from actions made by chance
Heraclitus
![]()
Nevertheless, co-hyponyms are not necessarily incompatible in all senses. A queen and mother are both hyponyms of woman but there is nothing preventing the queen from being a mother.
not necessarily incompatible in all senses.
so is this only a concern/possibility when the word in question is a polyseme?
but there is nothing preventing the queen from being a mother
The meaning of the "incompatibility" relation seems really ambiguous. What does that mean precisely?
And how would we know for sure if an incompatibility (such as a peach is not a plum) or lack of incompatibility (a queen can be a mother and a mother can be a queen) is a sufficient condition to cause it to be or not be a co-hyponym?
Oh. I guess it says
Co-hyponyms are often but not always related to one another by the relation of incompatibility.
so it actually can't ever be used to prove or disprove (sufficient/necessary condition) that something is a co-hyponym. So that observation, while interesting, is not helpful in a practical / deterministic way...
It consists of two relations; the first one being exemplified in "An X is a Y" (simple hyponymy) while the second relation is "An X is a kind/type of Y". The second relation is said to be more discriminating and can be classified more specifically under the concept of taxonomy.
So I think what this saying, rather indirectly (from the other direction), if I'm understanding correctly, is that the relationships that can be inferred from looking at a taxonomy are ambiguous, because a taxonomy includes 2 kinds of relationships, but encodes them in the same way (conflates them together as if they were both hyponyms--er, well, this is saying that the are both kinds of hyponyms):
Actually, I may have read it wrong / misunderstood it... While it's not ruling out that simple hyponymy may sometimes be used in a taxonomy, it is be saying that the "second relation" is "more specifically under the concept of taxonomy" ... which is not really clear, but seems to mean that it is more appropriate / better for use as a criterion in a taxonomy.
Okay, so define "simple hyponymy" and name the other kind of hyponymy that is referenced here.
This shows that compatibility may be relevant.
A synonym of co-hyponym based on same tier (and not hyponymic) relation is allonym (which means "different name").
Should mention/define all the possible subtypes of hyponym relationships, including
direct hyponym direct hypernym
The hierarchical structure of semantic fields can be mostly seen in hyponymy.
Good explanation about semantic fields.
I assume the same or an even stronger statement can be made about semantic classes (which to me are like more clear-cut, distinct semantic fields), then? 
A hyponym is a word or phrase whose semantic field is more specific than its hypernym.
A hyponym refers to a type. A meronym refers to a part. For example, a hyponym of tree is pine tree or oak tree (a type of tree), but a meronym of tree is bark or leaf (a part of tree).
The Taylor series of a real or complex-valued function f (x) that is infinitely differentiable at a real or complex number a is the power series f ( a ) + f ′ ( a ) 1 ! ( x − a ) + f ″ ( a ) 2 ! ( x − a ) 2 + f ‴ ( a ) 3 ! ( x − a ) 3 + ⋯ , {\displaystyle f(a)+{\frac {f'(a)}{1!}}(x-a)+{\frac {f''(a)}{2!}}(x-a)^{2}+{\frac {f'''(a)}{3!}}(x-a)^{3}+\cdots ,}
What's the connection between a series and the function?
-- because of the phrase: "the Taylor series of a ... function "
Lexical (semiotics) or content word, words referring to things, as opposed to having only grammatical meaning
faithful functor
Intuitively, a subcategory of C is a category obtained from C by "removing" some of its objects and arrows.
is the vocabulary of a language or branch of knowledge (such as nautical or medical)
The lexicon of a language is its vocabulary. Lexicon is also a synonym for a dictionary or encyclopedic dictionary
Windshield phenomenon
This windscreen evidence is very controversial. It may tell us something, but if so it is probably about the impact of roads on insects. Manu Sanders, who did her PhD on edge effects such as roads on insects has found only one published study on the insect abundance.
People often claim the ‘windscreen phenomenon’ is established evidence and proven fact. But a search of academic journal databases returns only one published study that has used car windscreens to measure changes in local insect abundance. In that study, Anders Møller compared insect abundance (although it’s not clear from the Methods if he actually measured density) with breeding rates of insectivorous birds in an agricultural landscape in Denmark. Data was collected in the same way at the same location for 20 years, which is very impressive, and analysis showed an 80% decline in insects across the period. She says that it is a good study, especially the parallel declines in birds and their insect foods. But it is only one location and one environmental context. She continues: This tells us about insect splatter on car windscreens in that location, not the world. There are more than 21 million km of roads across the world. Generally roads have negative effects on insect abundance. There are a lot more studies measuring broader-scale effects of roads on insects. But, as with all ecological questions, there is never one single factor influencing a dataset. A recent review found only 50 studies that had investigated the ecological impact of roads on insects (the review was published in 2015 and there have been a few more studies published since then). Overall the authors found generally negative effects on insect abundance and diversity. They also found there are lots of factors within the broader ‘road – insect’ interaction that affect results. For example, during my PhD, we investigated edge effects on wild insect pollinators in almond orchards (the edge was a two-lane low-traffic road between monoculture almond orchards and native mallee woodland). The road wasn’t a barrier, but we found that the edge effect varied across time as the floral resource pulse of the orchards on one side peaked and declined. First, it depends mainly on the verges. Nowadays we trim the verges of roads much more and this impacts on the numbers of insects on the roads.
See The windscreen phenomenon: anecdata is not scientific evidence
Also she mentions bug deflectors. You can get these to attach to a car to reduce the insect splatter.
https://www.carid.com/articles/age-old-debate-do-bug-deflectors-work.html
In a broader sense, taxonomy also applies to relationship schemes other than parent-child hierarchies, such as network structures. Taxonomies may then include a single child with multi-parents, for example, "Car" might appear with both parents "Vehicle" and "Steel Mechanisms"
Taxonomies are often represented as is-a hierarchies where each level is more specific (in mathematical language "a subset of") the level above it. For example, a basic biology taxonomy would have concepts such as mammal, which is a subset of animal, and dogs and cats, which are subsets of mammal. This kind of taxonomy is called an is-a model because the specific objects are considered as instances of a concept. For example, Fido is-an instance of the concept dog and Fluffy is-a cat.
Mutually exclusive categories can be beneficial. If categories appear several places, it's called cross-listing or polyhierarchical. The hierarchy will lose its value if cross-listing appears too often. Cross-listing often appears when working with ambiguous categories that fits more than one place.
Researchers reported that large populations consistently develop highly similar category systems. This may be relevant to lexical aspects of large communication networks and cultures such as folksonomies and language or human communication, and sense-making in general.
In the simple biology example, dog is a hypernym and Fido is one of its hyponyms. A word can be both a hyponym and a hypernym. For example, dog is a hyponym of mammal and also a hypernym of Fido.
I wish they hadn't used tokens/objects in this example. Wouldn't it be just as clear or clearer if they had stuck to only comparing types/classes?
It may be okay to mix them like that in some contexts, but in other cases it seems like this would be suffering from ignoring/conflating/[better word?] the Type–token distinction.
Does linguistics just not make the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type%E2%80%93token_distinction ?
This statement seems to reinforce that idea:
words that are examples of categories are hyponyms
because an example of a category/class/type could be either a sub-class or an instance of that category/class/type, right?
words that are examples of categories are hyponyms
So linguistics doesn't make the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type%E2%80%93token_distinction ?
Two of the predominant types of relationships in knowledge-representation systems are predication and the universally quantified conditional.
Mathematically, a hierarchical taxonomy is a tree structure of classifications for a given set of objects.
Taxonomy is different from meronomy, which is dealing with the categorisation of parts of a whole.
Tree (data structure)
Tree structure
In computer science, a tree is a widely used abstract data type that simulates a hierarchical tree structure
a tree (data structure) is the computer science analogue/dual to tree structure in mathematics
Not to be confused with tree (graph theory), a specific type of mathematical object.
Confusing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_(data_structure) says
Not to be confused with tree (graph theory) "Tree (graph theory)"), a specific type of mathematical object. but https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_(graph_theory) redirects to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_structure and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_structure is in category Trees (data structures) So is one a subtype/hyponym of the other ... or what?? How are they related? Skimming the articles a bit, esp. the first paragraph which clearly states as much ( :) ), I believe the answer is: a tree (data structure) is an implementation (in a programming language) of / or a "type that simulates" a hierarchical tree structure. a tree (data structure) is the computer science analogue/dual to tree structure in mathematics
Not to be confused with trie, a specific type of tree data structure. Not to be confused with tree (graph theory), a specific type of mathematical object.
How can they miss the opportunity to explain/describe the relationship/similarity/difference to/from graphs, graph theory, and/or graph data??
graph theory is the study of graphs, which are mathematical structures used to model pairwise relations between objects
Is this topic part of linguistics too? Or only semantics?
This should link to / explain the relationship to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Class_(computer_programming) (which I believe is a way of expressing / codifying semantic classes into source code).
It should also link to / explain the relationship to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_theory
A semantic class contains words that share a semantic feature.
For example within nouns there are two sub classes, concrete nouns and abstract nouns.
The concrete nouns include people, plants, animals, materials and objects while the abstract nouns refer to concepts such as qualities, actions, and processes.
Semantic classes may intersect. The intersection of female and young can be girl.
More examples are given at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_feature:
(Not answered on this stub article)
What, precisely, is the distinction/difference between a semantic class and a semantic field? At the very least, you would say that they are themselves both very much within the same semantic field.
So, is a semantic class distinct from a semantic field in that semantic class is a more well-defined/clear-cut semantic field? And a semantic field is a more fluid, nebulous, not well-defined field (in the same sense as a magnetic field, which has no distinct boundary whatsoever, only a decay as you move further away from its source) ("semantic fields are constantly flowing into each other")?
If so, could you even say that a semantic class is a kind of (hyponym) of semantic field?
Maybe I should pose this question on a semantics forum.
How is it that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_theory links to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_(model_theory) but the latter does not have any link to or mention of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_theory
Neither mentions the relationship between them, but both of them should, since I expect that is a common question.
Model theory recognizes and is intimately concerned with a duality: it examines semantical elements (meaning and truth) by means of syntactical elements (formulas and proofs) of a corresponding language
Roughly speaking, a category may be thought of as a type theory shorn of its syntax.
In fact categories can themselves be viewed as type theories of a certain kind
Some types exist as descriptions of objects, but not as tangible physical objects. One can show someone a particular bicycle, but cannot show someone, explicitly, the type "bicycle", as in "the bicycle is popular."
Property types (e.g. "height in metres" or "thorny") are often understood ontologically as concepts. Property instances (e.g. height = 1.74) are sometimes understood as measured values, and sometimes understood as sensations or observations of reality.
The words type, concept, property, quality, feature and attribute (all used in describing things) tend to be used with different verbs. E.g. Suppose a rose bush is defined as a plant that is "thorny", "flowering" and "bushy". You might say a rose bush instantiates these three types, or embodies these three concepts, or exhibits these three properties, or possesses these three qualities, features or attributes.
The distinction in computer programming between classes and objects is related, though in this context, "class" sometimes refers to a set of objects (with class-level attribute or operations) rather than a description of an object in the set, as "type" would.
The distinction is important in disciplines such as logic, linguistics, metalogic, typography, and computer programming.
The sentence "they drive the same car" is ambiguous. Do they drive the same type of car (the same model) or the same instance of a car type (a single vehicle)?
A semantic similarity network (SSN) is a special form of semantic network.[1] designed to represent concepts and their semantic similarity. Its main contribution is reducing the complexity of calculating semantic distances.
There is obvious connections between the flow paths of a use case and its test cases. Deriving functional test cases from a use case through its scenarios (running instances of a use case) is straightforward.
With content based upon an action or event flow structure, a model of well-written use cases also serves as an excellent groundwork and valuable guidelines for the design of test cases
Originally he had used the terms usage scenarios and usage case – the latter a direct translation of his Swedish term användningsfall – but found that neither of these terms sounded natural in English, and eventually he settled on use case.
Use cases are not only texts, but also diagrams, if needed.
Title: "goal the use case is trying to satisfy"[23]:101 Main Success Scenario: numbered list of steps[23]:101 Step: "a simple statement of the interaction between the actor and a system"[23]:101 Extensions: separately numbered lists, one per Extension[23]:101 Extension: "a condition that results in different interactions from .. the main success scenario". An extension from main step 3 is numbered 3a, etc.
Not sure why I find this example so interesting.
Probably because it is a human-readable outline that uses machine-readable (programming language source code) constructs, namely loops/iteration.
The format in which this is written in, then, is itself a kind of (high-level, human-oriented) programming language.
Example:
the phrase use case is a polyseme with two senses
The is-a relationship may also be contrasted with the instance-of relationship between objects (instances) and types (classes): see Type–token distinction.
In autoepistemic logic, which rejects the law of excluded middle, predicates may be true, false, or simply unknown
The precise semantic interpretation of an atomic formula and an atomic sentence will vary from theory to theory.
A predicate whose quantifiers all apply to individual elements, and not to sets or predicates, is called a first-order predicate.
While propositional logic can only express facts, autoepistemic logic can express knowledge and lack of knowledge about facts.
The autoepistemic logic is a formal logic for the representation and reasoning of knowledge about knowledge.
'female' + 'performer' = 'actress'
An individual semantic feature constitutes one component of a word's intention, which is the inherent sense or concept evoked.
Would this be referring, then, to explicit meaning or implicit meaning -- or neither?
The semantic features of a word can be notated using a binary feature notation common to the framework of componential analysis.[11] A semantic property is specified in square brackets and a plus or minus sign indicates the existence or non-existence of that property.
a class is an implementation—a concrete data structure and collection of subroutines—while a type is an interface
but narrowly speaking objects have type
In casual use, people often refer to the "class" of an object
Semantic class
semantic fields are constantly flowing into each other
See https://hyp.is/PKGOeo0_Eeuj5FeXF3jzng/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_class
The English word "man" used to mean "human being" exclusively, while today it predominantly means "adult male," but its semantic field still extends in some uses to the generic "human"
Synonymy requires the sharing of a sememe or seme, but the semantic field is a larger area surrounding those.
A general and intuitive description is that words in a semantic field are not necessarily synonymous, but are all used to talk about the same general phenomenon.
A semantic field denotes a segment of reality symbolized by a set of related words. The words in a semantic field share a common semantic property
grouped semantically (by meaning)
There may only be historical reasons that, for example, the periodic table is called a classification rather than a taxonomy
Taxonomy was first used in biology, but the term has spread to other domains.
Categorization is, for example, mostly used by cognitive psychologists for what other call classification
Synonyms and near-synonyms for the term classification
Categorization is sometimes considered synonymous with classification
Categorization is grounded in the features that distinguish the category's members from nonmembers.
distinguish = make a distinction between
Categorization is the human ability and activity of recognizing shared features or similarities between the elements of the experience of the world (such as objects, events, or ideas), organizing and classifying experience by associating them to a more abstract group (that is, a category, class, or type),[1][2] on the basis of their traits, features, similarities or other criteria.
place
place?
to me that connotes a physical location.
How can they be using that in semantics? Is that a common term/jargon used in the terminology/lexicon of semantics?
semantic domain or semantic field
What, then, is the difference between a semantic domain and a semantic field? The way they are used here, it's almost as if they are listing them in order to emphasis that they are synonyms ... but I'm not sure.
From the later examples of basketball (https://hyp.is/ynKbXI1BEeuEheME3sLYrQ/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_domain) and coffee shop, however, I am pretty certain that semantic domain is quite different from (broader than) semantic field.
For instance English has a domain ‘Rain’, which includes words such as rain, drizzle, downpour, raindrop, puddle.
"rain" seems more like a semantic field — a group of very related or nearly synonymous words — than a semantic field.
Esp. when you consider the later example of basketball (https://hyp.is/ynKbXI1BEeuEheME3sLYrQ/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_domain) and coffee shop, which are more like the sense of "field" that means (academic/scientific/etc.) discipline.
For instance, in basketball there are many words that are specific to the sport. Free throw, court, half court, three pointer, and point guard are all terms that are specific to the sport of basketball. These words make very little sense when used outside of the semantic domain of basketball.
But this example seems so different than the first example they gave, "rain", which seems more like a semantic field — a group of very related or nearly synonymous words.
In lexicography a semantic domain or semantic field is defined as "an area of meaning and the words used to talk about it
Semantic domains are the foundational concept for initial stages of vernacular dictionary building projects.
This uses techniques such as SIL International's Dictionary Development Process (DDP),[4][5] RapidWords, or software such as WeSay[6] or FLEx. These techniques rely on extensive lists of semantic domains that are relevant to vernacular languages.
Sometimes lexicography is considered to be a part or a branch of lexicology, but properly speaking, only lexicologists who write dictionaries are lexicographers.
Some consider this a distinction of theory vs. practice.
An allied science to lexicology is lexicography, which also studies words, but primarily in relation with dictionaries – it is concerned with the inclusion of words in dictionaries and from that perspective with the whole lexicon
Not to be confused with lexicography.
For example, in the Dyirbal language, the morpheme balam marks each entity in its noun class with the semantic property of edibility,[8] and Burmese encodes the semantic property for the ability to cut or pierce. Encoding the functional property for transportation, housing, and speech are also attested in world languages.
meaningful or meaningless – for example, whether a given word is part of a language's lexicon with a generally understood meaning
Basic semantic properties include being meaningful or meaningless – for example, whether a given word is part of a language's lexicon with a generally understood meaning
The "for example" being where it is, is confusing, and I believe should be left out.
I think this would have been better written as:
Basic semantic properties include, for example, being meaningful or meaningless (that is, whether a given word is part of a language's lexicon with a generally understood meaning); polysemy, ..
those aspects of a linguistic unit, such as a morpheme, word, or sentence,
Speaking of ambiguity...
Are the examples in the list "such as a morpheme, word, or sentence" examples of
Unless you are already fairly familiar with those terms -- in particular, linguistic unit -- it may not be clear.
I believe these are given as examples of "linguistic unit", in order to clarify what we mean by "linguistic unit" — perhaps (ironically) precisely because many people would be unfamiliar with that expression/term.
Every woman talked to a student. This has two interpretations. Under one reading, every woman talked to the same student (the class president, for example), and here the noun phrase a student is specific. Under the second reading, various students were talked to. In this case, a student is non-specific.
a stative verb is one that describes a state of being, in contrast to a dynamic verb, which describes an action
Semantics: deals with the formal properties and interrelation of signs and symbols, without regard to meaning.
Is a branch (of a field/discipline) considered a hyponym?? 
How is the phrase
including the production of meaning used in this article, yet the word "semantics" does not appear even once?
At least https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meaning_(semiotics) ("semantics" appears exactly 1 time in that article) has a link to the article on semantics.
Seems like a missed opportunity to answer what to me is a very first immediate question that I wonder (and now I wonder if it really is a FAQ or if it's just me who wonders): how is semiotics different from semantics?
But I guess https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semiotics is a better place to look for that answer, and it answers that when it says:
he defined semiotics as grouped into three branches:
any form of activity, conduct, or process that involves signs, including the production of meaning. A sign is anything that communicates a meaning, that is not the sign itself, to the interpreter of the sign. The meaning can be intentional such as a word uttered with a specific meaning, or unintentional, such as a symptom being a sign of a particular medical condition. Signs can communicate through any of the senses, visual, auditory, tactile, olfactory, or taste.
However, if the distinctions between the two concepts appear to be superficial, intentional conflation may be desirable for the sake of conciseness and recall
All bats are animals. Some wooden objects are bats. Therefore, some wooden objects are animals.
Using words with different meanings can help clarify, or can cause real confusion.
often in error
In logic, it is the practice of treating two distinct concepts as if they were one, which produces errors or misunderstandings as a fusion of distinct subjects tends to obscure analysis of relationships which are emphasized by contrasts
Function (computer science) Function (engineering) Function (mathematics)
Is this a polyseme?
Or is that only the case if the different distinct senses are all within the same "field"?
Analysis involves reaching a richer and more precise understanding of each requirement and representing sets of requirements in multiple, complementary ways.
The most interesting point to me here is the part:
representing sets of requirements in multiple, complementary ways.
Please elaborate...
Use cases, user stories, functional requirements, and visual analysis models are popular choices for requirements specification.
Requirements Triage or prioritization of requirements is another activity which often follows analysis.
A polyseme is a word or phrase with different, but related senses.
is the capacity for a word or phrase to have multiple meanings, usually related by contiguity of meaning within a semantic field.
Dictionary writers list polysemes under the same entry; homonyms are defined separately.
This describes how you can tell which one it is by looking at the dictionary entry.
Polysemy is thus distinct from homonymy—or homophony—which is an accidental similarity between two words (such as bear the animal, and the verb to bear); while homonymy is often a mere linguistic coincidence, polysemy is not.
Intentional community
![]()
Spontaneous symmetry breaking illustrated
Notice how this is about symmetry between the system and the environment, not either individually
Internet addiction disorder
Internet addiction disorder (IAD), also known as problematic internet use or pathological internet use, is generally defined as problematic, compulsive use of the internet, that results in significant impairment in an individual's function in various life domains over a prolonged period of time. Young people are at particular risk of developing internet addiction disorder.
Social media and psychology
Social media began in the form of generalized online communities. These online communities formed on websites like Geocities.com in 1994, Theglobe.com in 1995, and Tripod.com in 1995.[1] Many of these early communities focused on social interaction by bringing people together through the use of chat rooms. The chat rooms encouraged users to share personal information, ideas, or even personal web pages. Later the social networking community Classmates took a different approach by simply having people link to each other by using their personal email addresses. By the late 1990s, social networking websites began to develop more advanced features to help users find and manage friends.[2] These newer generation of social networking websites began to flourish with the emergence of SixDegrees.com in 1997, Makeoutclub in 2000, Hub Culture in 2002, and Friendster in 2002.[3] However, the first profitable mass social networking website was the South Korean service, Cyworld.[4] Cyworld initially launched as a blog-based website in 1999 and social networking features were added to the website in 2001. Other social networking websites emerged like Myspace in 2002, LinkedIn in 2003, and Bebo in 2005. In 2009, the social networking website Facebook (launched in 2004) became the largest social networking website in the world.[5] Active users of Facebook increased from just a million in 2004 to over 750 million by the year 2011. Making internet-based social networking both a cultural and financial phenomenon.
Studies of great ape behavior show that they are good at cooperating in situations where there is no potential of deception, but behave egotistically in situations where there are motives for deception, suggesting that their "lack of cooperativeness" is not a lack of a cognitive ability at all, but rather a necessary adaptation to a society full of deception.[citation needed] This suggests that human cooperativeness began when proto-humans began to successfully avoid competition, which is also supported by the fact that the oldest evidence of care for the long-term sick and disabled are from shortly after the first emigration of hominins out of Africa about 1.8 million years ago
successfully avoiding competition was key to humans doing super well vs the egotistical, competitive, & deceiving ways of apes
being able to cooperate and get around deception/defection was key to humans doing so well
.. and you can see how we evolved white sclera so others can better follow our gaze, hence work with us
wow! (ape sclera is dark)
His life and legacy of scientific and political achievement, and his status as one of America's most influential Founding Fathers, have seen Franklin honored more than two centuries after his death on the fifty-cent piece, the $100 bill, warships, and the names of many towns, counties, educational institutions, and corporations, as well as numerous cultural references and with a portrait in the Oval Office.
Very true, he is someone that future generations will still learn about. He will still influence others just like MLK, Malcom X and others that changed America.
He initially owned and dealt in slaves but, by the late 1750s, he began arguing against slavery, became an abolitionist, and promoted education and the integration of blacks in American Society.
I was not aware of this before. Quite interesting, some people do change for the better. I am glad to see he began arguing against slavery.
He was promoted to deputy postmaster-general for the British colonies on August 10, 1753,[10] having been Philadelphia postmaster for many years, and this enabled him to set up the first national communications network.
All this must of really made him stand out beyond anyone around his age. I'm sure he was looked up to by others. It takes a lot of responsibility and determination..
Franklin became a successful newspaper editor and printer in Philadelphia, the leading city in the colonies, publishing the Pennsylvania Gazette at the age of 23.[7] He became wealthy publishing this and Poor Richard's Almanack, which he authored under the pseudonym "Richard Saunders".[
Crazy to think you can become successful being a newspaper editor. I always figured that type of job would be not worth it as I thought you wouldn't make much money off of it. But good for him!
Franklin earned the title of "The First American" for his early and indefatigable campaigning for colonial unity,
Never knew this, also the word "indefatigable is new to me as well.
A polymath, he was a leading writer, printer, political philosopher, politician, Freemason, postmaster, scientist, inventor, humorist, civic activist, statesman, and diplomat.
This man did everything! Well not exactly, but very impressive.