[Crm-sig] ISSUE: Scholarly Reading.

Francesco Beretta francesco.beretta at ish-lyon.cnrs.fr
Fri Mar 31 08:16:06 EEST 2017


Dear all,

I'm quite acquainted with the factoid model and issues it raises, and 
participated recently in a workhop about prosopography in Vienna (in 
February) where I met once again John Bradley. I would prefer to discuss 
all this in Heraklion or at a later point on the list because the issue 
is quite complicated and needs a thorough discussion.

Juste to give some examples quoting the Bradley/Pasin text:

"Factoid represents the spot in a primary source where something is said 
about one or more persons".

"factoid approach prioritizes the sources, rather than our historians’ 
reading of them. "

"state of affairs described by the document is either a ‘situation’ or 
an ‘event’, i.e., more generally, a ‘temporal entity’"

As you see, there are many notions behind the factoid model and I 
couldn't say for sure if it's an event, a reading or a portion of text, 
or all of them at once.


In the same paper Martin mentions, an alignment with the CRM is 
proposed: a factoid is a subclass of E2 Temporal entity and a so called 
"document-interpretation-act" is a subclass of E3 Attribute assignement. 
The reading would be more on this side.

I'm not (yet) so trained in the CRM to be able to tell if this 
alignement is accurate but in any case this paper raises very 
interesting issues we have to discuss (and are discussing) in the domain 
of an extension of the CRM for historical data. And are certainly worth 
a discussion in the SIG.

See you soon

Francesco Beretta







Le 30.03.17 à 17:10, martin a écrit :
> Dear All,
>
> My colleague Athina found the following paper:
> Michele Pasin, John Bradley; Factoid-based prosopography and computer 
> ontologies: towards an integrated approach. Lit Linguist Computing 
> 2015; 30 (1): 86-97.
>
> It seems that "factoid" describes the attitude towards a text I tried 
> to formulate as "Reading" ?
>
> Best,
>
> Martin
>
> On 23/3/2017 8:10 μμ, martin wrote:
>> Dear All,
>>
>> I propose to start the discussion about a simplified Inference model 
>> for the case in which the interpretation of a text as a proposition 
>> is not questioned, but other things are questioned:
>>
>> A) assertions of historical truth: We need a text with a questioned 
>> fact, such as Nero singing in Rome when it was burning. I think 
>> Tacitus states he was singing in Rome, and another source says he was 
>> on the countryside.
>>
>> B) Shakespeare's "love is not love" : scholarly interpretation = 
>> translation of sense
>>
>> C) Questioning provenance or authenticity of texts: In the Merchant 
>> of Venice, place details are mentioned that only a person who was 
>> there could have written that. Shakespeare was not allowed to travel 
>> abroad.
>> C1) Or, critical editions: In the first written version of Buddha's 
>> speaches (Pali Canon), there are identifiable passages that present 
>> past-Buddha dogmata.
>>
>> I would start with A), then B), then C)
>>
>> So, we first want to solve the case that the premise is a 
>> proposition, which is not believed as such.
>> Rather, it is believed that the author of the text meant to express 
>> this proposition. This implies that the premise does not make any 
>> sense without a provenance assumption, which must be believed.
>>
>> In A), the provenance of the text from Tacitus is believed. His good 
>> will to say the truth about Nero not.
>> In B) The provenance "Shakespeare" back to the respective 
>> edition/name or pseudonym/place of creation is not questioned.
>> In C1) The text as being that compiled following the first 
>> performance is not questioned, but who wrote the text under the name 
>> of Shakespeare is questioned.
>> In C2) The provenance of the Pali Canon edition is not questioned, 
>> neither that its content mainly goes historically back to Buddha, but 
>> the provenance of a paragraph is questioned.
>>
>> Therefore, we could Introduce a subclass of I2 Belief i'd call 
>> "reading", which puts the focus on believing authenticity of a 
>> comprehensible natural language proposition relative to an explicitly 
>> stated provenance, but does not mean believing the proposition, nor 
>> questioning the intended meaning of the text:
>>
>> J1 used as premise (was premise for) : IXX Reading
>>
>> IXX Reading  subclass of I2 Belief (or a generalized Belief)
>>
>> properties of IXX Reading:
>>    JX1 understanding : Information Object (the cited phrase, 
>> understanding the words)
>>    JX2 believing provenance : I4 Proposition Set (This contains the 
>> link from the cited phrase to the text the phrase is taken from, and 
>> all provenance data believed. E.g. Shakespeare edition 1648(??) 
>> believed, authorship by Shakespeare questioned, etc.)
>> *optional:*
>>    JX3 reading as : I4 Proposition Set (the translation of the cited 
>> into triples. If absent, the interpretation of the cited phrase is 
>> regarded to be obvious)
>>
>> and J5 defaults to "true" (I believe all "J5 <#_J5_holds_to>holds to 
>> be: I6 <#_I6_Belief_Value>Belief Value" should default to "True" if 
>> absent).
>>
>> Then, a conclusion could be that the Information Object (cited 
>> phrase) is not believed. In that case, we would need to generalize I4 
>> to be either a Named Graph or an unambiguous text. If we do not, we 
>> could use JX1, JX3 to introduce the translation of the cited text as 
>> formal proposition, and then use J5 to say "FALSE": "Nero singing in 
>> burning Rome 18 to 24 July, 64 AD"
>>
>> In the case of text sense interpretation, we would need a sort of 
>> "has translation" construct, if not simply a work about another work 
>> (FRBRoo).
>>
>> The representation of a text in a formal proposition (Nero P14 
>> performed E7 Activity P2 has type "singing" ...falls within 
>> Destruction....)
>>
>> In the case of the Buddhist text, we would need in addition the 
>> believe in the provenance of the post-Buddha dogma, plus the reading, 
>> resulting in a different provenance for the paragraph.
>>
>> If we agree on something like that, let us see if we can simplify or 
>> shortcut anything.
>>
>> best,
>>
>> Martin**
>> -- 
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>>   Dr. Martin Doerr              |  Vox:+30(2810)391625        |
>>   Research Director             |  Fax:+30(2810)391638        |
>>                                 |  Email:martin at ics.forth.gr  |
>>                                                               |
>>                 Center for Cultural Informatics               |
>>                 Information Systems Laboratory                |
>>                  Institute of Computer Science                |
>>     Foundation for Research and Technology - Hellas (FORTH)   |
>>                                                               |
>>                 N.Plastira 100, Vassilika Vouton,             |
>>                  GR70013 Heraklion,Crete,Greece               |
>>                                                               |
>>               Web-site:http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl            |
>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>
>
> -- 
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
>   Dr. Martin Doerr              |  Vox:+30(2810)391625        |
>   Research Director             |  Fax:+30(2810)391638        |
>                                 |  Email:martin at ics.forth.gr  |
>                                                               |
>                 Center for Cultural Informatics               |
>                 Information Systems Laboratory                |
>                  Institute of Computer Science                |
>     Foundation for Research and Technology - Hellas (FORTH)   |
>                                                               |
>                 N.Plastira 100, Vassilika Vouton,             |
>                  GR70013 Heraklion,Crete,Greece               |
>                                                               |
>               Web-site:http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl            |
> --------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Crm-sig mailing list
> Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr
> http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ics.forth.gr/pipermail/crm-sig/attachments/20170331/b28e5eaa/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Crm-sig mailing list