Natural language at a crossroads: formal and probabilistic approaches in philosophy and computer science
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2022 |
Outros Autores: | |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Manuscrito (Online) |
Texto Completo: | https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/manuscrito/article/view/8670442 |
Resumo: | Philosophy of language and computer science, despite being very distinct fields, share a great interest in natural language. However, while philosophy has traditionally opted for a formalist approach, computer science has been increasingly favoring probabilistic models. After presenting these two approaches in more detail, we discuss some of their main virtues and limitations. On the one hand, formalist models have trouble in acquiring semantic information from corpora and learning from large amounts of data. Probabilistic approaches, on the other hand, have difficulty in operating with compositionality, in dealing with contrast sets and hierarchical relations, and in distinguishing normative and descriptive views of meaning. We argue that a more fruitful dialogue between philosophers and computer scientists may help to produce a better approach to natural language and stimulate the integration of logical and probabilistic methods. |
id |
UNICAMP-17_4b64f88a3b300a873155683d6a1c614e |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br:article/8670442 |
network_acronym_str |
UNICAMP-17 |
network_name_str |
Manuscrito (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Natural language at a crossroads: formal and probabilistic approaches in philosophy and computer scienceNatural language at a crossroads: formal and probabilistic approaches in philosophy and computer scienceNatural language at a crossroads: formal and probabilistic approaches in philosophy and computer sciencePhilosophy of languagePhilosophy of languagePhilosophy of languagePhilosophy of language and computer science, despite being very distinct fields, share a great interest in natural language. However, while philosophy has traditionally opted for a formalist approach, computer science has been increasingly favoring probabilistic models. After presenting these two approaches in more detail, we discuss some of their main virtues and limitations. On the one hand, formalist models have trouble in acquiring semantic information from corpora and learning from large amounts of data. Probabilistic approaches, on the other hand, have difficulty in operating with compositionality, in dealing with contrast sets and hierarchical relations, and in distinguishing normative and descriptive views of meaning. We argue that a more fruitful dialogue between philosophers and computer scientists may help to produce a better approach to natural language and stimulate the integration of logical and probabilistic methods.Philosophy of language and computer science, despite being very distinct fields, share a great interest in natural language. However, while philosophy has traditionally opted for a formalist approach, computer science has been increasingly favoring probabilistic models. After presenting these two approaches in more detail, we discuss some of their main virtues and limitations. On the one hand, formalist models have trouble in acquiring semantic information from corpora and learning from large amounts of data. Probabilistic approaches, on the other hand, have difficulty in operating with compositionality, in dealing with contrast sets and hierarchical relations, and in distinguishing normative and descriptive views of meaning. We argue that a more fruitful dialogue between philosophers and computer scientists may help to produce a better approach to natural language and stimulate the integration of logical and probabilistic methods.Philosophy of language and computer science, despite being very distinct fields, share a great interest in natural language. However, while philosophy has traditionally opted for a formalist approach, computer science has been increasingly favoring probabilistic models. After presenting these two approaches in more detail, we discuss some of their main virtues and limitations. On the one hand, formalist models have trouble in acquiring semantic information from corpora and learning from large amounts of data. Probabilistic approaches, on the other hand, have difficulty in operating with compositionality, in dealing with contrast sets and hierarchical relations, and in distinguishing normative and descriptive views of meaning. We argue that a more fruitful dialogue between philosophers and computer scientists may help to produce a better approach to natural language and stimulate the integration of logical and probabilistic methods.Universidade Estadual de Campinas2022-07-20info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionTextTextinfo:eu-repo/semantics/otherapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/manuscrito/article/view/8670442Manuscrito: Revista Internacional de Filosofia; v. 45 n. 2 (2022): abr./jun.; 50-81Manuscrito: International Journal of Philosophy; Vol. 45 No. 2 (2022): abr./jun.; 50-81Manuscrito: Revista Internacional de Filosofía; Vol. 45 Núm. 2 (2022): abr./jun.; 50-812317-630Xreponame:Manuscrito (Online)instname:Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)instacron:UNICAMPenghttps://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/manuscrito/article/view/8670442/29594Brazil; ContemporaryBrazil; ContemporaryBrazil; ContemporaryCopyright (c) 2022 Manuscrito: Revista Internacional de Filosofiahttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessPirozelli, PauloCâmara, Igor2022-07-20T18:06:36Zoai:ojs.periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br:article/8670442Revistahttps://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/manuscritoPUBhttps://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/manuscrito/oaimwrigley@cle.unicamp.br|| dascal@spinoza.tau.ac.il||publicacoes@cle.unicamp.br2317-630X0100-6045opendoar:2022-07-20T18:06:36Manuscrito (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Natural language at a crossroads: formal and probabilistic approaches in philosophy and computer science Natural language at a crossroads: formal and probabilistic approaches in philosophy and computer science Natural language at a crossroads: formal and probabilistic approaches in philosophy and computer science |
title |
Natural language at a crossroads: formal and probabilistic approaches in philosophy and computer science |
spellingShingle |
Natural language at a crossroads: formal and probabilistic approaches in philosophy and computer science Pirozelli, Paulo Philosophy of language Philosophy of language Philosophy of language |
title_short |
Natural language at a crossroads: formal and probabilistic approaches in philosophy and computer science |
title_full |
Natural language at a crossroads: formal and probabilistic approaches in philosophy and computer science |
title_fullStr |
Natural language at a crossroads: formal and probabilistic approaches in philosophy and computer science |
title_full_unstemmed |
Natural language at a crossroads: formal and probabilistic approaches in philosophy and computer science |
title_sort |
Natural language at a crossroads: formal and probabilistic approaches in philosophy and computer science |
author |
Pirozelli, Paulo |
author_facet |
Pirozelli, Paulo Câmara, Igor |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Câmara, Igor |
author2_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Pirozelli, Paulo Câmara, Igor |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Philosophy of language Philosophy of language Philosophy of language |
topic |
Philosophy of language Philosophy of language Philosophy of language |
description |
Philosophy of language and computer science, despite being very distinct fields, share a great interest in natural language. However, while philosophy has traditionally opted for a formalist approach, computer science has been increasingly favoring probabilistic models. After presenting these two approaches in more detail, we discuss some of their main virtues and limitations. On the one hand, formalist models have trouble in acquiring semantic information from corpora and learning from large amounts of data. Probabilistic approaches, on the other hand, have difficulty in operating with compositionality, in dealing with contrast sets and hierarchical relations, and in distinguishing normative and descriptive views of meaning. We argue that a more fruitful dialogue between philosophers and computer scientists may help to produce a better approach to natural language and stimulate the integration of logical and probabilistic methods. |
publishDate |
2022 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2022-07-20 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion Text Text info:eu-repo/semantics/other |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/manuscrito/article/view/8670442 |
url |
https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/manuscrito/article/view/8670442 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/manuscrito/article/view/8670442/29594 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2022 Manuscrito: Revista Internacional de Filosofia https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2022 Manuscrito: Revista Internacional de Filosofia https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.coverage.none.fl_str_mv |
Brazil; Contemporary Brazil; Contemporary Brazil; Contemporary |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Estadual de Campinas |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Estadual de Campinas |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Manuscrito: Revista Internacional de Filosofia; v. 45 n. 2 (2022): abr./jun.; 50-81 Manuscrito: International Journal of Philosophy; Vol. 45 No. 2 (2022): abr./jun.; 50-81 Manuscrito: Revista Internacional de Filosofía; Vol. 45 Núm. 2 (2022): abr./jun.; 50-81 2317-630X reponame:Manuscrito (Online) instname:Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) instacron:UNICAMP |
instname_str |
Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) |
instacron_str |
UNICAMP |
institution |
UNICAMP |
reponame_str |
Manuscrito (Online) |
collection |
Manuscrito (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Manuscrito (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
mwrigley@cle.unicamp.br|| dascal@spinoza.tau.ac.il||publicacoes@cle.unicamp.br |
_version_ |
1800216568468078592 |