Re: Thesaurus
| From: | Vasiliy Chernov <bc_@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Friday, September 21, 2001, 17:48 |
|---|
On Wed, 19 Sep 2001 13:39:12 -0400, John Cowan <jcowan@...>
wrote:
>Lojban and -gua!spi both use thesaurus categories to classify their
>root words. The main issue is that classification of verbs (and
>loglanish roots are essentially verbs) tends to be classification
>of the grammatical subject. If you have a verb "S goes to O" (Chinese
>qu4), then should it be classified under agents, places, or events?
I think hypertext format provides a lot of possibilities for several
categorization principles to be implemented simultaniously.
That is, each subcategory can have several 'parents', and each upward
link can represent its own classification principle.
I've had some experience of designing such a system for a different
purpose (a multilingual directory of weblinks, http://www.mavicanet.com/).
>> For example, will I be sued if I copy the structure used in Roget's?
>
>No. The copyright on the classification scheme, assuming one was
>valid in the first place, expired long ago (the original thesaurus
>was published in 1852). Recent editions are of course still in
>copyright, but only the added materials (new words and phrases, etc.)
>
>There is an out-of-copyright thesaurus at
http://www.gutenberg.net .