Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Theorie verbaler Dokumentationssprachen"
  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Boteram, F.: Semantische Relationen in Dokumentationssprachen : vom Thesaurus zum semantischen Netz (2010) 0.07
    0.067464456 = product of:
      0.16866113 = sum of:
        0.11995316 = weight(_text_:thesaurus in 4792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11995316 = score(doc=4792,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.23732872 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6210785 = idf(docFreq=1182, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051357865 = queryNorm
            0.50543046 = fieldWeight in 4792, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.6210785 = idf(docFreq=1182, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4792)
        0.048707973 = weight(_text_:22 in 4792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.048707973 = score(doc=4792,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1798465 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051357865 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4792, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4792)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Source
    Wissensspeicher in digitalen Räumen: Nachhaltigkeit - Verfügbarkeit - semantische Interoperabilität. Proceedings der 11. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation, Konstanz, 20. bis 22. Februar 2008. Hrsg.: J. Sieglerschmidt u. H.P.Ohly
    Theme
    Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
  2. Engerer, V.: Control and syntagmatization : vocabulary requirements in information retrieval thesauri and natural language lexicons (2017) 0.03
    0.02518492 = product of:
      0.1259246 = sum of:
        0.1259246 = weight(_text_:thesaurus in 3678) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1259246 = score(doc=3678,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.23732872 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6210785 = idf(docFreq=1182, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051357865 = queryNorm
            0.5305915 = fieldWeight in 3678, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.6210785 = idf(docFreq=1182, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3678)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    This paper explores the relationships between natural language lexicons in lexical semantics and thesauri in information retrieval research. These different areas of knowledge have different restrictions on use of vocabulary; thesauri are used only in information search and retrieval contexts, whereas lexicons are mental systems and generally applicable in all domains of life. A set of vocabulary requirements that defines the more concrete characteristics of vocabulary items in the 2 contexts can be derived from this framework: lexicon items have to be learnable, complex, transparent, etc., whereas thesaurus terms must be effective, current and relevant, searchable, etc. The differences in vocabulary properties correlate with 2 other factors, the well-known dimension of Control (deliberate, social activities of building and maintaining vocabularies), and Syntagmatization, which is less known and describes vocabulary items' varying formal preparedness to exit the thesaurus/lexicon, enter into linear syntactic constructions, and, finally, acquire communicative functionality. It is proposed that there is an inverse relationship between Control and Syntagmatization.
    Theme
    Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
  3. Engerer, V.: Thesauri, Terminologien, Lexika, Fachsprachen : Kontrolle, physische Verortung und das Prinzip der Syntagmatisierung von Vokabularen (2014) 0.01
    0.014540519 = product of:
      0.072702594 = sum of:
        0.072702594 = weight(_text_:thesaurus in 3644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.072702594 = score(doc=3644,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.23732872 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6210785 = idf(docFreq=1182, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051357865 = queryNorm
            0.30633712 = fieldWeight in 3644, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6210785 = idf(docFreq=1182, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3644)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Theme
    Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
  4. Mazzocchi, F.: Relations in KOS : is it possible to couple a common nature with different roles? (2017) 0.01
    0.009693679 = product of:
      0.048468396 = sum of:
        0.048468396 = weight(_text_:thesaurus in 78) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.048468396 = score(doc=78,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.23732872 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6210785 = idf(docFreq=1182, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051357865 = queryNorm
            0.20422474 = fieldWeight in 78, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6210785 = idf(docFreq=1182, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=78)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    The purpose of this paper, which increases and deepens what was expressed in a previous work (Mazzocchi et al., 2007), is to scrutinize the underlying assumptions of the types of relations included in thesauri, particularly the genus-species relation. Logicist approaches to information organization, which are still dominant, will be compared with hermeneutically oriented approaches. In the light of these approaches, the nature and features of the relations, and what the notion of a priori could possibly mean with regard to them, are examined, together with the implications for designing and implementing knowledge organizations systems (KOS). Design/methodology/approach The inquiry is based on how the relations are described in literature, engaging in particular a discussion with Hjørland (2015) and Svenonius (2004). The philosophical roots of today's leading views are briefly illustrated, in order to put them under perspective and deconstruct the uncritical reception of their authority. To corroborate the discussion a semantic analysis of specific terms and relations is provided too. Findings All relations should be seen as "perspectival" (not as a priori). On the other hand, different types of relations, depending on the conceptual features of the terms involved, can hold a different degree of "stability." On this basis, they could be used to address different information concerns (e.g. interoperability vs expressiveness). Research limitations/implications Some arguments that the paper puts forth at the conceptual level need to be tested in application contexts. Originality/value This paper considers that the standpoint of logic and of hermeneutic (usually seen as conflicting) are both significant for information organization, and could be pragmatically integrated. In accordance with this view, an extension of thesaurus relations' set is advised, meaning that perspective hierarchical relations (i.e. relations that are not logically based but function contingently) should be also included in such a set.