Advertisement

Ontological Usage Schemes

A Working Proposal for the Ontological Foundation of Language Use
  • Frank Loebe
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6999)

Abstract

Inspired by contributing to the development of a top-level ontology and its formalization in logical languages, we discuss and defend three interrelated theses concerning the semantics of languages in general. The first is the claim that the usual formal semantics needs to be clearly distinguished from an ontological semantics, where the latter aims at explicating, at least partially, an ontological analysis of representations using a language. The second thesis is to utilize both types of semantics in parallel. Thirdly, it is argued that ontological semantics must be oriented at particular cases of using a language, which may lead to different manifestations of ontological semantics for one and the same language. Based on these views, we outline and illustrate our proposal for establishing usage-specific and ontology-based semantic schemes. Moreover, relations to works regarding conceptual modeling languages are established and potential applications are indicated, including semantics-preserving translations and the re-engineering of representations.

Keywords

Formal Semantic Logical Language Conceptual Content Ontological Foundation Ontological Claim 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Baader, F., Calvanese, D., McGuinness, D., Nardi, D., Patel-Schneider, P. (eds.): The Description Logic Handbook. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ciocoiu, M., Nau, D.S.: Ontology-based semantics. In: Cohn, A.G., Giunchiglia, F., Selman, B. (eds.) Proc. of KR 2000, pp. 539–546. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco (2000)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Diaz, M. (ed.): Petri Nets: Fundamental Models, Verification and Applications. ISTE, London (2009)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Evermann, J.: A UML and OWL description of Bunge’s upper-level ontology model. Software Syst. Model 8(2), 235–249 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Evermann, J., Wand, Y.: Ontology based object-oriented domain modelling: Fundamental concepts. Requir. Eng. 10(2), 146–160 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Evermann, J., Wand, Y.: Toward formalizing domain modeling semantics in language syntax. IEEE T. Software Eng. 31(1), 21–37 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Evermann, J.M.: Using Design Languages for Conceptual Modeling: The UML Case. PhD Thesis, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada (2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Guizzardi, G.: Ontological Foundations for Structural Conceptual Models. CTIT PhD Series No. 05-74, Telematica Instituut, Enschede, The Netherlands (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Herre, H.: General Formal Ontology (GFO): A foundational ontology for conceptual modelling. In: Poli, R., Healy, M., Kameas, A. (eds.) Theory and Applications of Ontology: Computer Applications. ch. 14, pp. 297–345. Springer, Berlin (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Loebe, F.: Abstract vs. social roles: Towards a general theoretical account of roles. Appl. Ontology 2(2), 127–158 (2007)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Loebe, F., Herre, H.: Formal semantics and ontologies: Towards an ontological account of formal semantics. In: Eschenbach, C., Grüninger, M. (eds.) Proc. of FOIS 2008, pp. 49–62. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Noy, N., Rector, A.: Defining N-ary relations on the Semantic Web. W3C Working Group Note, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) (2006), http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-n-aryRelations/
  13. 13.
    Schorlemmer, M., Kalfoglou, Y.: Institutionalising ontology-based semantic integration. Appl. Ontology 3(3), 131–150 (2008)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    W3C: OWL 2 Web Ontology Language Document Overview. W3C Recommendation, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wand, Y., Storey, V.C., Weber, R.: An ontological analysis of the relationship construct in conceptual modeling. ACM T. Database Syst. 24(4), 494–528 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frank Loebe
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science (IfI) and Institute of Medical Informatics, Statistics and Epidemiology (IMISE)University of LeipzigGermany

Personalised recommendations