Follow project on Twitter

1.6. Predicate Logic

Predicate Logic (algebra) has a fundamental problem when applied to linguistics: It doesn’t naturally go beyond basic verb “to be” in the present tense.

Predicate Logic (algebra) describes logic expressed by present tense verb “is/are” in a natural way. But it doesn’t describe the logic of the complimentary function of verb “is/are”, namely verb “has/have”. Neither does it describe the logic of their past tense functions, namely verb “was/were” and verb “had”. As a consequence, automated reasoners are unable to read and write sentences with possessive verb “has/have” and with past tense verbs “was/were” and “had”. Apparently, Predicate Logic (algebra) is not yet equipped to process linguistics.

A lot of structure words (non-keywords) have a naturally intelligent function in language. However, their naturally intelligent function is not described in any scientific paper. Apparently, scientists don't understand their naturally intelligent function in language.

Being unable to describe possessive logic in a natural way, another workaround is created, by adding possessive logic in an artificial way:

• Possessive logic must be programmed directly into the reasoner, like “has_son(john,paul)”;
• Besides that, lacking a generic solution, the same logic needs to be programmed for each and every new noun. So, separate functions must be programmed for “has_daughter”, “has_father”, “has_mother”, “has_teacher”, “has_student”, and so on;
• Moreover, in order to enable multilingual reasoning, all existing functions in one language, need to be translated for each and every new language.

This is engineering (specific solutions to specific problems) instead of fundamental science (a generic solution). Actually, it is a bad example of engineering. So, we need to uplift the field of AI and NLP from engineering towards a fundamental science.