Paving the way for human-level sentence corrections

Re:Paving the way for human-level sentence corrections by throwayedidqo on Saturday April 01, 2017 @05:07AM (#14011290)

Ambiguous messages do not imply slang. Plenty of words have multiple meanings in normal and formal English. It's a much worse problem in tonal languages like Chinese. Tell me how you could grammatically correct this without understanding meaning https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lion-Eating_Poet_in_the_Ston...

Strong AI isn't a buzzword either, it's been in use for as long as I can remember. Maybe you would be able to understand my Grammer better if I said super human general intelligence and wasted a bunch of space in the process.

I don't think you read my comment? You seem to imply that the corrections would be unambiguous while my point was that some errors are uncorrectable without understanding meaning.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Paving the way for human-level sentence corrections by 3131s on Saturday April 01, 2017 @10:45AM (#14012344)

> Plenty of words have multiple meanings in normal and formal English.

There are some stats from Wordnet on polysemy in English. Obviously this depends on the granularity of a set of senses in a dictionary, but regardless English has many polysemous words (26,000+ according to Wordnet). And more importantly, these polysemous words also tend to be the most common words, hence words like "set" having around 120 definitions in the Oxford English dictionary.

https://wordnet.princeton.edu/wordnet/man/wnstats.7WN.html#s...

[ Parent | on HN ]