ekaf / wordnet-prolog Goto Github PK

Thanks to Chris from micallef.io for raising this question:

How do you query lemmas using your library of predicates? For example, the lemma for "walking", "walks", "walked" is "walk".

Older Princeton WordNet releases used to include a morphology analyser called "morphy", but it was not a part of the WordNet databases, and therefore neither included in the old WNprolog nor the newer wordnet-prolog releases.

However, maybe it is time to consider including the morphological exceptions file, since this would be very easy, and maybe even a Prolog equivalent of the "morphy" program.

I have made the current releases available as packs at https://github.com/LogtalkDotOrg/wordnet Thanks for making the releases available and let me know if I missed something or got some detail wrong.

Some goals, which used to succeed with swipl versions up to 8.x, now fail with swipl v. 9.0. The failures occur when current_functor/2 returns surprising functor/arity pairs of questionable authenticity, which are neither in the loaded program files, nor Prolog builtins. In particular,
this causes trouble with WordNet's s/6 predicate, because current_functor(s, Arity) reports Arity=1 and Arity=3 in addition to the expected Arity=6.

The Swipl documentation explains this behaviour by the fact that current_functor/2 also returns noncurrent functors, which have not been garbage collected. Still, it is a mystery where s/1 and s/3 come from, and why they did not cause trouble with previous Swipl versions.

However, the analogous current_predicate/2 does not suffer from the same problem.

Thanks to Todd Kelley from algonquincollege.com for catching this bug:

The fr(synset_id,f_num,w_num) predicate seems to behave as if it is actually fr(synset_id,w_num,f_num) with the f_num and w_num reversed.

You're completely right: in the fr/3 predicate, the second and third arguments are swapped w.r.t. the documentation. This is an "undocumented change" which has persisted since WNprolog-2.1 from back in 2006. Before that, the fr/3 predicate followed the order in the documentation.

I would rather fix the documentation than the dbs, since having the word number as second argument corresponds to the order used in all the other lexical predicates.