Linguistic levels

We can also consider the phonological hierarchy, which is a different, parallel hierarchy which focuses on the sound patterns in a sentence. In this, we have the additional units of syllables, which are a structural sound unit used to group phonemes together and phonological phrases, another structural sound unit that groups words together within the sentence. Representations using these units can also be expressed in a hierarchy of sentences, prosodic phrases, words, syllables and phonemes. 

The difference between the two hierarchies is that the phonological one concentrates on the sound patterns alone, and is not concerned with any aspect of meaning, while the syntactic one ignores the sound patters, and concentrates on the grammatical and semantic relationships between the units. 

It is important to realise that these terms are used both to refer to the linguistic level and the area of study. In traditional linguistics these terms are often taken as absolute levels that exist in language, such that one sometimes sees turf wars between phoneticians and phenologists about who best should describe a particular phenomenon. From our engineering perspective, we will find it more convenient to adopt these terms, but not worry too much about the division between each rather it is best to view these levels as salient points in a continuum stretching from pragmatics to acoustics. 

Semantics is sometimes given a broad definition as the study of meaning in the general sense, but is sometimes given a much narrower definition concerned only with 

---

The Seventh Water. As an cample of ambiguity we may read this statement referring to Pt(NH3) X2 compounds "simultaneously with the replacement of the acid residue by OH an mtercalation of WATER takes place" (KT 58). Clearly, water is shorthand for water molecule, but it is true that in the quoted text all three ontological levels seem to interact very smoothly in the simultaneous replacement/intercalation of substances, particles, and descriptions. The ambiguity is resolved when we ask ourselves wlwre the facts happen. The answer is that the entire statement is decoded (by a chemist) at the linguistic level of the formulae. Many more... 

There are different forms in which knowledge can be presented. Leisen (2005) identifies five different representational forms that iffer in their level of abstraction (a) level of object, (b) pictorial level, (b) linguistic level, (d) symbolical level and (e) mathematical level (Figure 2). The abstraction increases from level (a) to (e). 

On the other side, not all children learn the same way. Therefore, the materials should be presented in different forms, so that (almost) all learning styles are considered. As we see from Figure 2, the pictorial level should be used in order to achieve the linguistic level. 

While several predicates require and accept only affirmative (yes) or negative (no) responses from the user, for the most part, communication with the program is governed by what has been termed a "Context Parser", the main predicate of which has three levels to handle varying levels of linguistic complexity. 

To limit inspectional findings related to informed consent deficiencies, auditor reviews of informed consents can be conducted proactively, that is, before being submitted to IRBs for review and approval. Inadequacies regarding the lack of required content, the use of technical rather than lay language, readability above an eighth-grade level, and consents that are culturally and linguistically inappropriate for the anticipated population, are examples of problem areas... 

Fuzzy logic is also widely used in process control, because it allows rules to be expressed in a simple linguistic format IF (A) THEN (B), with an associated confidence level that is related to the membership functions. To understand how it is used for control, consider the simple example of a fan heater governed by four rules, summarized in Fig. 8. These rules map onto the four fuzzy sets COLD, COOL, WARM, and HOT also shown in Fig. 8. If the room temperature is 18°C, the heavy line on Fig. 8, then by Rule 3, the fan speed is medium, with truth value 0.7, and by Rule 4, the fan speed is low with truth value 0.3. The process of... 

We nonetheless believe that the Hamuro et al. article exhibits many of the important features of most work in modern chemistry, especially in the way that it moves between levels of reality. On one line the authors of the article talk of a molecular structure, and on the next of a reaction a certain linguistic item (symbol or icon) may stand for either or both. Theory and experiment, expressed in beautifully intertwined symbolic and iconic languages, relate the world of visible, tangible substances and that of the molecule. Is this sloppiness, an ambiguity that hard science must ultimately abolish We think not. 

If the odors of specific objects translate into unitary percepts, which constitute the basic entities in linguistic descriptions of olfaction, then the question follows as to whether these unitary percepts take shape at the level of the receptor neurons or in the olfactory bulb or elsewhere in the brain. That question remains unanswered, as of this writing. Because the sense of smell does not correlate perfectly with externally monitored patterns of electrical response from the receptor neurons or the olfactory bulb, the nature of olfactory coding remains unknown. Outside the laboratory unitary percepts rarely equate to pure compounds. Two vocabularies coexist, one of smells (which varies from individual to individual, and which refers to other inputs besides olfaction) and the other of chemical structures. 

---