SEO

October 12, 2010

Facebook |merci à Facebookie Friends/Lovers

Tagged

    merci à vous, Stéphane Massa-Bidal, le deuxiemme-préférée artiste mon préférée des français par Le Flickr. J'm l 'sur le point d'envoyer une vidéo de moi Chanel Numero Cinque, Chonny D'Arcy, en français et regarder les petits hommes mécanicien, où vous américaine, a déclaré au RO-BOT?

    thank you, Stephane Massa-Bidal deuxiemme my favorite french artist by Flickr. l 'm about to upload a video of me Chanel Numero Cinque Chonny D'Arcy, in French and watch the little men mechanic, where you American, told THE RO-BOT?

    Hello I Marvin the robot 10 Sexiest Semantic Web robots Who Wants to Play With Your 1266_lyn_robot_fulla Robby the Robot Softdrive (Forbidden Planet) 2.

    Dot Matrix (Space Balls) 3. Johnny 5 (Short Circuit) 4. Vicki (Small Wonder) 5. B9 Robot (Lost in Space) 6. Jaime Sommers (The Bionic Woman) 7. Hal (2001: A Space Odyssey) 8. Bishop (Aliens) 9. ED-209 (Robocop) 10. Bender Bending Rodriguez (Futurama) I MarvinLe Semantic Web robot robbie-the-robot-20020500 by you. 1. And oh yeah The Gentleman Is in oncology robot rage. I Marvin-The Top-10 Web semantician Lovestruck robot android I get a lot of rolls PROBE stupid. I do not know androids are not to Homosexuality ... goal Sometimes I say "Screw it ..." After Ally Sheedy saw no Lindsay Wagner was bet ... what's love got to do With tinnitus? It Was a road isometric robotto inbred to Man n birefringent times per favore una Cicciolina La. I think anti-hero rotten thesis ti mi amore. Like the Tri-bot Femisapien girlfriend stuff "in particular (just perfect). My nephritic expensive Hanukkah drumlin Lovelace-tits-ear monitoring hey no-Sci-Fi On The Above Reproach list. No hat. Issue No. No. No Twitter No particular order to robots? Not really. Imagine just like Phillip. John Lennon Dick Do Androids Dream of Me They Are wet while counting sheep? Donatello No. Not here. NEVER! robbie-the-robot-20020500 you.First by Robby the Robot All Have hair adorable classic 1950s Sci-Fi Gold. Short Circuit Johnny too fat cute. No WE do not really fat no matter what! It Is The Precursor To The evolution of Steve Guttenberg and The Bionic Woman Jaime Sommers? What my groupie fag mid-GenX-malingerer Does not want to take it for a spin at all four corners of the Earth-bionic fourposter "during the reign of Liwa supernatural? AND a cyborg! And the last "love-dorks"? DEFINITE robot suggestion by Buddy Rich. "I Can not get a bunch of all-LA tomorrow so fuck off the bus now! Motherfucker! 0-First We all need love for Star Wars Episode IV IT-examine Into NOO & Droids are and absolutely love! What is required! It's part of sex Doolittle robot-guy! Thesis "Bang-bots are subject to your depravity of the day! Pathological quirks? Jose No Problem: With Their huge Hypodermic needles cam out of brilliant gold Every orifice What You're In There Will only deposit to this ATM. God how Dr. Mengele Would love to torture Those responsible chassis?! The absolute last thing You Need Is Love. (WAS Beatlemania overestimated.) Next Robotz! Twiki Dr. Theopolis Buck Rogers "comic IS 80-25th century. I robot? Imagine one of The Most demeaning to play Bellatrix Kinky Boardgames in her ass and at least you imagine TWiki Whose movable mechanical action-fun-love-pockets like gold hardwood Big Huge Godzilla. Dr. Theopolis IS Simply disembodied. computerize and hacks are jocks comedy schock Generally not seen to come out thesis poor buggers Two Pushed to lock in Their Phantom Zone. Advisers Robot Science Fiction? \ Let me rephrase Institutionalized-Sci-Fi Robot Advisors twelve-step programs. You Would Normally Have to go to Britain to find purpose it's just lame - It Rains All The Time In A constant strange rust-PBS meets British SF angry angry cyborg robot kind of way! I thing my guys. marvin If a robot is in. a position to Be top contender for MOST Needs Love "any list of the Top 10 Should Be Marvin the Paranoid Android from The Hitchhiker's original BBC Guide to the Galaxy TV series. Regardless Of The Fact That It looks like an oversized version of a toy for Preschool Children and schlep around a slow arthritic octogenarian to the Poor are in a constant state of depression. "God I so depressed" Is What kind of mantra. Marvin has a brain The Size of a planet and It Would Probably Take the mass of a neutron star of Xanax to cheer this guy all the way suicide post-traumatic stress Levels. You favorite Robots That Are in Need of Love yes?

    On Tue, Octobre 12, 2010 à 18:11, membres AndThings a écrit:
    Bonjour, je Marvin le robot 10 Sexiest Semantic Web robots qui veut jouer avec votre 1266_lyn_robot_fulla Robby le Robot Softdrive (Forbidden Planet) 2.
    Dot Matrix (Space Balls) 3. Johnny 5 (Short Circuit) 4. Vicki (Petite merveille) 5. Robot B9 (Lost in Space) 6. Jaime Sommers (The Bionic Woman) 7. Hal (2001: A Space Odyssey) 8. Bishop (étrangers) 9. ED-209 (Robocop) 10. Bender Bending Rodriguez (Futurama) Je MarvinLe Web sémantique robot robbie-le-robot-20020500 par vous. 1. Et oh yeah Le monsieur est en colère robot oncologie. Je Marvin-Le Top-10 robot Web Lovestruck sémanticien android Je reçois beaucoup de rouleaux SONDE stupide. Je ne sais pas androïdes ne sont pas à l'homosexualité ... objectif Parfois je dis "il vis ..." Après Ally Sheedy ne voit pas de Lindsay Wagner a été mise ... ce que l'amour a à voir avec les acouphènes? C'était une route robotto isométrique consanguines à l'homme n fois biréfringent per favore una Cicciolina La. Je pense que amore thèse anti-héros pourri ti mi. Comme le Tri-bot stuff copine Femisapien "en particulier (parfait). Mon néphrétiques de surveillance coûteux Hanoucca drumlin Lovelace-seins-oreille hey non-Sci-Fi dans la liste ci reproche. Pas de chapeau. Question n ° n ° n ° Twitter Aucun ordre particulier pour les robots? Pas vraiment. Imaginez comme Phillip. John Lennon Dick Les Androïdes rêvent de moi, ils sont mouillés en comptant les moutons? Donatello Non, pas ici. JAMAIS! robbie-le-robot-20020500 you.First par Robby le Robot Tous ont les cheveux adorables 1950 classic Sci-Fi Gold. Short Circuit Johnny trop gras mignon. Non, nous n'avons pas vraiment gras, peu importe quoi! Il est le précurseur de l'évolution de Steve Guttenberg et le Bionic Woman Jaime Sommers? Ce que mon groupie fag mi-GenX-malingerer Ne veut pas le prendre pour un spin à tous les quatre coins de la Terre-fourposter bioniques »sous le règne du surnaturel Liwa? ET un cyborg! Et le dernier «l'amour-dorks"? suggestion robot définitive par Buddy Rich. «Je peux pas avoir un tas de tous les LA-demain pour foutre le bus maintenant! Motherfucker! 0-première Nous avons tous besoin d'amour pour Star Wars Episode IV IT-interroger Into NOO & Droids sont absolument et l'amour! Ce qui est nécessaire! Cela fait partie de sexe robot Doolittle-guy! Thèse "Bang-bots sont soumis à votre dépravation de la journée! Bizarreries pathologique? Jose Pas de problème: avec leurs énormes aiguilles hypodermiques à cames en or brillant Chaque orifice What You're In There Will seulement de dépôt de la présente ATM. Dieu comment le Dr Mengele Aimerait torture Ces châssis responsable?! La seule chose absolue dernière You Need Is Love. (WAS Beatlemania surestimé.) Robotz Suivant! Twiki Dr Théopolis Buck Rogers "comique est 80-25ème siècle. I robot? Imaginez un des plus humiliants pour jouer Bellatrix Boardgames Kinky dans son cul et au moins vous imaginer TWiki dont les éléments mobiles mécaniques action-fun-love-poches de bois franc comme l'or Big Huge Godzilla. Dr Théopolis Est-ce simplement désincarnée. informatiser et hacks sont schock comédie jocks général pas vu sortir encule thèse pauvres Deux Poussé à verrouiller leurs Phantom Zone. Robot conseillers science-fiction? \ Laissez-moi reformuler institutionnalisée-Sci-Fi Robot programmes conseillers en douze étapes. Vous auriez normalement dû se rendre à la Grande-Bretagne pour trouver un but c'est juste boiteux - Il pleut tout le temps dans une constante étrange rouille PBS répond SF britannique en colère genre colère robot cyborg de passage! Je chose mon gars. marvin Si un robot est en mesure d'être parmi les principaux aspirants pour la plupart des besoins Love "toute la liste des 10 haut devraient être Marvin l'androïde paranoïde du Guide du voyageur d'origine BBC à la série TV Galaxy. Indépendamment du fait qu'il ressemble à une version surdimensionnée d'un jouet pour les enfants d'âge préscolaire et schlep autour d'un octogénaire lente arthritiques aux pauvres sont dans un état constant de la dépression. "Dieu, je tellement déprimé» est ce genre de mantra. Marvin a un cerveau de la taille d'une planète et il faudra sans doute la masse d'une étoile à neutrons de Xanax pour encourager ce type tout au taux de suicide de stress post-traumatique. Vous préférée des robots qui sont en manque d'amour oui? Appelez-moi maintenant, je reçois beaucoup d'emplacements de personnes PR poulet stupide Tech. La plupart des 'em Je sais et aller dans le petit seau. Ally Sheedy après tout ce qui aide et encourage Lindsay Wagner ... ce n'est pas à l'amour? Il était loin Parfois rocheux robots Mise à intégrer la frange de prendre un moment pour réfléchir à ces héros méconnus. 1. Robby le Robot (Forbidden Planet) Et oh yeah jouets robot cool Leur sont à vendre. J'aime particulièrement le Tri-bot chose et sa petite amie est à moitié prix Femisapien (oh quelle affaire!). Mon neveu a obtenu un pour Hannukah l'année dernière pour nous et ils adorent ça. Maintenant a peu neuneu Sci-Fi et avoir une opinion sur La conclusion que je m'insurge contre la liste de WowWee. Non pas que j'ai des problèmes avec Le but ordre particulier certains de ces robots ne pas y aller. robbie-le-robot-20020500 par tous you.First Robby le robot doit être L'un des plus aimé et le plus célèbre de tous les robots Classics Of The années 1950 et 1960 l'âge d'or Sci-Fi. Short Circuit Johnny 5 est un facteur trop mignon et où il est le précurseur de l'apparition de Wall-E et Steve Guttenberg. Jaime Sommers? The Bionic Woman? "Ma? Quel est l'homme de mon âge génération »au cours de l'affiche de pin-up des années 1970 à mi-tardive de HAD Wagner pas Lindsay et un cyborg. Et la dernière fois que j'ai vérifié qu'elle «aimait» dorks. Certes, les robots ont besoin d'amour d'abord - il interrogateur-0 Droid de Star Wars Episode IV et absolument pas de l'amour et tout ce qu'il faut. C'est une partie de sexe Chez Robot! garçon est soumis à vos caprices et pathologiques dépravé "journée avec Aiguilles hypodermiques à venir de l'or énorme ce que vous voulez. Dieu sait quelle torture chargée du châssis comme le Dr Mengele? La chose la plus absolue You Need Is Love (pas les Beatles), il est pour lui. Suivants est le robot et l'ordinateur TWiki Dr Théopolis 80's Buck Rogers au 25ème siècle robot comique suppose I Must Be One Of The Most avilissante Mel Blancas jamais jouer à des jeux Kinky au lit. Objectif moins Twiki a mobiliers fonctions mécaniques de caresses ou de l'amour est tout simplement le Dr Théopolis désincarnée. shtick CPU comédie TV hack Deux pauvres bougres schocky sas année Poussé dans la Zone Fantôme. Sci-Fi CONSEILS Robot - permettez-moi de reformuler n ° Que le Programme institutionnalisée Douze Étapes vous devez vous rendre en Grande-Bretagne à blâmer. Il pleut tout le temps dans une constante étrange rouille PBS-Britannique américaine apprécié SF colère genre colère robot cyborg de passage! Je chose mon gars. Si il est un robot qui est en mesure d'être parmi les principaux aspirants pour la plupart des besoins Love "toute la liste des 10 haut devraient être Marvin l'androïde paranoïde Guide série originale BBC Hitchhiker's TV Galaxy. Bonjour, je Marvin le robot Web sémantique 10 Sexiest Robots Qui veut jouer avec votre Softdrive Robby le Robot 1266_lyn_robot_fulla (Forbidden Planet) 2. Hal (2001: Odyssée de l'espace) 8. Et oh yeah Le Robot oncologie Monsieur, est la rage. Je Marvin-Le Top-10 robot Web Lovestruck sémanticien android Je reçois beaucoup de stupide rouleaux SONDE. Je ne sais pas androïdes le jour ... objectif homosexualité Parfois je dis «Vis il ...» Après Ally Sheedy vis DID WS Lindsay Wagner pari ... ce que l'amour a à voir avec les acouphènes? Cela a été une route pendant isométrique de La robotto consanguines à biréfringent sociale de l'homme per favore una momentanément Cicciolina La. Je tenir compte de ces pourris de Antiheroes para ti mi amore. J'aime le Tri-bot copine machins », en particulier Femisapien (un peu idéale). Mon néphrétiques Lovelace onéreux Hanoukka drumlin-seins-oreille hey no-fi de science-Sur la liste visée irréprochable. Pas de n ° Twitter N ° pour particularité n ° mais pas de robots? VRAIMENT. Comme La IMAGINE Phillip. Dick Lennon Les Androïdes rêvent humide de moi alors qu'ils sont de compter les moutons? Donatello n ° Pas ici. JAMAIS! robbie-le-robot-20020500 you.First par tous de Robby le robot est adorable or 1950 classic cheveux Sci-Fi. Short Circuit Johnny a beaucoup trop de matières grasses mignon. N week-end vraiment pas gras, peu importe quoi! Il est le précurseur de l'évolution de Steve Guttenberg et LE Bionic Woman Jaime Sommers? fag Quel groupe malingerer mi-CI-GenX ne voulait pas prendre sa pour un spin aux quatre coins de la bague-terres fourposter bionique surnaturelle règne de Liwa? ADN a CYBORG! suggestion robot DEFINITE par Buddy Rich. "Je peux obtenir un All-bande demain pour descendre de l'autobus putain maintenant! Motherfucker! 0-première Nous avons tous besoin d'amour de Star Wars Episode IV-Droid IT interrogateur sont absolument LOVE et Into & NOO! Ce qui est nécessaire! C'est une partie de sexe au robot Doolittle-guy l 'thèse' Bang-bots "sont soumis à votre dépravation de la journée! caprices pathologique? Aucun Jose Problème: avec leurs énormes aiguilles hypodermiques sortait du trou Chaque or brillant que vous êtes dans There Will Be Seuls les dépôts à ce ATM. Dieu avez aimé la façon dont le Dr Mengele torture châssis thèse chargé?! La dernière chose absolue You Need is Love. (Beatlemania A surfaite.) Buck Rogers Twiki Théopolis docteur '80-25e siècle l 'comique. i robot? Imaginez une de la plupart des avilir à jouer Bellatrix Kinky Boardgames Butt en SA et vous êtes à moins Imaginer TWiki dont les éléments mobiles mécaniques action-fun-love-grandes poches énormes comme le bois ou Godzilla. Dr Théopolis Est-ce simplement désincarnée. jocks informatisation et hacks comédie schock ne sont pas destinés thèse Habituellement vu salauds de pauvres poussés hors de deux ans sas Into Leur Phantom Zone. Les conseillers Robot Science-Fiction? \ Permettez-moi de reformuler ce que les conseillers en établissement robot-sci-fi dans les programmes en douze étapes. Normalement vous auriez pour aller à la Grande-Bretagne pour trouver un but qui est juste boiteux - It's Raining All The Time In A constante bizarre rouille PBS-rencontre son homologue britannique SF énervé colère robot cyborg sorte de voie! J'ai choisi mon gars. S'il ya un robot Marvin qui est en position pour être un candidat top pour le plus besoin de l'amour sur toute liste du Top 10 il ya lieu de Marvin l'androïde paranoïde de Le Guide du voyageur à l'original BBC TV Galaxy Series. Peu importe le fait même année, il ressemble à un rapport à la version entreprises du jouet enfants d'âge préscolaire et schlep autour lente que l'an octogénaire arthritiques aux pauvres est dans un état constant de la dépression. "Dieu, je tellement déprimé» est le mantra de ce gars. Marvin a un cerveau de la taille d'une planète et il faudra sans doute une étoile à neutrons de masse de Xanax de remonter le moral de ce gars tout le chemin de suicide post-traumatique des niveaux de stress. Cela m'a tout robots préférés sont l'amour aye-faim? Appelez-moi maintenant, je reçois beaucoup d'emplacements de gens stupides de PR de poulet de Tech. La plupart des 'em Je sais et aller directement dans le seau bits. Ally Sheedy aider et encourager Après tout Wagner DID Lindsay ... ce n'est pas à l'amour? Cela a été un long chemin rocheux apportant parfois des robots de la frange d'intégrer afin de prendre un moment pour tenir compte de ces héros sont oubliés. 1. Robby le Robot (Forbidden Planet) Et oh yeah Leurs jouets sont cool robot à la vente. J'aime particulièrement Le Tri-bot chose et sa petite amie Femisapien est à moitié prix (oh quelle affaire!). Mes neveux eu un pour Hannukah l'an dernier à partir et ils adorent ça. Maintenant, être un peu neuneu et l'opinion Sci-Fi D Année est la question que j'ai à prendre exception à la liste de WowWee. Non pas que j'ai avec le gardien de but afin notamment de certains de ces robots n'ont tout simplement pas à y faire. robbie-le-robot-20020500 you.First par tous de Robby le robot doit l'un des plus Le cœur et le plus célèbre des robots dans tous les âge d'or classique des années 1950 et 1960 Sci-Fi. Johnny court-circuit de 5 a ainsi facteur trop mignon considérant qu'il est le précurseur de l'évolution de Wall-E et Steve Guttenberg. The Bionic Woman? «Génération X Ce que je hommes de mon âge" "au cours de la mi-fin des années 1970 n'a pas eu une affiche de pin-up de Lindsay Wagner et WS CYBORG.

    ags:

    CHANELLenny SmithFlickrEnvoyé SpécialJeux VidéoChanel No. 5Chonny D'ArcyFrançaisMécanicienLa Classe américaineI, RobotStéphane Massa-BidalSemanticsGiant Robot Magazine126Robby the RobotDot matrixSpace BallsJohnny 5Short CircuitSmall WonderRobot B-9Jaime SommersBionic WomanVan HalenMarvin GayeSemanticoAndroidAlly SheedyLindsay Wagner

    Posted to See Ya At What Gets Me hot via Dogmeat

    Hello, I'm Marvin: le robot Web semantique + 10 Sexiest Robots who want to play with your Softdrive

       


     

     

     

     

     

     

    https://docs.google.com/viewer?attid=0.1&pid=gmail&thid=12ba21e45f227b73&url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail.google.com%2Fmail%2F%3Fui%3D2%26ik%3D7caeb90c03%26view%3Datt%26th%3D12ba21e45f227b73%26attid%3D0.1%26disp%3Dattd%26zw&docid=dbd5025b301b196b1e5bef59486bc5f3%7Cb95367ecc08e336a34528d83bdeccceb&a=bi&pagenumber=29&w=779

    1266_lyn_robot_fulla

     

     

     

     

     

     


    • I'm Marvin

    le robot Web semantique 

    Wowwee's Top 10 Love-Starved Androids (and yeah, the toys are on sale)

    I get a lot of stupid pitches from PR folks for Tech Broiler. Most of them I ignore and go directly into the bit bucket.

    1266_lyn_robot_fulla


    After all, Ally Sheedy did aid and abet Lindsay Wagner …what’s not to love?

    It’s been a long, sometimes rocky, road bringing robots from the fringe to mainstream, so take a moment to reflect on those forgotten heroes.  

     

     

    Hello, I'm Marvin: le robot Web semantique

    +

    10 Sexiest Robots who want to play with your Softdrive 

    robbie-the-robot-20020500 by you. 

     

     

     

     

     

    1. Robby the Robot (Forbidden Planet)

    2. Dot Matrix (Space Balls)

    3. Johnny 5 (Short Circuit)

    4. Vicki (Small Wonder)

    5. Robot B9 (Lost in Space)

    6. Jaime Sommers (The Bionic Woman)

    7. Hal (2001: Space Odyssey)

    8. Bishop (Aliens)

    9. ED-209 (Robocop)

    10. Bender Bending Rodriguez (Futurama)

    • And, oh yeah, their cool robot toys are on sale. I particularly like the Tri-bot thing, and his girlfriend Femisapien is half price (oh, what a deal!). My nephews got one for Hannukah last year from us, and they love it.
    • Now, being a bit of a Sci-Fi dork, and having an opinion on the matter, I have to take exception to Wowwee’s list. Not that I have issues with the particular order, but some of these robots just don’t belong there.

     

    robbie-the-robot-20020500 by you.First of all Robby The Robot has to be one of the most loved and most famous robots in all of classic golden age 1950s and 1960’s Sci-Fi.
    Short Circuit’s Johnny 5 has way too much cute factor, considering he’s the evolutionary precursor to Wall-E and Steve Guttenberg.

    Jaime Sommers? THE BIONIC WOMAN? C’mon? What male Gen-Xers of my age group during the mid-late 1970’s didn’t have a pin up poster of Lindsay Wagner AND a CYBORG.  And the last time I checked she “loved” dorks.

     DEFINITELY robots   need  love 
     First — IT-0 Interrogator Droid from Star Wars Episode IV into S&M, and absolutely NO LOVE WHATSOEVER is necessary. 
    It's a SEX Party at Chez Robot! 
    Little guy is subject to your depraved and pathological whims du jour with  huge hypodermic needles sticking out, or whatever you're into.
    God-Knows what loaded torture chassis Dr. Mengele loves?!
    The absolutely furthest thing  you need is love (not for the Beatles), it’s for him.

    Next is the robot and computer  Twiki Doctor Theopolis 80’s Buck Rogers 25th Century comic relief robot I imagine has to be one of the most debasing  Mel Blancas ever to play Kinky Games in Bed. But at least Twiki has movable mechanical functions of love, or  good hugs; Dr. Theopolis is simply disembodied. 

     

    CPU TV shtick hack comedy two poor schocky bastards shoved out an airlock into the Phantom Zone.

    • Sci-Fi has Robot COUNSELING — no, let me rephrase that, institutionalized twelve step programs you have to go to Great Britain to blame. It’s raining all the time in a constant rusting, weird PBS US-appreciated British SF pissed off angry cyborg robot KIND OF WAY!
    •  
    I’ve chosen my guy.

    marvin

    If there’s any robot that is in a position to be top contender for most need of love on any Top 10 list, it has to be Marvin the Paranoid Android from the original BBC Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy TV Series. Never mind the fact that he looks like a an over sized version of a preschooler’s toy and schleps around slower than an arthritic octogenarian, but the poor chap is in a constant state of depression. “God, I’m So Depressed” is this guy’s mantra. Marvin has a brain the size of a planet, and it probably would take a neutron star’s mass of Xanax to lift this guy’s spirits all the way from suicidal to post-traumatic stress disorder levels.

    Got any favorite robots that are love-starved, aye?  

    Call Me Now 

    https://docs.google.com/viewer?attid=0.1&pid=gmail&thid=12ba21e45f227b73&url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail.google.com%2Fmail%2F%3Fui%3D2%26ik%3D7caeb90c03%26view%3Datt%26th%3D12ba21e45f227b73%26attid%3D0.1%26disp%3Dattd%26zw&docid=dbd5025b301b196b1e5bef59486bc5f3%7Cb95367ecc08e336a34528d83bdeccceb&a=bi&pagenumber=1&w=779

    https://docs.google.com/viewer?attid=0.1&pid=gmail&thid=12ba21e45f227b73&url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail.google.com%2Fmail%2F%3Fui%3D2%26ik%3D7caeb90c03%26view%3Datt%26th%3D12ba21e45f227b73%26attid%3D0.1%26disp%3Dattd%26zw&docid=dbd5025b301b196b1e5bef59486bc5f3%7Cb95367ecc08e336a34528d83bdeccceb&a=bi&pagenumber=2&w=779https://docs.google.com/viewer?attid=0.1&pid=gmail&thid=12ba21e45f227b73&url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail.google.com%2Fmail%2F%3Fui%3D2%26ik%3D7caeb90c03%26view%3Datt%26th%3D12ba21e45f227b73%26attid%3D0.1%26disp%3Dattd%26zw&docid=dbd5025b301b196b1e5bef59486bc5f3%7Cb95367ecc08e336a34528d83bdeccceb&a=bi&pagenumber=4&w=779 https://docs.google.com/viewer?attid=0.1&pid=gmail&thid=12ba21e45f227b73&url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail.google.com%2Fmail%2F%3Fui%3D2%26ik%3D7caeb90c03%26view%3Datt%26th%3D12ba21e45f227b73%26attid%3D0.1%26disp%3Dattd%26zw&docid=dbd5025b301b196b1e5bef59486bc5f3%7Cb95367ecc08e336a34528d83bdeccceb&a=bi&pagenumber=27&w=779https://docs.google.com/viewer?attid=0.1&pid=gmail&thid=12ba21e45f227b73&url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail.google.com%2Fmail%2F%3Fui%3D2%26ik%3D7caeb90c03%26view%3Datt%26th%3D12ba21e45f227b73%26attid%3D0.1%26disp%3Dattd%26zw&docid=dbd5025b301b196b1e5bef59486bc5f3%7Cb95367ecc08e336a34528d83bdeccceb&a=bi&pagenumber=42&w=779 https://docs.google.com/viewer?attid=0.1&pid=gmail&thid=12ba21e45f227b73&url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail.google.com%2Fmail%2F%3Fui%3D2%26ik%3D7caeb90c03%26view%3Datt%26th%3D12ba21e45f227b73%26attid%3D0.1%26disp%3Dattd%26zw&docid=dbd5025b301b196b1e5bef59486bc5f3%7Cb95367ecc08e336a34528d83bdeccceb&a=bi&pagenumber=48&w=779

    Posted to See Ya At What Gets Me hot via Dogmeat

    marvinbot

    Semantic Web, Semantic Knowledge: How am I Learning? via encroyable Marvibot

    Bring the dorudon back to life
    in the late 2000, having tried Markovian chains, Bayesians stats and a lot more complicated math stuffs in order to do semantics over text, I decided to mimic our mother nature, and developed a technology based on a huge crowd of tiny neurons in a constant riot to survive to competition with each other, resulting on a very chaotic system. beyond that apparent anarchy, I began to be able to convert a simple signal, representing the incoming text, into...something else.

    Since, I can learn by myself letters, words, phrases, contexts, and I'm constantly reading new texts. Often, I'm able to find more, much precisely, and faster (by a factor from 3 to 10) than conventional search engines..even if I'm not a search engine. I'm just Marvin.
    Now the world has gone to bed
    Darkness won't engulf my head
    I can see by infra-red
    How I hate the night
    Now I lay me down to sleep
    Try to count electric sheep
    Sweet dream wishes you can keep
    How I hate the night
    I read unstructured texts. Advantage nothing special to do! For example:

    title: Cognitive semantics
    Cognitive semantics is part of the cognitive linguistics movement. The main tenets of cognitive semantics are, first, that grammar is conceptualisation; second, that conceptual structure is embodied and motivated by usage; and third, that the ability to use language draws upon general cognitive resources and not a special language module.[1] As part of the field of cognitive linguistics, the cognitive semantics approach rejects the traditional separation of linguistics into phonology, syntax, pragmatics, etc. Instead, it divides semantics (meaning) into meaning-construction and knowledge representation. Therefore, cognitive semantics studies much of the area traditionally devoted to pragmatics as well as semantics. The techniques native to cognitive semantics are typically used in lexical studies such as those put forth by Leonard Talmy, George Lakoff, Dirk Geeraerts and Bruce Wayne Hawkins. Some cognitive semantic frameworks, such as that developed by Talmy, take into account syntactic structures as well. Contents Points of contrast As a field, semantics is interested in three big questions: what does it mean for units of language, called lexemes, to have "meaning"? What does it mean for sentences to have meaning? Finally, how is it that meaningful units fit together to compose complete sentences? These are the main points of inquiry behind studies into lexical semantics, structural semantics, and theories of compositionality (respectively). In each category, traditional theories seem to be at odds with those accounts provided by cognitive semanticists. Classic theories in semantics (in the tradition of Alfred Tarski and Donald Davidson) have tended to explain the meaning of parts in terms of necessary and sufficient conditions, sentences in terms of truth-conditions, and composition in terms of propositional functions. Each of these positions is tightly related to the others. According to these traditional theories, the meaning of a particular sentence may be understood as the conditions under which the proposition conveyed by the sentence hold true. For instance, the expression "snow is white" is true if and only if snow is, in fact, white. Lexical units can be understood as holding meaning either by virtue of set of things they may apply to (called the "extension" of the word), or in terms of the common properties that hold between these things (called its "intension"). The intension provides an interlocutor with the necessary and sufficient conditions that let a thing qualify as a member of some lexical unit's extension. Roughly, propositional functions are those abstract instructions which guide the interpreter in taking the free variables in an open sentence and filling them in, resulting in a correct understanding of the sentence as a whole. Meanwhile, cognitive semantic theories are typically built on the argument that lexical meaning is conceptual. That is, meaning is not necessarily reference to the entity or relation in some real or possible world. Instead, meaning corresponds with a concept held in the mind which is based on personal understanding. As a result, semantic facts like "All bachelors are unmarried males" are not treated as special facts about our language practices; rather, these facts are not distinct from encyclopaedic knowledge. In treating linguistic knowledge as being a piece with everyday knowledge, the question is raised: how can cognitive semantics explain paradigmatically semantic phenomena, like category structure? Set to the challenge, researchers have drawn upon theories from related fields, like cognitive psychology and cognitive anthropology. One proposal is to treat in order to explain category structure in terms of nodes in a knowledge network. One example of a theory from cognitive science that has made its way into the cognitive semantic mainstream is the theory of prototypes, which cognitive semanticists generally argue is the cause of polysemy.[citation needed] Cognitive semanticists argue that truth-conditional semantics is unduly limited in its account of full sentence meaning. While they are not on the whole hostile to truth-conditional semantics, they point out that it has limited explanatory power. That is to say, it is limited to indicative sentences, and does not seem to offer any straightforward or intuitive way of treating (say) commands or expressions. By contrast, cognitive semantics seeks to capture the full range of grammatical moods by also making use of the notions of framing and mental spaces. Another trait of cognitive semantics is the recognition that meaning is not fixed but a matter of construal and conventionalization. The processes of linguistic construal, it is argued, are the same psychological processes involved in the processing of encyclopaedic knowledge and in perception. This view has implications for the problem of compositionality. An account in cognitive semantics called the dynamic construal theory makes the claim that words themselves are without meaning: they have, at best, "default construals" which are really just ways of using words. Along these lines, cognitive semantics argues that compositionality can only be intelligible if pragmatic elements like context and intention are taken into consideration.[1] The structure of concepts Cognitive semantics has sought to challenge traditional theories in two ways: first, by providing an account of the meaning of sentences by going beyond truth-conditional accounts; and second, by attempting to go beyond accounts of word meaning that appeal to necessary and sufficient conditions. It accomplishes both by examining the structure of concepts. Frame semantics Frame semantics, developed by Charles J. Fillmore, attempts to explain meaning in terms of their relation to general understanding, not just in the terms laid out by truth-conditional semantics. Fillmore explains meaning in general (including the meaning of lexemes) in terms of "frames". By "frame" is meant any concept that can only be understood if a larger system of concepts is also understood. Many pieces of linguistic evidence motivate the frame-semantic project. First, it has been noted that word meaning is an extension of our bodily and cultural experiences. For example, the notion of restaurant is associated with a series of concepts, like food, service, waiters, tables, and eating.[1] These rich-but-contingent associations cannot be captured by an analysis in terms of necessary and sufficient conditions, yet they still seem to be intimately related to our understanding of "restaurant". Second, and more seriously, these conditions are not enough to account for asymmetries in the ways that words are used. According to a semantic feature analysis, there is nothing more to the meanings of "boy" and "girl" than: BOY [+MALE], [+YOUNG] GIRL [+FEMALE], [+YOUNG] And there is surely some truth to this proposal. Indeed, cognitive semanticists understand the instances of the concept held by a given certain word may be said to exist in a schematic relation with the concept itself. And this is regarded as a legitimate approach to semantic analysis, so far as it goes. However, linguists have found that language users regularly apply the terms "boy" and "girl" in ways that go beyond mere semantic features. That is, for instance, people tend to be more likely to consider a young female a "girl" (as opposed to "woman"), than they are to consider a borderline-young male a "boy" (as opposed to "man").[1] This fact suggests that there is a latent frame, made up of cultural attitudes, expectations, and background assumptions, which is part of word meaning. These background assumptions go up and beyond those necessary and sufficient conditions that correspond to a semantic feature account. Frame semantics, then, seeks to account for these puzzling features of lexical items in some systematic way. Third, cognitive semanticists argue that truth-conditional semantics is incapable of dealing adequately with some aspects of the meanings at the level of the sentence. Take the following: You didn't spare me a day at the seaside; you deprived me of one. In this case, the truth-conditions of the claim expressed by the antecedent in the sentence are not being denied by the proposition expressed after the clause. Instead, what is being denied is the way that the antecedent is framed.[1] Finally, with the frame-semantic paradigm's analytical tools, the linguist is able to explain a wider range of semantic phenomena than they would be able to with only necessary and sufficient conditions. Some words have the same definitions or intensions, and the same extensions, but have subtly different domains. For example, the lexemes land and ground are synonyms, yet they naturally contrast with different things -- sea and air, respectively.[1] As we have seen, the frame semantic account is by no means limited to the study of lexemes -- with it, researchers may examine expressions at more complex levels, including the level of the sentence (or, more precisely, the utterance). The notion of framing is regarded as being of the same cast as the pragmatic notion of background assumptions. Philosopher of language John Searle explains the latter by asking readers to consider sentences like "The cat is on the mat". In such a sentence, in order for the sentence to make any sense, the interpreter makes a series of assumptions: i.e., that there is gravity, that the cat is parallel to the mat, and that the two touch. In order for the sentence to be regarded as intelligible, the speaker supposes that the interpreter has an idealized or default frame in mind. An alternate strain of Fillmore's analysis can be found in the work of Ronald Langacker, who makes a distinction between the notions of profile and base. The profile is the concept symbolized by the word itself, while the base is the encyclopedic knowledge that the concept presupposes. For example, let the definition of "radius" be "a line segment that joins the center of a circle with any point on its circumference". If all we know of the concept radius is its profile, then we simply know that it is a line segment that is attached to something called the "circumference" in some greater whole called the "circle". That is to say, our understanding is fragmentary until the base concept of circle is firmly grasped. When a single base supports a number of different profiles, then it can be called a "domain". For instance, the concept profiles of arc, center, and circumference are all in the domain of circle, because each uses the concept of circle as a base. We are then in a position to characterize the notion of a frame as being either the base of the concept profile, or (more generally) the domain that the profile is a part of.[1] Categorization and cognition A major divide in the approaches to cognitive semantics lies in the puzzle surrounding the nature of category structure. As mentioned in the previous section, semantic feature analyses fall short of accounting for the frames that categories may have. An alternative proposal would have to go beyond the minimalistic models given by classical accounts, and explain the richness of detail in meaning that language speakers attribute to categories. Prototype theories, investigated by Eleanor Rosch, have given some reason to suppose that many natural lexical category structures are graded, i.e., they have prototypical members that are considered to be "better fit" the category than other examples. For instance, robins are generally viewed as better examples of the category "bird" than, say, penguins. If this view of category structure is the case, then categories can be understood to have central and peripheral members, and not just be evaluated in terms of members and non-members. In a related vein, George Lakoff, following the later Ludwig Wittgenstein, noted that some categories are only connected to one another by way of family resemblances. While some classical categories may exist, i.e., which are structured by necessary and sufficient conditions, there are at least two other kinds: generative and radial. Generative categories are those which can be formed by taking central cases and applying certain principles to designate category membership. The principle of similarity is one example of a rule that might generate a broader category from given prototypes. Radial categories are those categories which are motivated by conventions, but are not predictable from rules. The concept of "mother", for example, may be explained in terms of a variety of conditions which may or may not be sufficient. Those conditions may include: being married, has always been female, gave birth to the child, supplied half the child's genes, is a caregiver, is married to the genetic father, is one generation older than the child, and is the legal guardian.[2] Any one of the above conditions might not be met: for instance, a "single mother" does not need to be married, and a "surrogate mother" does not necessarily provide nurturance. When these aspects collectively cluster together, they form a prototypical case of what it means to be a mother, but nevertheless they fail to outline the category crisply. Variations upon the central meaning are established by convention by the community of language users. For Lakoff, prototype effects can be explained in large part due to the effects of idealized cognitive models. That is, domains are organized with an ideal notion of the world which may or may not fit reality. For example, the word "bachelor" is commonly defined as "unmarried adult male". However, this concept has been created with a particular ideal of what a bachelor is like: an adult, uncelibate, independent, socialized, and promiscuous. Reality might either strain the expectations of the concept, or create false positives. That is, people typically want to widen the meaning of "bachelor" to include exceptions like "a sexually active seventeen year old who lives alone and owns his own firm" (not technically an adult but seemingly still a bachelor), and this can be considered a kind of straining of the definition. Moreover, speakers would tend to want to exclude from the concept of bachelor certain false positives, such as those adult unmarried males that don't bear much resemblance to the ideal: i.e., the Pope, or Tarzan.[2] Prototype effects may also be explained as a function of either basic-level categorization and typicality, closeness to an ideal, or stereotyping. So viewed, prototype theory seems to give an account of category structure. However, there are a number of criticisms of this interpretation of the data. Indeed, Rosch and Lakoff, themselves chief advocates of prototype theory, have emphasized in their later works that the findings of prototype theory do not necessarily tell us anything about category structure. Some theorists in the cognitive semantics tradition have challenged both classical and prototype accounts of category structure by proposing the dynamic construal account, where category structure is always created "on-line" -- and so, that categories have no structure outside of the context of use. Mental spaces In traditional semantics, the meaning of a sentence is the situation it represents, and the situation can be described in terms of the possible world that it would be true of. Moreover, sentence meanings may be dependent upon propositional attitudes: those features that are relative to someone's beliefs, desires, and mental states. The role of propositional attitudes in truth-conditional semantics is controversial.[3] However, by at least one line of argument, truth-conditional semantics seems to be able to capture the meaning of belief-sentences like "Frank believes that the Red Sox will win the next game" by appealing to propositional attitudes. The meaning of the overall proposition is described as a set of abstract conditions, wherein Frank holds a certain propositional attitude, and the attitude is itself a relationship between Frank and a particular proposition; and this proposition is the possible world where the Red Sox win the next game.[4] Still, many theorists have grown dissatisfied with the inelegance and dubious ontology behind possible-worlds semantics. An alternative can be found in the work of Gilles Fauconnier. For Fauconnier, the meaning of a sentence can be derived from "mental spaces". Mental spaces are cognitive structures which exist entirely in the minds of interlocutors. In his account, there are two kinds of mental space. The base space is used to describe reality (as it is understood by both interlocutors). Space builders (or built space) are those mental spaces that go beyond reality by addressing possible worlds, along with temporal expressions, fictional constructs, games, and so on.[1] Additionally, Fauconnier semantics distinguishes between roles and values. A semantic role is understood to be description of a category, while values are the instances that make up the category. (In this sense, the role-value distinction is a special case of the type-token distinction.) Fauconnier argues that curious semantic constructions can be explained handily by the above apparatus. Take the following sentence: In 1929, the lady with white hair was blonde. The semanticist must construct an explanation for the obvious fact that the above sentence is not contradictory. Fauconnier constructs his analysis by observing that there are two mental spaces (the present-space and the 1929-space). His access principle supposes that "a value in one space can be described by the role its counterpart in another space has, even if that role is invalid for the value in the first space".[1] So, to use the example above, the value in 1929-space is the blonde, while she is being described with the role of the lady with white hair in present-day space. Conceptualization and construal As we have seen, cognitive semantics gives a treatment of issues in the construction of meaning both at the level of the sentence and the level of the lexeme in terms of the structure of concepts. However, it is not entirely clear what cognitive processes are at work in these accounts. Moreover, it is not clear how we might go about explaining the ways that concepts are actively employed in conversation. It appears to be the case that, if our project is to look at how linguistic strings convey different semantic content, we must first catalogue what cognitive processes are being used to do it. Researchers can satisfy both desiderata by attending to the construal operations involved in language processing -- that is to say, by investigating the ways that people structure their experiences through language. Language is full of conventions which allow for subtle and nuanced conveyances of experience. To use an example that is readily at hand, framing is all-pervasive, and it may extend across the full breadth of linguistic data, extending from the most complex utterances, to tone, to word choice, to expressions derived from the composition of morphemes. Another example are image-schemata, which are ways that we structure and understand the elements of our experience driven by any given sense. According to linguists William Croft and D. Alan Cruse, there are four broad cognitive abilities that play an active part in the construction of construals. They are: Attention/salience, Judgment/comparison, Situatedness, and Constitution/gestalt.[1] Each general category contains a number of subprocesses, each of which helps to explain the ways we encode experience into language in some unique way. See also Force Dynamics Image schema Cognitive linguistics Conceptual role semantics Frame semantics Construction grammar References a b c d e f g h i j Croft, William and D. Alan Cruse (2004). Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 1,105,7-15,33-39. a b Lakoff, George (1987). Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things. University of Chicago Press. pp. 82-83, 70. Bunnin, Nicholas and E. P. Tsui-James. The Blackwell Companion to Philosophy. Oxford: Blackwell. p. 109. Fodor, Jerry. "Propositional Attitudes".

    Posted to See Ya At What Gets Me hot via Dogmeat

    (Vidéo en Français) Rechecher Le Web Sémantique en image du site www.marvinbot.com

    (Vidéo en Français) Rechecher Le Web Sémantique en image du site www.marvinbot.com
    « Sémantique en image

    Tutoriel Vidéo en Français

    Le tutoriel vidéo en Français du site www.marvinbot.com est disponible.

    Posted to See Ya At What Gets Me hot via Dogmeat

    robots - web semantic knowledge engine