On What Goes On: The Ontology of Processes and Events. Antony Galton University of Exeter, UK. How are processes related to events?. Mourelatos (1981): Process and Event are disjoint subcategories of Occurrence . Moens and Steedman (1988): Process is a subcategory of Event.
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
On What Goes On:The Ontology of Processes and Events
University of Exeter, UK
‘My life is becoming harder’
‘Their lives moved apart’
‘The battle grew fiercer’
‘The protest became violent’
In these cases what changes is not an event but a process associated with an event.
This solves nothing if processes are, like events, occurrents …
Processes are open-ended:
But events are not:
The various ways of deriving events/processes from other events/processes can, in principle, be formalised in an algebraic structure.
“The term … ‘historical’ is intended to suggest the narration of events ordered in terms of successivity and presented dispassionately with the minimum of subjective involvement; and this mode of description clearly relates to the static, non-deictic, objective conception of time. The term ‘experiential’, on the other hand, is suggestive of the kind of description that might be given by someone who is personally involved in what he is describing; and this mode is no less clearly related to the dynamic, deictic, subjective conception of time.”
Running(john,p) & Active(p,t)
states that John is running at time t.
in a way that correctly captures its logical relations with sentences such as
Walking(x,process(e)) & IsAt(x,y,result(e))
For event type E,
ProgE(p) =def $e[E(e) & process(e)=p & result(e)=goal(p)]
where goal(p) is the goal or end-point towards which process p is directed.
$p $t [Past(t) & Prog(WalkTo(john,station))(p) &
Active(p,t) & ~$e[WalkTo(john,station,e) &
This is not contradictory since Active(process(e),t) does not imply Occurs(e).
Thank you for listening!