Semantic WFF(x) specified syntactically

Abstract

Hypothesis: WFF(x) can be applied syntactically to the semantics of formalized declarative sentences such that: WFF(x) ↔ (x ↦ True) ∨ (x ↦ False) (see proof sketch below) For clarity we focus on simple propositions without binary logical connectives.

Links

PhilArchive

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

Semantics and syntax: parallels and connections.J. E. Miller - 1985 - New York: Cambridge University Press.
Foundations of intensional semantics.Chris Fox - 2005 - Malden MA: Blackwell. Edited by Shalom Lappin.
Semantic holism is seriously false.Gerald J. Massey - 1990 - Studia Logica 49 (1):83 - 86.
A theory of focus interpretation.Mats Rooth - 1992 - Natural Language Semantics 1 (1):75-116.
Lexical semantics without thematic roles.Yael Ravin - 1990 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Two-dimensional semantics.Laura Schroeter - 2010 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
The handbook of contemporary semantic theory.Shalom Lappin (ed.) - 1996 - Cambridge, Mass., USA: Blackwell Reference.
Why Propositions Cannot be Sets of Truth-supporting Circumstances.Scott Soames - 2008 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 37 (3):267-276.
Embeddability, syntax, and semantics in accounts of scientific theories.Peter Turney - 1990 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 19 (4):429 - 451.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-01-27

Downloads
384 (#49,905)

6 months
37 (#95,960)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Meaning postulates.Rudolf Carnap - 1952 - Philosophical Studies 3 (5):65 - 73.
Meaning Postulates.Rudolf Carnap - 1955 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 20 (2):188-189.

Add more references