Some philosophers find the following thesis attractive: for every logical constant C there is a set of logical rules of inference R such that a subject knows the meaning of C if and only if she accepts the rules in R. I point out some obvious but, apparently, easily forgotten difficulties concerning this thesis.

Alcuni anni or sono, poco dopo l’uscita dell’edizione italiana di Lexical Competence, mi è capitato di pubblicare un breve articolo in cui analizzavo e criticavo certe tesi sostenute da Diego Marconi nel suo libro. L’articolo era seguito, nello stesso numero della rivista, da una risposta di Marconi alla quale non ho mai replicato. La presente nota vuole essere, più che una replica tardiva, una riconsiderazione complessiva di quella discussione. La strategia argomentativa che avevo adottato a...

Let $\langle\mathscr{T},\leq\rangle$ be the usual structure of the degrees of unsolvability and $\langle\mathscr{D},\leq\rangle$ the structure of the T-degrees of partial functions defined in [7]. We prove that every countable distributive lattice with a least element can be isomorphically embedded as an initial segment of $\langle\mathscr{D},\leq\rangle$ : as a corollary, the first order theory of $\langle\mathscr{D},\leq\rangle$ is recursively isomorphic to that of $\langle\mathscr{T},\leq\rangle$ . We also show that $\langle\mathscr{D},\leq\rangle$ and $\langle\mathscr{T},\leq\rangle$ are not elementarily equivalent.

A good reason to have a language containing a truth-predicate is that it makes it possible to formulate 'truthfulness attributions' and that truthfulness attributions are of great help in the transmission of true beliefs, the latter being, of course, a desirable end in itself. I argue that, given a language and a conceptual system more or less like ours, truthfulness attributions cannot be effectively replaced by other kinds of statements.

We propose an analysis ofonly in terms of event semantics. This approach allows a unified treatment of a wide range of cases in whichonly is associated with focused expressions of different categories. Section 1 is devoted to a preliminary discussion of some problems that a good analysis ofonly should solve. In section 2 we concentrate on sentences in which the focused expression is a NP. In section 3 we show how our analysis can be extended to other categories. Finally, section (...) 4 contains some remarks on related topics, such as scalarity and exhaustiveness. (shrink)