Download Doing Worlds with Words: Formal Semantics without Formal by J. Peregrin PDF

By J. Peregrin

Doing Worlds with Words throws mild at the challenge of that means because the assembly aspect of linguistics, good judgment and philosophy, and severely assesses the probabilities and boundaries of elucidating the character of that means through formal common sense, version thought and model-theoretical semantics. the most thrust of the booklet is to teach that it really is faulty to appreciate version thought metaphysically and with the intention to attempt to base formal semantics on anything like formal metaphysics; fairly, the ebook states that version concept and related instruments of the research of language can be understood as shooting the semantically proper, in particular inferential, constitution of language. From this vantage element, the reader earnings a brand new gentle on the various conventional strategies and difficulties of common sense and philosophy of language, resembling which means, reference, fact and the character of formal logic.

Show description

Read Online or Download Doing Worlds with Words: Formal Semantics without Formal Metaphysics PDF

Similar semantics books

Peirce, Signs, and Meaning (Toronto Studies in Semiotics)

C. S. Peirce used to be the founding father of pragmatism and a pioneer within the box of semiotics. His paintings investigated the matter of that means, that's the middle point of semiosis in addition to an important factor in lots of educational fields. Floyd Merrell demonstrates all through Peirce, indicators, and which means that Peirce's perspectives stay dynamically suitable to the research of next paintings within the philosophy of language.

From etymology to pragmatics: metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure

This publication bargains a brand new method of the research of the a number of meanings of English modals, conjunctions, conditionals, and notion verbs. even if such ambiguities can't simply be accounted for via feature-analyses of be aware which means, Eve Sweetser's argument indicates that they are often analyzed either with no trouble and systematically.

A Glossary of Semantics and Pragmatics (Glossary Of...)

This easy-to-use consultant illuminates key techniques and phrases in semantics and pragmatics and the research of that means because it is conveyed via language.

Contemporary Critical Discourse Studies

CDS is a multifarious box continually constructing assorted methodological frameworks for analysing dynamically evolving facets of language in a extensive variety of socio-political and institutional contexts. This quantity is a leading edge, interdisciplinary account of those theoretical and empirical advancements.

Extra info for Doing Worlds with Words: Formal Semantics without Formal Metaphysics

Example text

Iff LMOD({o})=INT (F15) (F16) (F17) (F16) together with (D5) and (YCI ') then give (YCI "); whereas (FI7) plus (D6) plus (VC2') yield (VC2"). E such that sdNST(o) and MOD({o})=INT. E' such that sdNST(o) and MOD({o})=INT. (YCI ") (VC2") We have stated that a logical calculus related to language is adequate, or sound and complete, if all and only schemata which can be proved in it are logically valid. Now, after having introduced the concepts of material interpretation and model, we conclude that a schema is logically valid if and only if it is logically verified by every interpretation; hence we can now say that a logical calculus is materially sound if all its theorem-schemata are logically verified by every material interpretation; and that it is materially complete if only its theorem-schemata are logically verified by every material interpretation.

Iff iEMOO({a}) for every idNT. Hence we have proved (FlS); we can prove (F16) and (F17) analogously. 340f course if we keep the range of constants to be obligatorily replaced by parameters fixed. Otherwise, more than one schema could result from every single statement containing at least one parameter. yr. NYr. LYr. iff LMOD({o})=INT (F15) (F16) (F17) (F16) together with (D5) and (YCI ') then give (YCI "); whereas (FI7) plus (D6) plus (VC2') yield (VC2"). E such that sdNST(o) and MOD({o})=INT. E' such that sdNST(o) and MOD({o})=INT.

However, we have stressed that logical theory aims at a canon, that it is to summarize valid inferences. To canonize is to bridge the gap between the descriptive and the normative, to take what is the case and to make what should be the case out of it. Hence, at some point we cease acknowledging that the validity of (5) depends upon its being a mere description of its naturallanguage instances, and we start to see it on its own as a prescription, as a norm; we begin to use the schema to justify the validity of the natural-language instances rather than the other way round.

Download PDF sample

Rated 4.57 of 5 – based on 47 votes