David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Logic, Language and Information 13 (4):471-489 (2004)
In Pninis grammar of Sanskrit one finds the ivastras, a table which defines the natural classes of phonological segments in Sanskrit by intervals. We present a formal argument which shows that, using his representation method, Pninis way of ordering the phonological segments to represent the natural classes is optimal. The argument is based on a strictly set-theoretical point of view depending only on the set of natural classes and does not explicitly take into account the phonological features of the segments, which are, however, implicitly given in the way a language clusters its phonological inventory. The key idea is to link the graph of the Hasse-diagram of the set of natural classes closed under intersection to ivastra-style representations of the classes. Moreover, the argument is so general that it allows one to decide for each set of sets whether it can be represented with Pninis method. Actually, Pnini had to modify the set of natural classes to define it by the ivastras (the segment h plays a special role). We show that this modification was necessary and, in fact, the best possible modification. We discuss how every set of classes can be modified in such a way that it can be defined in a ivastra-style representation.1.
|Keywords||Pānini Śivasūtras representation of natural classes|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Citations of this work BETA
John Kadvany (forthcoming). Pāṇini's Grammar and Modern Computation. History and Philosophy of Logic:1-22.
Similar books and articles
Harvey Friedman & Lee Stanley (1989). A Borel Reducibility Theory for Classes of Countable Structures. Journal of Symbolic Logic 54 (3):894-914.
Shaughan Lavine (1991). Dual Easy Uniformization and Model-Theoretic Descriptive Set Theory. Journal of Symbolic Logic 56 (4):1290-1316.
William M. Farmer & Joshua D. Guttman (2000). A Set Theory with Support for Partial Functions. Studia Logica 66 (1):59-78.
Christopher Menzel (1986). On the Iterative Explanation of the Paradoxes. Philosophical Studies 49 (1):37 - 61.
Laureano Luna (2012). Grim's Arguments Against Omniscience and Indefinite Extensibility. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 72 (2):89-101.
Gabriel Uzquiano (2003). Plural Quantification and Classes. Philosophia Mathematica 11 (1):67-81.
Ralf-Dieter Schindler (1993). Prädikative Klassen. Erkenntnis 39 (2):209 - 241.
John L. Bell (2000). Sets and Classes as Many. Journal of Philosophical Logic 29 (6):585-601.
Philip Hugly & Charles Sayward (1980). Tarski and Proper Classes. Analysis 40 (4):6-11.
Lowell Friesen (2006). Natural Classes of Universals: Why Armstrong's Analysis Fails. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 84 (2):285 – 296.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads16 ( #225,672 of 1,796,591 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #281,430 of 1,796,591 )
How can I increase my downloads?