8 found
Sort by:
See also:
Profile: Hans Smessaert (Catholic University of Louvain)
  1. Hans Smessaert & Lorenz Demey (forthcoming). Logical Geometries and Information in the Square of Oppositions. Journal of Logic, Language and Information:1-39.
    The Aristotelian square of oppositions is a well-known diagram in logic and linguistics. In recent years, several extensions of the square have been discovered. However, these extensions have failed to become as widely known as the square. In this paper we argue that there is indeed a fundamental difference between the square and its extensions, viz., a difference in informativity. To do this, we distinguish between concrete Aristotelian diagrams (such as the square) and, on a more abstract level, the Aristotelian (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Hans Smessaert (2012). The Classical Aristotelian Hexagon Versus the Modern Duality Hexagon. Logica Universalis 6 (1-2):171-199.
    Peters and Westerståhl (Quantifiers in Language and Logic, 2006), and Westerståhl (New Perspectives on the Square of Opposition, 2011) draw a crucial distinction between the “classical” Aristotelian squares of opposition and the “modern” Duality squares of opposition. The classical square involves four opposition relations, whereas the modern one only involves three of them: the two horizontal connections are fundamentally distinct in the Aristotelian case (contrariety, CR vs. subcontrariety, SCR) but express the same Duality relation of internal negation (SNEG). Furthermore, the (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Sara Verbrugge & Hans Smessaert (2010). On the Argumentative Strength of Indirect Inferential Conditionals. Argumentation 24 (3):337-362.
    Inferential or epistemic conditional sentences represent a blueprint of someone’s reasoning process from premise to conclusion. Declerck and Reed (2001) make a distinction between a direct and an indirect type. In the latter type the direction of reasoning goes backwards, from the blatant falsehood of the consequent to the falsehood of the antecedent. We first present a modal reinterpretation in terms of Argumentation Schemes of indirect inferential conditionals (IIC’s) in Declerck and Reed (2001). We furthermore argue for a distinction between (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Hans Smessaert (2009). On the 3d Visualisation of Logical Relations. Logica Universalis 3 (2):303-332.
    The central aim of this paper is to present a Boolean algebraic approach to the classical Aristotelian Relations of Opposition, namely Contradiction and (Sub)contrariety, and to provide a 3D visualisation of those relations based on the geometrical properties of Platonic and Archimedean solids. In the first part we start from the standard Generalized Quantifier analysis of expressions for comparative quantification to build the Comparative Quantifier Algebra CQA. The underlying scalar structure allows us to define the Aristotelian relations in Boolean terms (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Sara Verbrugge, Kristien Dieussaert, Walter Schaeken, Hans Smessaert & William Van Belle (2007). Pronounced Inferences: A Study on Inferential Conditionals. Thinking and Reasoning 13 (2):105 – 133.
    An experimental study is reported which investigates the differences in interpretation between content conditionals (of various pragmatic types) and inferential conditionals. In a content conditional, the antecedent represents a requirement for the consequent to become true. In an inferential conditional, the antecedent functions as a premise and the consequent as the inferred conclusion from that premise. The linguistic difference between content and inferential conditionals is often neglected in reasoning experiments. This turns out to be unjustified, since we adduced evidence on (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Hans Smessaert & Alice G. B. Ter Meulen (2004). Temporal Reasoning with Aspectual Adverbs. Linguistics and Philosophy 27 (2):209-261.
    Validity of dynamic temporal reasoning is semantically characterized for Englishand Dutch aspectual adverbs in Discourse Representation Theory. This dynamicperspective determines how the content needs to be revised and what informationis preserved across updates, when the order of premises is considered relevant.Resetting contextual parameters relies on modelling the basic aspectual polaritytransitions and temporal reasoning extensionally. For intensional aspectual adverbialsthe speaker''s attitudes regarding past alternatives to and possible continuations of thecurrent state come into play. Additional considerations are offered for generalizing thissystem to (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Hans Smessaert & Alice G. B. Ter Meulen (2004). Temporal Reasoning with Aspectual Adverbs. Linguistics and Philosophy 27 (2):209-261.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Hans Smessaert (1996). Monotonicity Properties of Comparative Determiners. Linguistics and Philosophy 19 (3):295 - 336.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation