Erkenntnis 81 (4):721-739 (2016)

Authors
Denis Bonnay
Université Paris Nanterre
Dag Westerståhl
Stockholm University
Abstract
The standard relation of logical consequence allows for non-standard interpretations of logical constants, as was shown early on by Carnap. But then how can we learn the interpretations of logical constants, if not from the rules which govern their use? Answers in the literature have mostly consisted in devising clever rule formats going beyond the familiar what follows from what. A more conservative answer is possible. We may be able to learn the correct interpretations from the standard rules, because the space of possible interpretations is a priori restricted by universal semantic principles. We show that this is indeed the case. The principles are familiar from modern formal semantics: compositionality, supplemented, for quantifiers, with topic-neutrality.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s10670-015-9764-8
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 60,694
External links

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

Multiple-Conclusion Logic.D. J. Shoesmith - 1978 - Cambridge University Press.
What is Logic?Ian Hacking - 1979 - Journal of Philosophy 76 (6):285-319.
On a Generalization of Quantifiers.Andrzej Mostowski - 1957 - Fundamenta Mathematicae 44 (2):12--36.

View all 21 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Categoricity by Convention.Julien Murzi & Brett Topey - forthcoming - Philosophical Studies.
How May the Propositional Calculus Represent?Tristan Haze - 2017 - South American Journal of Logic 3 (1):173-184.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Logical and the Analytic.Richard Creath - 2017 - Synthese 194 (1):79-96.
Carnap's Criterion of Logicality.Denis Bonnay - 2009 - In Pierre Wagner (ed.), Carnap's Logical Syntax of Language. Palgrave-Macmillan.
Recurrence.Nathan Salmon - 2012 - Philosophical Studies 159 (3):407-441.
Pure Quotation and General Compositionality.Peter Pagin & Dag Westerståhl - 2010 - Linguistics and Philosophy 33 (5):381-415.
Compositionality and Complexity in Multiple Negation.Francis Corblin - 1995 - Logic Journal of the IGPL 3 (2-3):449-471.
Consequence Mining: Constans Versus Consequence Relations.Denis Bonnay & Dag Westerståhl - 2012 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 41 (4):671-709.
Compositionality and Modest Inferentialism.James Trafford - 2014 - Teorema: International Journal of Philosophy (1):39-56.
Carnap and Reichenbach on Probability with Neurath the Winner.Keith Lehrer - 1993 - Vienna Circle Institute Yearbook 1:143-155.
Why Rationalist Compositionality Won't Go Away (Either).Víctor M. Verdejo - 2009 - Theoria: Revista de Teoría, Historia y Fundamentos de la Ciencia 24 (1):29-47.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2015-09-11

Total views
92 ( #113,531 of 2,438,590 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
4 ( #167,451 of 2,438,590 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes