Abstract
Generally speaking, there are two categories of semantics theory: model-theoretic approach and proof-theoretic approach. In the first part of this paper, I will briefly analyze some inadequacies related to these two approaches, and promote an alternative relational approach, which bases semantic notions on relations between expressions. A brief discussion in general for this alternative will be provided. In the second part, I will provide a solid mathematical framework to the study of logical meanings, and show its connection with the other two approaches.
This chapter is in final form and it is not submitted to publication anywhere else.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Austin, John L. Truth. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supp. 24, 111–129. 1950. Reprint in [2]. Page refers to this reprint.
Blackburn S, Simmons K. Truth Oxford University Press. 1999.
Brandom R. Articulating reasons: An introduction to inferentialism: Harvard University Press; 2009.
Cintula P, Gil-Férez J, Moraschini T, Paoli F (2019). An abstract approach to consequence relations. The Review of Symbolic Logic. 12(2):331–71.
Frege G. The basics of arithmetic: a logical mathematical study of the concept of number. w. Koebner; 1884th.
Gentzen G. Untersuchungen über das logische Schließen. I. Mathematische zeitschrift. 1935;39(1):176–210. English translation ‘Investigations into Logical Deduction’ in [11], pp. 68–131.
Hodges W. ‘From sentence meanings to full semantics’, in Logic at the Crossroads: An Interdisciplinary View I, ed. Amitabha Gupta et al., Allied Publishers, New Delhi 2008, pp. 399–415; reprinted in Proof, Computation and Agency: Logic at the Crossroads, ed. Johan van Benthem et al., Springer, Dordrecht 2011, pp. 261–276.
Peregrin J. What is inferentialism? Inference, consequence, and meaning: perspectives on inferentialism. 2012:3–16.
De Queiroz RJ (2008). On reduction rules, meaning-as-use, and proof-theoretic semantics. Studia Logica. Nov 1;90(2):211–47.
Schroeder-Heister, Peter, “Proof-Theoretic Semantics”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2018 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2018/entries/proof-theoretic-semantics/.
Gentzen, Gerhard, and M. E. Szabo. The Collected Papers of Gerhard Gentzen. Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics. 1969.
Tarski A. The semantic conception of truth and the foundations of semantics. Philosophy and phenomenological research. 1944;4(3):341–76.
Timpson CG. Quantum information theory and the foundations of quantum mechanics: OUP Oxford; 2013.
Acknowledgements
I would like to express my sincerest and greatest gratitude to the following professors: Fenrong Liu, Martin Stokhof and Johan van Benthem. All of them have provided me considerable help and guidance. I would also like to thank three anonymous reviewers of this paper who have also offered me many detailed and useful comments.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this paper
Cite this paper
Ye, L. (2020). Towards a Relational Treating of Language and Logical Systems. In: Liao, B., Wáng, Y. (eds) Context, Conflict and Reasoning. Logic in Asia: Studia Logica Library. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-7134-3_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-7134-3_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-15-7133-6
Online ISBN: 978-981-15-7134-3
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)