Subatomic Natural Deduction for a Naturalistic First-Order Language with Non-Primitive Identity
- 647 Downloads
A first-order language with a defined identity predicate is proposed whose apparatus for atomic predication is sensitive to grammatical categories of natural language (e.g., common nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs, modifiers). Subatomic natural deduction systems are defined for this naturalistic first-order language. These systems contain subatomic systems which govern the inferential relations which obtain between naturalistic atomic sentences and between their possibly composite components. As a main result it is shown that normal derivations in the defined systems enjoy the subexpression property which subsumes the subformula property with respect to atomic and identity formulae as a special case. The systems admit a proof-theoretic semantics which does not only apply to logically compound but also to atomic and identity formulae—as well as to their components. The potential of the defined systems for a meticulous first-order analysis of natural inferences whose validity crucially depends on expressions of some of the aforementioned categories is demonstrated.
KeywordsIdentity Natural deduction Natural logic Normalization Proof-theoretic semantics Simple rules
I would like to thank Nissim Francez for discussions on proof-theoretic semantics and an anonymous referee for her/his feedback. This work was supported by the DFG (Grant WI 3456/2-1).
- Davidson, D. (2001). The logical form of action sentences. In D. Davidson, Essays on actions and events (pp. 105–122). Oxford: Clarendon Press. (Originally published in N. Rescher (ed.), The Logic of Decision and Action, Pittsburg, University of Pittsburg Press, 1967.).Google Scholar
- Dummett, M. (1991). The logical basis of metaphysics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Forbes, G. (2013). Intensional transitive verbs. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Fall 2013 Edition). http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2013/entries/intensional-trans-verbs/.
- Francez, N. (2015a). Proof-theoretic semantics. London: College Publications.Google Scholar
- Francez, N., & Więckowski, B. (forthcoming). A proof theory for first-order logic with definiteness. IfCoLog Journal of Logics and their Applications.Google Scholar
- Frege, G. (1879). Begriffsschrift. Eine der arithmetischen nachgebildete Formelsprache des reinen Denkens. Halle an der Saale: Verlag von Louis Nebert. (Reprint: I. Angelelli (ed.), Hildesheim, Georg Olms Verlag, 1998).Google Scholar
- Frege, G. (1893/1903). Grundgesetze der Arithmetik I/II. Jena: Verlag von Hermann Pohle. (Reprint: C. Thiel (ed.), Hildesheim, Georg Olms Verlag, 2009).Google Scholar
- Gamut, L. T. F. (1991). Logic, language, and meaning: Intensional logic and logical grammar (Vol.2). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Gentzen, G. (1934). Untersuchungen über das logische Schließen I, II. Mathematische Zeitschrift, 39, 176–210, 405–432Google Scholar
- Jaśkowski, S. (1934). On the rules of suppositions in formal logic. Studia Logica, 1, 5–32.Google Scholar
- Montague, R. (1974). Formal philosophy. Selected papers of Richard Montague, R. H. Thomason (Ed.). New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
- Prawitz, D. (1965). Natural deduction. A proof-theoretical study. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell. (Reprint: Mineola/NY, Dover Publications, 2006.).Google Scholar
- Prawitz, D. (1973). Towards a foundation of a general proof theory. In P. Suppes (Ed.), Logic, methodology and philosophy of science IV (pp. 225–250). Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
- Prawitz, D. (2006). Meaning approached via proofs. Synthese, 148(3), 507–524. Special issue on Proof-Theoretic Semantics edited by R. Kahle and P. Schroeder-Heister.Google Scholar
- Quine, W. V. (1969). Existence and quantification. In W. V. Quine (Ed.), Ontological relativity and other essays (pp. 94–96). New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
- Read, S. (2004). Identity and harmony. Analysis, 64, 113–119. (Revised version: Identity and harmony revisited, 2014).Google Scholar
- Read, S. (2015). General elimination harmony and higher-level rules. In H. Wansing (Ed.), Dag Prawitz on proofs and meaning (pp. 293–312). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
- Sandqvist, T. (2015). Hypothesis-discharging rules in atomic bases. In H. Wansing (Ed.), Dag Prawitz on proofs and meaning (pp. 313–328). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
- Schroeder-Heister, P. (2013). Proof-theoretic semantics. In Zalta, E. N. (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring 2013 Edition). http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2013/entries/proof-theoretic-semantics/.
- Schroeder-Heister, P. (2015). Harmony in proof-theoretic semantics: A reductive analysis. In H. Wansing (Ed.), Dag Prawitz on proofs and meaning (pp. 329–358). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
- Tarski, A. (1995). Pisma Logiczno-Filozoficzne: Tom 1. Prawda, J. Zygmunt (Ed.), Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.Google Scholar
- Wansing, H. (2015). Dag Prawitz on proofs and meaning: Outstanding contributions to logic (Vol. 7). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
- Więckowski, B. (2012). A constructive type-theoretical formalism for the interpretation of subatomically sensitive natural language constructions. Studia Logica, 100(4), 815–853. Special issue on Logic and Natural Language edited by N. Francez and I. Pratt-Hartmann.Google Scholar
- Więckowski, B. (2015). Constructive belief reports. Synthese, 192(3), 603–633. Special section on Hyperintensionality edited by M. Duží and B. Jespersen.Google Scholar
- Więckowski, B. (forthcoming). Refinements of subatomic natural deduction, Journal of Logic and Computation, (first published online: August 20, 2014).Google Scholar