Journal of Logic, Language and Information

, Volume 10, Issue 1, pp 49–61 | Cite as

Aspects of Compositionality

  • Gabriel Sandu
  • Jaakko Hintikka
Article

Abstract

We introduce several senses of the principle ofcompositionality. We illustrate the difference between them with thehelp of some recent results obtained by Cameron and Hodges oncompositional semantics for languages of imperfect information.

axiom of choice compositionality games 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Blass, A. and Gurevich, Y., 1986, “Henkin quantifiers and complete problems,” Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 32, 1–16.Google Scholar
  2. Cameron, P. and Hodges, W., “Some combinatorics of imperfect information,” forthcoming.Google Scholar
  3. Groenendijk, J. and Stokhof, M., 1991, “Dynamic predicate logic,” Linguistics and Philosophy 14, 39–100.Google Scholar
  4. Henkin, L., 1961, “Some remarks on infinitary long formulas,” pp. 167–183 in Infinitistic Methods, Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  5. Hintikka, J., 1996, The Principles of Mathematics Revisited, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Hintikka, J. and Sandu, G., 1989, “Informational independence as a semantical phenomenon,” pp. 571–589 in Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science VIII, J.E. Fenstad, I.T. Frolov, and R. Hilpinen, eds., Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  7. Hintikka, J. and Sandu, G., 1997, “Game-theoretical semantics,” pp. 361–410 in Handbook of Logic and Language, A. ter Meulen and J. van Benthem, eds., Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  8. Hodges, W., 1997a, “Compositional semantics for a language of imperfect information,” Journal of the IPGL 5, 539–563.Google Scholar
  9. Hodges, W., 1997b, “Some strange quantifiers,” pp. 51–65 in Structures in Logic and Computer Science, J. Mycielski, G. Rozenberg, and A. Salomaa, eds., Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 1261, Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  10. Hodges, W., 1998, “Compositionality is not the problem,” Logic and Logical Philosophy 6, 7–33.Google Scholar
  11. Hodges, W., 2001, “Formal features of compositionality,” Journal of Logic, Language, and Information 10, 7–28.Google Scholar
  12. Janssen, Th., 1997, “Compositionality,” pp. 417–473 in Handbook of Logic and Language, A. ter Meulen and J. van Benthem, eds., Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  13. Kolaitis, Ph., 1985, “Game quantification,” pp. 365–421 in Model-Theoretic Logics, J. Barwise and S. Feferman, eds., New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  14. Krynicki, M. and Mostowski, M., 1995, “Henkin quantifiers,” pp. 193–262 in Quantifiers: Logics, Models, and Computation, M. Krynicki, M. Mostowski, and L.W. Szczerba, eds., Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  15. Sandu, G. and Väänänen, J., 1992, “Partially ordered connectives,” Zeitschrift für Mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik 38, 361–372.Google Scholar
  16. Westerstå hl, D., 1998, “On mathematical proofs of the vacuity of compositionality,” Linguistics and Philosophy 21, 635–643.Google Scholar
  17. Zadrozny, W., 1994, “From compositional to systematic semantics,” Linguistics and Philosophy 17, 329–342.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gabriel Sandu
    • 1
  • Jaakko Hintikka
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of HelsinkiHelsinkiFinland
  2. 2.Department of PhilosophyBoston UniversityBostonU.S.A

Personalised recommendations