全部 标题 作者
关键词 摘要


Conservative Intensional Extension of Tarski's Semantics

DOI: 10.1155/2013/920157

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

We considered an extension of the first-order logic (FOL) by Bealer's intensional abstraction operator. Contemporary use of the term “intension” derives from the traditional logical Frege-Russell doctrine that an idea (logic formula) has both an extension and an intension. Although there is divergence in formulation, it is accepted that the “extension” of an idea consists of the subjects to which the idea applies, and the “intension” consists of the attributes implied by the idea. From the Montague's point of view, the meaning of an idea can be considered as particular extensions in different possible worlds. In the case of standard FOL, we obtain a commutative homomorphic diagram, which is valid in each given possible world of an intensional FOL: from a free algebra of the FOL syntax, into its intensional algebra of concepts, and, successively, into an extensional relational algebra (different from Cylindric algebras). Then we show that this composition corresponds to the Tarski's interpretation of the standard extensional FOL in this possible world. 1. Introduction In “über Sinn und edeutung,” Frege concentrated mostly on the senses of names, holding that all names have a sense (meaning). It is natural to hold that the same considerations apply to any expression that has an extension. But two general terms can have the same extension and different cognitive significance; two predicates can have the same extension and different cognitive significance; two sentences can have the same extension and different cognitive significance. So, general terms, predicates, and sentences all have senses as well as extensions. The same goes for any expression that has an extension or is a candidate for extension. The significant aspect of an expression’s meaning is its extension. We can stipulate that the extension of a sentence is its truth-value, and that the extension of a singular term is its referent. The extension of other expressions can be seen as associated entities that contribute to the truth-value of a sentence in a manner broadly analogous to the way in which the referent of a singular term contributes to the truth-value of a sentence. In many cases, the extension of an expression will be what we intuitively think of as its referent, although this need not hold in all cases. While Frege himself is often interpreted as holding that a sentence’s referent is its truth-value, this claim is counterintuitive and widely disputed. We can avoid that issue in the present framework by using the technical term “extension.” In this context, the claim that the

References

[1]  J. Pustejovsky and B. Boguraev, “Lexical knowledge representation and natural language processing,” Artificial Intelligence, vol. 63, no. 1-2, pp. 193–223, 1993.
[2]  M. Fitting, “First-order intensional logic,” Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, vol. 127, no. 1–3, pp. 171–193, 2004.
[3]  T. Braüner, “Adding intensional machinery to hybrid logic,” Journal of Logic and Computation, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 631–648, 2008.
[4]  T. Braüner and S. Ghilardi, “First-order modal logic,” in Handbook of Modal Logic, pp. 549–620, Elsevier, 2007.
[5]  S. Bond and M. Denecker, “I-logic: an intensional logic of informations,” in Proceedings of the 19th Belgian-Dutch Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 49–56, Utrecht, The Netherlands, November 2007.
[6]  M. A. Orgun and W. W. Wadge, “Towards a unified theory of intensional logic programming,” The Journal of Logic Programming, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 413–440, 1992.
[7]  G. Bealer, “Universals,” The Journal of Philosophy, vol. 90, no. 1, pp. 5–32, 1993.
[8]  G. Bealer, “Theories of properties, relations, and propositions,” The Journal of Philosophy, vol. 76, no. 11, pp. 634–648, 1979.
[9]  E. F. Codd, “Relational completeness of data base sublanguages,” in Data Base Systems: Courant Computer Science Symposia Series 6, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1972.
[10]  D. K. Lewis, On the Plurality of Worlds, Blackwell, Oxford, UK, 1986.
[11]  R. Stalnaker, Inquiry, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass, USA, 1984.
[12]  R. Montague, “Universal grammar,” Theoria, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 373–398, 1970.
[13]  R. Montague, “The proper treatment of quantification in ordinary English,” in Approaches to Natural Language, J. Hintikka, P. Suppes, J. M. E. Moravcsik, et al., Eds., pp. 221–242, Reidel, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1973.
[14]  R. Montague, Formal Philosophy. Selected Papers of Richard Montague, Yale University Press, London, UK, 1974.
[15]  Z. Majki?, “First-order logic: modality and intensionality,” http://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0680v1.
[16]  Z. Majki?, “Intensional first-order logic for P2P database systems,” in Journal on Data Semantics 12, vol. 5480 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 131–152, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2009.
[17]  Z. Majki?, “Intensional semantics for RDF data structures,” in Proceedings of the 12th International Symposium on Database Engineering & Applications Systems (IDEAS '08), pp. 69–77, Coimbra, Portugal, September, 2008.
[18]  G. Bealer, Quality and Concept, Oxford University Press, New York, NY, USA, 1982.
[19]  Z. Majki?, “Weakly-coupled ontology integration of P2P database systems,” in Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Peer-to-Peer Knowledge Management (P2PKM '04), Boston, Mass, USA, August 2004.
[20]  Z. Majki?, “Intensional P2P mapping between RDF ontologies,” in Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Web Information Systems (WISE '05), M. Kitsuregawa, Ed., vol. 3806 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 592–594, New York, NY, USA, November 2005.
[21]  Z. Majki?, “Intensional semantics for P2P data integration,” in Journal on Data Semantics 6, vol. 4090 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Special Issue on ‘Emergent Semantics’, pp. 47–66, 2006.
[22]  Z. Majki?, “Non omniscient intensional contextual reasoning for query-agents in P2P systems,” in Proceedings of the 3rd Indian International Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IICAI '07), Pune, India, December 2007.
[23]  Z. Majki?, “Coalgebraic specification of query computation in intensional P2P database systems,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on Theoretical and Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science (TMFCS '08), pp. 14–23, Orlando, Fla, USA, July 2008.
[24]  Z. Majki?, “RDF view-based interoperability in intensional FOL for Peer-to-Peer database systems,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems and Web Technologies (EISWT '08), pp. 88–96, Orlando, Fla, USA, July 2008.
[25]  L. Henkin, J. D. Monk, and A. Tarski, Cylindic Algebras I, North-Holland, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1971.
[26]  A. Pirotte, “A precise definition of basic relational notions and of the relational algebra,” ACM SIGMOD Record, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 30–45, 1982.
[27]  G. Frege, “über Sinn und Bedeutung,” Zeitschrift für Philosophie und philosophische Kritik, vol. 100, pp. 22–50, 1892.
[28]  B. Russell, “On Denoting,” in Logic and Knowledge, vol. 14 of Mind, Reprinted in Russell, pp. 479–493, 1905.
[29]  A. N. Whitehead and B. Russell, Principia Mathematica, vol. 1, Cambridge, Mass, USA, 1910.
[30]  R. Carnap, Meaning and Necessity, Chicago, Ill, USA, 1947.

Full-Text

comments powered by Disqus