The Logic of Language: Language From Within Volume II
The Logic of Language opens a new perspective on logic. Seuren first argues that the logic of language derives from the lexical meanings of the logical operators. These meanings, however, prove not to be consistent. To solve this problem, the author distinguishes between a default ‘basic‐natural’ and two nondefault ‘strict‐natural’ versions of natural predicate logic, all different from standard modern logic. Basic‐natural logic is shown to derive from an ontology of entities and properties, combined with a basic‐natural set theory, reflecting the way humans deal cognitively with plural sets. A new measure for ‘logical power’ shows the extreme weakness of standard predicate logic as against the maximal power of one version of strict‐natural logic, traditional, post‐Aristotelian predicate logic, or the ‘Square of Opposition’. It is shown that Aristotle's original logic as reconstructed by Abelard is logically faultless (unlike the Square, which suffers from ‘undue existential import’) and also more powerful than standard logic, though less so than the Square or basic‐natural logic. The latter two are shown to be maximally functional for natural linguistic interaction. In the last five chapters, a general theory of discourse‐bound interpretation is developed, covering discourse incrementation, anaphora, presupposition (with its logic) and topic—comment structure. The ‘donkey‐anaphora’ problem is solved by an appeal to discourse structures. The great defect of the Square, its ‘undue existential import’, is remedied by means of a protecting presuppositional ‘mantle’ creating a third truth value of radical falsity, assigned to propositions suffering from presupposition failure and causing inconsistency with preceding true discourse. Finally, topic—comment structure is shown to correspond to a question—answer game directing the building up of discourse domains and to be not of a pragmatic but of a truth‐conditional, hence semantic, nature. Anaphora, presupposition, and topic—comment structure are thus seen to form the ‘cement’ of discourse structure.
0003630 | 160 P1034TH 2011 | ห้องสมุดบัณฑิณศึกษา DCIGS (อาคาร 1 ชั้น 3) | พร้อมให้บริการ |
0003644 | 160 P1034TH 2011 | ห้องสมุดบัณฑิณศึกษา DCIGS (อาคาร 1 ชั้น 3) | พร้อมให้บริการ |
No other version available