Ed Barkmeyer wrote:
> Christopher Menzel wrote:
>> Ed Barkmeyer wrote:
>>> Upon reflection, I have to agree. Logical predicates seem to
>>> represent nouns, adjectives, verbs and adverbs without prejudice.
>> Not adverbs, typically. In a standard logical language, sentences
>> (1) John buttered the toast
>> (2) John buttered the toast slowly
>> would have to be represented using completely different predicates,
>> one for "buttered" and another for "slowly buttered", e.g., "Bjt" and
>> "Sjt" or "Buttered(john,thetoast)" and
>> "SlowlyButtered(john,thetoast)". This is very unsatisfactory,
>> however, as sentence (1) obviously follows from (2), whereas "Bjt"
>> obviously does not follow from "Sjt".
> Chris is quite right, of course.
> Having recently been exposed to some IKL-like phrasing, I have seen
> things like:
> (WasSlowly (THAT (Buttered John Toast))) (01)
Right; it's kind of Davidsonian, with a proposition playing the role of
an event. (02)
> But that is most definitely NOT FOL. (03)
Not traditional FOL, for sure. But you can certainly have first-order
logics in which propositions are first-class citizens as in IKL.
Whether IKL is genuinely first-order, well, we'll get back to you on
that. :-) (04)
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (06)