| To: | "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> | 
|---|---|
| From: | Simon Spero <ses@xxxxxxx> | 
| Date: | Fri, 19 Aug 2011 21:14:39 -0400 | 
| Message-id: | <CADE8KM4Z5FxwWHB61A_tmV6W64t=pwWRZnEijL_FeGrXvkF-1g@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> | 
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 5:30 PM, Pat Hayes <phayes@xxxxxxx> wrote:I have been taken to task by some very competent logicians for calling CL first-order, as they are using a purely syntactic criterion of order. Nobody is right in debates like this[...] Nobody's right if everybody's wrong... 
But I didn't come here to talk order, law and or otherwise.  I came here to talk about CL, types/sorts, and syntax.  All of the concrete syntactic sugar to allow variables to be constrained to satisfy some one-place predicate. However, the semantics are explicitly and deliberately designed so that type errors lead to sentences which are always  false, rather than being syntax errors.   
Was a sorted dialect of CL ever proposed? Simon    _________________________________________________________________ Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/ Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/ Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/ Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J (01)  | 
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> | 
|---|---|---|
  | ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [ontolog-forum] type free logic and higher order quantification, k Goodier | 
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [ontolog-forum] type free logic and higher order quantification, Christopher Menzel | 
| Previous by Thread: | [ontolog-forum] type free logic and higher order quantification, Rick Murphy | 
| Next by Thread: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Sorted for ∃s and whizz (was Re: type free logic and higher order quantification), Pat Hayes | 
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |