Considerations on Logical Consequence and Natural Language

Q2 Arts and Humanities

DIALECTICA Pub Date : 2022-11-18 DOI:10.48106/dial.v74.i2.06

Gil Sagi

引用次数: 0

Abstract

In a recent article, “Logical Consequence and Natural Language,” Michael Glanzberg claims that there is no relation of logical consequence in natural language (2015). The present paper counters that claim. I shall discuss Glanzberg’s arguments and show why they don’t hold. I further show how Glanzberg’s claims may be used to rather support the existence of logical consequence in natural language.

查看原文本刊更多论文

关于逻辑后果与自然语言的思考

在最近的一篇文章“逻辑结果和自然语言”中，Michael Glanzberg声称在自然语言中没有逻辑结果的关系(2015)。本文反驳了这种说法。我将讨论格兰茨伯格的论点，并说明为什么它们站不住脚。我进一步展示了Glanzberg的主张如何被用来支持自然语言中逻辑结果的存在。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

DIALECTICA PHILOSOPHY-

CiteScore

0.80

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Dialectica publishes first-rate articles predominantly in theoretical and systematic philosophy. It is edited in Switzerland and has a focus on analytical philosophy undertaken on the continent. Continuing the work of its founding members, dialectica seeks a better understanding of the mutual support between science and philosophy that both disciplines need and enjoy in their common search for understanding.