{"title":"Nonboolean条件","authors":"P. Santorio, Alexis Wellwood","doi":"10.3765/elm.2.5377","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"On standard analyses, indicative conditionals behave in a Boolean fashion when interacting with and and or. We test this prediction by investigating probability judgments about sentences of the form \"If A, then B {and, or} if C, then D\". Our findings are incompatible with a Boolean picture. This is challenging for standard analyses of ICs, as well as for several nonclassical analyses. Some trivalent theories, conversely, may account for the data.","PeriodicalId":154565,"journal":{"name":"Experiments in Linguistic Meaning","volume":"103 2","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Nonboolean Conditionals\",\"authors\":\"P. Santorio, Alexis Wellwood\",\"doi\":\"10.3765/elm.2.5377\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"On standard analyses, indicative conditionals behave in a Boolean fashion when interacting with and and or. We test this prediction by investigating probability judgments about sentences of the form \\\"If A, then B {and, or} if C, then D\\\". Our findings are incompatible with a Boolean picture. This is challenging for standard analyses of ICs, as well as for several nonclassical analyses. Some trivalent theories, conversely, may account for the data.\",\"PeriodicalId\":154565,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Experiments in Linguistic Meaning\",\"volume\":\"103 2\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Experiments in Linguistic Meaning\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3765/elm.2.5377\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Experiments in Linguistic Meaning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3765/elm.2.5377","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
On standard analyses, indicative conditionals behave in a Boolean fashion when interacting with and and or. We test this prediction by investigating probability judgments about sentences of the form "If A, then B {and, or} if C, then D". Our findings are incompatible with a Boolean picture. This is challenging for standard analyses of ICs, as well as for several nonclassical analyses. Some trivalent theories, conversely, may account for the data.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
