LEADER 03543nam  22006375  450 
001 9910300629203321
005 20251113204228.0
010   $a9783319741543
010   $a3-319-74154-3
010   $z3-319-74153-5
024 7 $a10.1007/978-3-319-74154-3
035   $a(CKB)4100000001795256
035   $a(DE-He213)978-3-319-74154-3
035   $a(MiAaPQ)EBC5252880
035   $a(EXLCZ)994100000001795256
100   $a20180127d2018      u|         0
101 0 $aeng
135   $aurnn#|||mamaa
181   $ctxt$2rdacontent
182   $cc$2rdamedia
183   $acr$2rdacarrier
200 10$aLogical Form $eBetween Logic and Natural Language /$fby Andrea Iacona
205   $a1st ed. 2018.
210  1$aCham :$cSpringer International Publishing :$cImprint: Springer,$d2018.
215   $a1 online resource (viii, 133 p.)
225 1 $aSynthese Library, Studies in Epistemology, Logic, Methodology, and Philosophy of Science,$x2542-8292 ;$v393
320   $aIncludes bibliographical references.
327   $aPreface -- 1. The early history of logical form -- 2. The ideal of logical perfection -- 3. Formal languages and natural languages -- 4. Logical form and syntactic structure -- 5. Logical form and truth conditions -- 6. Logical knowledge vs knowledge of logical form -- 7. Validity -- 8. Quanti ed sentences -- 9. Further issues concerning quanti cation -- Afterword.
330   $aLogical form has always been a prime concern for philosophers belonging to the analytic tradition. For at least one century, the study of logical form has been widely adopted as a method of investigation, relying on its capacity to reveal the structure of thoughts or the constitution of facts. This book focuses on the very idea of logical form, which is directly relevant to any principled reflection on that method. Its central thesis is that there is no such thing as a correct answer to the question of what is logical form: two significantly different notions of logical form are needed to fulfill two major theoretical roles that pertain respectively to logic and to semantics. This thesis has a negative and a positive side. The negative side is that a deeply rooted presumption about logical form turns out to be overly optimistic: there is no unique notion of logical form that can play both roles. The positive side is that the distinction between two notions of logical form, once properly spelled out, sheds light on some fundamental issues concerning the relation between logic and language.
410  0$aSynthese Library, Studies in Epistemology, Logic, Methodology, and Philosophy of Science,$x2542-8292 ;$v393
606   $aLogic
606   $aSemiotics
606   $aLanguage and languages$xPhilosophy
606   $aPhilosophy$xHistory
606   $aMachine theory
606   $aLogic
606   $aSemiotics
606   $aPhilosophy of Language
606   $aHistory of Philosophy
606   $aFormal Languages and Automata Theory
615  0$aLogic.
615  0$aSemiotics.
615  0$aLanguage and languages$xPhilosophy.
615  0$aPhilosophy$xHistory.
615  0$aMachine theory.
615 14$aLogic.
615 24$aSemiotics.
615 24$aPhilosophy of Language.
615 24$aHistory of Philosophy.
615 24$aFormal Languages and Automata Theory.
676   $a160
700   $aIacona$b Andrea$4aut$4http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/aut$0326358
906   $aBOOK
912   $a9910300629203321
996   $aLogical Form$92124607
997   $aUNINA