Analyze the following sentences in as much detail as possible, providing a key to the non-logical vocabulary (upper and lower case letters) appearing in your answer. | |
1. |
George traveled to LA by way of some town in Wyoming. [Give this analysis also using an unrestricted quantifier.]
answer |
2. |
Everyone is afraid of something. [This sentence is ambiguous. Analyze it in two different ways, and describe a situation in which the sentence is true on one of your interpretations and false on the other.]
answer |
3. |
Spot knew exactly one trick.
answer |
4. |
Analyze the sentence below using each of the two ways of analyzing definite descriptions. That is, analyze it using Russell’s analysis of definite descriptions as quantifier phrases and then analyze it again using the description operator.
Tom opened the letter from Bulgaria
answer
|
5. |
Use derivations to show that the following argument is valid. You may use any rules.
answer |
||
6. |
Use a derivation to show that the following argument is not valid and describe a structure dividing an open gap.
|
7. |
Complete the following to give a definition of equivalence in terms of truth values and possible worlds:
A sentence φ is equivalent to a sentence ψ if and only if … answer |
8. |
Describe a structure (i.e., an assignment of extensions to the non-logical vocabulary) which makes the 8 sentences at the left below all true.
fab = fba, ga = fab, fba = c, Fb, F(ga), Rab, ¬ Rba, R(ga)c
answer |
9. |
[This question was on a topic not covered in F08] Use replacement by equivalence to put the following sentence into disjunctive normal form. Show how you reach your result; you may combine uses of associativity and commutativity with other principles in a single step but there should be no more than one use of De Morgan’s laws or distributivity in each step.
¬ ((A ∧ B) ∨ (C ∨ D))
answer
|
6. |
|
|
7. | A sentence φ is equivalent to a sentence ψ if and only if there is no possible world in which φ and ψ have different truth values |
8. |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The diagram provides a complete answer, as do the tables to its left. The tables below are a way of finding this structure. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
9. |
[This question was on a topic not covered in F08]
¬ ((A ∧ B) ∨ (C ∨ ¬ D))
≃ ¬ (A ∧ B) ∧ ¬ (C ∨ ¬ D) ≃ (¬ A ∨ ¬ B) ∧ (¬ C ∧ D) ≃ (¬ A ∧ ¬ C ∧ D) ∨ (¬ B ∧ ¬ C ∧ D) |