On 3/21/2019 11:59 AM, Jon Alan Schmidt wrote:
Natural languages are anything but precise, and as Peirce himself
affirmed, even in logic the dividing line between the subject and
predicate within any given proposition is somewhat arbitrary.
That statement is partly false, and rest is misleading.
1. The syntax of NLs is the most precise aspect. The semantics
is often vague because the subject matter is continuous, the
context is continuous, and the words are discrete.
2. But the syntax of well-edited writing in ordinary language
can be parsed by computer with a high degree of accuracy.
And the syntax of every version of formal logic can be parsed
with 100% accuracy.
3. No version of logic after syllogisms made a binary distinction
between subject and predicate. Therefore, the mapping from the
logic to the subject and predicate of an English sentence requires
the speaker or writer to use shared (AKA collateral) knowledge or
experience. Since the speaker or writer can never be certain
about what is shared, errors and inaccuracies often occur.
For examples and explanations about vagueness in NL semantics, see
"What is the source of fuzziness?" http://jfsowwa.com/pubs/fuzzy.pdf
For issues about contexts in language and the mapping to logic, see
See http://jfsowa.com/talks/contexts.pdf
For the search for a "natural logic" in the foundations for language
and logic, see http://jfsowa.com/talks/natlog.pdf
Please read those references. Even if you disagree with me, read
the citations and quotations of other authors (mostly with URLs).
John
-----------------------------
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L
to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . To
UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the
line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at
http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
