Academic literature on the topic 'Semantic paradoxes'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the lists of relevant articles, books, theses, conference reports, and other scholarly sources on the topic 'Semantic paradoxes.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Journal articles on the topic "Semantic paradoxes"
WALICKI, MICHAŁ. "RESOLVING INFINITARY PARADOXES." Journal of Symbolic Logic 82, no. 2 (June 2017): 709–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/jsl.2016.18.
Full textRapaport, William J., and Richmond H. Thomason. "Paradoxes and Semantic Representation." Journal of Symbolic Logic 53, no. 2 (June 1988): 667. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2274553.
Full textWen, Lan. "Semantic paradoxes as equations." Mathematical Intelligencer 23, no. 1 (December 2001): 43–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf03024517.
Full textHanke, Miroslav. "John Mair on Semantic Paradoxes." Studia Neoaristotelica 9, no. 1 (2012): 58–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/studneoar2012913.
Full textHanke, Miroslav. "John Mair on Semantic Paradoxes." Studia Neoaristotelica 9, no. 2 (2012): 154–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/studneoar2012927.
Full textHanke, Miroslav. "John Mair on Semantic Paradoxes." Studia Neoaristotelica 10, no. 1 (2013): 50–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/studneoar20131014.
Full textFerguson, Thomas Macaulay. "Two paradoxes of semantic information." Synthese 192, no. 11 (March 13, 2015): 3719–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11229-015-0717-1.
Full textCastaldo, Luca. "Fixed-point models for paradoxical predicates." Australasian Journal of Logic 18, no. 7 (December 30, 2021): 688–723. http://dx.doi.org/10.26686/ajl.v18i7.6576.
Full textRabern, Landon, Brian Rabern, and Matthew Macauley. "Dangerous Reference Graphs and Semantic Paradoxes." Journal of Philosophical Logic 42, no. 5 (October 2, 2012): 727–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10992-012-9246-2.
Full textTurner, Ray. "A theory of properties." Journal of Symbolic Logic 52, no. 2 (June 1987): 455–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2274394.
Full textDissertations / Theses on the topic "Semantic paradoxes"
Rossi, Lorenzo. "Truth, paradoxes, and partiality : a study on semantic theories of naïve truth." Thesis, University of Oxford, 2015. https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:026f12c0-8a1a-4094-8ee9-3b7405021870.
Full textEldridge-Smith, Peter, and peter eldridge-smith@anu edu au. "The Liar Paradox and its Relatives." The Australian National University. Faculty of Arts, 2008. http://thesis.anu.edu.au./public/adt-ANU20081016.173200.
Full textBurgis, Benjamin. "Truth is a One-Player Game: A Defense of Monaletheism and Classical Logic." Scholarly Repository, 2011. http://scholarlyrepository.miami.edu/oa_dissertations/677.
Full textDalglish, Steven Jack William. "Accepting Defeat: A Solution to Semantic Paradox with Defeasible Principles for Truth." The Ohio State University, 2020. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=osu1597757494987204.
Full textEklund, Matti 1974. "Paradoxes and the foundations of semantics and metaphysics." Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2000. http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/8798.
Full textIncludes bibliographical references (p. 175-180).
Numerous philosophical problems, otherwise quite different in character, are of the following form. Certain claims which seem not only obviously true, but even constitutive of the meanings of the expressions employed, can be shown to lead to absurdity when taken together (perhaps in conjunction with contingent facts about the world). All such problems can justly be called paradoxes. The paradoxes I examine are the liar paradox, the sorites paradox, and the personal identity paradox posed by the fission problem. I argue that, in all of the cases examined, the claims that jointly lead to absurdity really are constitutive of the meanings of the expressions employed, in the following ways. First, semantic competence with the expressions involves being disposed to accept these claims. Second, the claims are reference-determining, in that the semantic values of the expressions employed are constrained by the condition that these claims should come out true, or as nearly true as possible. If a claim or principle is constitutive of meaning in both of these ways, I call it meaning-constitutive. When the meaning-constitutive principles for some expressions of a language are inconsistent, I call the language inconsistent. This is a stipulative definition; but it accords well with what other theorists who have talked about languages being inconsistent, for example Alfred Tarski, have had in mind. In chapters one and two, I argue that our language is inconsistent. In chapter three, I relate my theses to Frank Jackson's and David Lewis's views on how reference is determined. Another problem posed by the liar paradox concerns important theses in the philosophy of language. The liar reasoning shows that under certain conditions, a natural language cannot contain a predicate satisfying the T-schema. But many theses in the philosophy of language presuppose that truth satisfies the T-schema. I resolve this conflict in a Tarskian way: by saying that truth then is expressed only in an essentially richer metalanguage. However, I argue that taking this route means having to embrace the existence of absolutely inexpressible properties - and even to embrace the conclusion that some properties of which we appear to have concepts are absolutely inexpressible. All this is dealt with in chapter four. In the fifth chapter I show that my arguments of the previous chapters have (dis)solved the liar paradox. And finally, in the sixth chapter, I discuss the philosophical significance of truth and logic, and argue that these questions are significant only if understood in a new way. In this last chapter I also discuss the implications of the liar paradox for metaphysics; more specifically, its implications for the issue of how metaphysical claims are justified.
by Matti Eklund.
Ph.D.
Machado, Julio Cesar. "O paradoxo a partir da teoria dos blocos semânticos : língua, dicionário e história." Universidade Federal de São Carlos, 2015. https://repositorio.ufscar.br/handle/ufscar/7810.
Full textApproved for entry into archive by Ronildo Prado (ronisp@ufscar.br) on 2016-10-11T19:31:38Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 TeseJCM.pdf: 4590158 bytes, checksum: 2c97cc5bc376d0c6c91fa9230bea44a2 (MD5)
Approved for entry into archive by Ronildo Prado (ronisp@ufscar.br) on 2016-10-11T19:31:48Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 TeseJCM.pdf: 4590158 bytes, checksum: 2c97cc5bc376d0c6c91fa9230bea44a2 (MD5)
Made available in DSpace on 2016-10-11T19:45:39Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 TeseJCM.pdf: 4590158 bytes, checksum: 2c97cc5bc376d0c6c91fa9230bea44a2 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015-03-20
Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)
In general, the idea of this work is to investigate the paradox, our object, by a linguistic and argumentative way, from the Theory of Semantic blocks (TBS). And specifically, for this, we adopted as main methods, two gestures: the relationship between linguistic elements as analysis condition, on the one hand, and the interdependence of its structure and significance, on the other hand, both in the non- use (language) and the use of language (enunciation). This second method of interdependence, when applied to our object, the paradox, becomes our first central hypothesis, the possibility of semantic paradox: the strange and difficult linguisticargumentative consideration of opposite significances, but in the interdependent state. And in this context we will also develop a second central hypothesis: the argumentative cube, while theoretical actualization of the argumentative square (the basic theoretical framework of our theory). Organizationally, the resourcefulness of this work will be carrying out in several specific strands, distributed throughout the chapters, namely: theory / paradox (divided into "Argumentation in the Language" / paradox, at first, and "Theory of Semantic Blocks "/ paradox, in a second stage); discours / paradox; dictionaries / paradox; "Historic Semantics of Enunciation" / paradox; relationship between languages / paradox and anteriority / paradox. In addition to these relational axes established to better observe our object, the paradox, and defend our hypothesis, the semantic paradox, we elected as central corpora, a group of dictionaries in which we can catch "which is said to be" a paradox and "as they say "a paradox to ponder" which means "a paradox. These dictionaries are divided into main corpus: Dictionnaire Historique de langue francaise, and and secondary corpora : Enciclopédia e Dicionário ilustrado, Kokugo Ziten e Dicionário Houaiss da Língua Portuguesa, among others.
L'idée de ce travail est d'étudier le paradoxe d’une façon linguistique et argumentatif, à partir de la Théorie des Blocs Sémantiques (TBS). Et précisément pour cela, nous prenderons comme principales méthodologies deux gestes : la relation entre des éléments linguistiques comme condition d'analyse, et l'interdépendance entre la structure et sa significance, à partir tant par le champ du non-usage (langue), comme du champ d’usage de la langue (l'énonciation). Cette seconde méthode d'interdépendance, lorsqu'elle est appliquée à notre objet (le paradoxe) constitue mon premier hypothèse centrale : la possibilité du paradoxe sémantique : la considération linguistique-argumentative de signifiances opposées, mais dans un état d’interdépendance. Et dans ce contexte nous allons développer aussi une deuxième hipothèse centrale: le cube argumentatif, tandis que une atualization théorique du carré argumentatif (le construct théorique base dans notre théorie). Sur le plan organisationnel, l'ingéniosité de ce travail sera effectuer dans plusieurs axes spécifiques, répartis sur plusieurs chapitres: la théorie/paradoxe (premièrement «Argumentation dans la langue»/paradoxe, et deuxièmement «Théorie des blocs sémantiques»/paradoxe); discours/paradoxe; dictionnaires/paradoxe; «Sémantique Historiques de l'Énonciation» / paradoxe; relation entre des langues / paradoxe et antétriorité / paradoxe. En plus de ces axes relationnels mis en place pour mieux observer notre objet (le paradoxe) et de défendre mon hypothèse du paradoxe sémantique, je formerai un corpus à partir d’un groupe de dictionnaires dans lesquels appairassent « ce qui ce dit être » un paradoxe et « comment est-ce qu’» un paradoxe ce dit, afin de reflechir sur ce « que signifie un paradoxe ». Les dictionnaires sont divisés en corpus principal: Dictionnaire Historique de langue francaise, et corpora secondaire: Enciclopédia e Dicionário ilustrado, Kokugo Ziten e Dicionário Houaiss da Língua Portuguesa, parmi d’autres.
De modo geral, a ideia deste trabalho é investigar o paradoxo, nosso objeto, de modo linguístico e argumentativo, a partir da Teoria dos Blocos Semânticos (TBS). E de modo específico, para isto, adotamos enquanto principais metodologias, dois gestos: a relação entre elementos linguísticos enquanto condição de análises, por um lado, e a interdependência entre a estrutura e suas significâncias, por outro lado, tanto no âmbito do não-uso (língua) quanto do uso da língua (enunciação). Este segundo método da interdependência, quando aplicado ao nosso objeto, o paradoxo, constitui a nossa primeira hipótese central, a possibilidade do paradoxo semântico: a estranha e difícil consideração linguístico-argumentativa de significâncias opostas, mas em estado de interdependência. E neste contexto desenvolveremos também uma segunda hipótese central: o cubo argumentativo, enquanto atualização teórica do quadrado argumentativo (o construto teórico basilar de nossa teoria). Organizacionalmente, a desenvoltura deste trabalho efetivar-se-á em vários eixos específicos, distribuídos ao longo dos capítulos, a saber: teoria/paradoxo (dividido em “Argumentação na Língua”/paradoxo, em um primeiro momento, e “Teoria dos Blocos Semânticos”/paradoxo, em um segundo momento); discurso/paradoxo; dicionários/paradoxo; “Semântica Histórica da Enunciação”/paradoxo; relação entre línguas/paradoxo e anterioridade/paradoxo. Além destes eixos relacionais estabelecidos para melhor observar nosso objeto, o paradoxo, e defender nossa hipótese, o paradoxo semântico, elegemos enquanto corpus central, um grupo de dicionários nos quais possamos flagrar “o que se diz ser” um paradoxo e “como se diz” um paradoxo, para ponderar “o que significa” um paradoxo. Estes dicionários estão divididos em corpus principal: Dictionnaire Historique de langue francaise, e corpus secundário: Enciclopédia e Dicionário ilustrado, Kokugo Ziten e Dicionário Houaiss da Língua Portuguesa, dentre outros.
Bacon, Andrew Jonathan. "Indeterminacy : an investigation into the Soritical and semantical paradoxes." Thesis, University of Oxford, 2012. http://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:b4490a8c-0089-4c77-8d24-1ab1ca5baaf0.
Full textBette, Karl-Heinrich. "Körperspuren : zur Semantik und Paradoxie moderner Körperlichkeit /." Bielefeld : Transcript-Verl, 2005. http://www.gbv.de/dms/bs/toc/501094601.pdf.
Full textHassman, Benjamin John. "Semantic objects and paradox: a study of Yablo's omega-liar." Diss., University of Iowa, 2011. https://ir.uiowa.edu/etd/1228.
Full textWulf, Douglas J. "The imperfective paradox in the English progressive and other semantic course corrections /." Thesis, Connect to this title online; UW restricted, 2000. http://hdl.handle.net/1773/8368.
Full textBooks on the topic "Semantic paradoxes"
Jonkersz, Ineke. Semantic interference and facilitation in word production: Explaining the semantic relatedness paradox. [Leiden]: Universiteit Leiden, 2004.
Find full textBette, Karl-Heinrich. Körperspuren: Zur Semantik und Paradoxie moderner Körperlichkeit. Bielefeld: transcript Verlag, 2005.
Find full textBette, Karl-Heinrich. Körperspuren: Zur Semantik und Paradoxie moderner Körperlichkeit. Berlin: W. de Gruyter, 1989.
Find full textThere are two errors in the title of this book: A sourcebook of philosophical puzzles, problems, and paradoxes. Peterborough, Ont: Broadview Press, 2002.
Find full textLe paradoxe en langue et en discours. Paris: Harmattan, 2008.
Find full textWołowska, Katarzyna. Le paradoxe en langue et en discours. Paris: Harmattan, 2008.
Find full textNortmann, Ulrich. Deontische Logik ohne Paradoxien: Semantik und Logik des Normativen. München: Philosophia, 1989.
Find full textGodart-Wendling, Béatrice. La vérité et le menteur: Les paradoxes sui-falsificateurs et la sémantique des langues naturelles. Paris: Editions du Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1990.
Find full textVaillancourt, Claude. Le paradoxe de l'écrivain: Le savoir et l'écriture. Montréal, Québec: Triptyque, 2003.
Find full textPanzova, Violeta. Semantičkite paradoksi. Skopje: Ǵurǵa, 2001.
Find full textBook chapters on the topic "Semantic paradoxes"
Priest, Graham. "Semantic Paradoxes." In In Contradiction, 11–34. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 1987. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-3687-4_2.
Full textGarciadiego, Alejandro R. "The ‘Semantic Paradoxes’." In Bertrand Russell and the Origins of the Set-theoretic ‘Paradoxes’, 131–50. Basel: Birkhäuser Basel, 1992. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-0348-7402-1_5.
Full textProietti, Carlo, Davide Grossi, Sonja Smets, and Fernando R. Velázquez-Quesada. "Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks, Modal Logic and Semantic Paradoxes." In Logic, Rationality, and Interaction, 214–29. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-60292-8_16.
Full textBruni, Riccardo, and Lorenzo Rossi. "A Unified Approach to Semantic and Soritical Paradoxes." In Logic, Rationality, and Interaction, 31–40. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-88708-7_3.
Full textGarola, Claudio. "An Informal Presentation of Semantic Realism and Its Solution of Quantum Paradoxes." In Language, Quantum, Music, 219–30. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 1999. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-2043-4_20.
Full textZardini, Elia. "Getting One for Two, or the Contractors’ Bad Deal. Towards a Unified Solution to the Semantic Paradoxes." In Unifying the Philosophy of Truth, 461–93. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9673-6_23.
Full textEllrich, Lutz. "Semantik und Paradoxie." In Germanistik und Komparatistik, 378–98. Stuttgart: J.B. Metzler, 1995. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-476-05561-3_21.
Full textBurton-Roberts, Noel. "Grelling’s paradox." In Perspectives on Semantics, Pragmatics, and Discourse, 187–201. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2001. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/pbns.90.16bur.
Full textMaruyama, Yoshihiro. "Categorical Harmony and Paradoxes in Proof-Theoretic Semantics." In Advances in Proof-Theoretic Semantics, 95–114. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22686-6_6.
Full textMartino, Enrico. "Russellian Type Theory and Semantical Paradoxes." In Logic, Meaning and Computation, 491–505. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2001. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0526-5_24.
Full textConference papers on the topic "Semantic paradoxes"
Dai, Li, and Ji-hua Zhang. "Analysis of the Situation Semantics Solution to Paradoxes." In 3d International Conference on Applied Social Science Research (ICASSR 2015). Paris, France: Atlantis Press, 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.2991/icassr-15.2016.207.
Full textKovačević, Miloš М. "JEZIČKE ŠKOLSKE IGRE DUŠKA TRIFUNOVIĆA." In KNjIŽEVNOST ZA DECU U NAUCI I NASTAVI. University of Kragujevac, Faculty of Education in Jagodina, 2022. http://dx.doi.org/10.46793/kdnn21.009k.
Full text