According to Galileo Galilei “all truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.” Proving the truth values of sentences has been of peculiar interest for thousands of years and philosophers as well as mathematicians worldwide have tried to grasp this enormously complex matter. The intricacy of truth even begins with the definition of the object. Even Alfred Tarski, a Polish-American mathematician and one of the greatest logicians of the twentieth century, stated that the main problem is a satisfactory definition of truth. Obviously, discovering the truth of statements is a rather difficult task to undertake. Howsoever, in this paper we illustrate various semantic
relations and theories as well as logical tools which help to establish the truth.
Table of Contents
1 Introduction
2 Sentence Semantics
3 Propositions in General
4 Logic
4.1 The Aristotelian Logic
5 Truth
5.1 The Correspondence Theory
5.2 The Coherence Theory
5.3 Tarski’s Definition of Truth
6 Truth-Conditional Semantics
6.1 The Epistemological Distinction of Truth
6.1.1 A Posteriori Truth
6.1.2 A Priori Truth
6.2 The Metaphysical Distinction of Truth
6.3 The Semantic Distinction of Truth
7 The Semantic Relation of Entailment
7.1 Truth Table Entailment
7.2 Modus Ponens
7.3 Entailment given by Linguistic Structure
7.4 Entailment given by Syntactic Structure
7.4.1 Active and Passive
7.4.2 Synonymy
7.4.3 Contradiction
8 Presuppositions
8.1 Negation of Presupposition
8.2 Two Approaches of Presupposition
8.2.1 The Semantic Approach
8.2.1.1 Truth Table Semantic Approach
8.2.2 The Pragmatic Approach
8.3 Presupposition Failure
8.4 Presupposition Triggers
8.5 Lexical Triggers
8.6 Presupposition and Context
8.7 Pragmatic Theories of Presupposition
9 Conclusion
Objectives and Topics
This academic paper examines the foundational concepts of semantics, specifically focusing on the relationship between logical truth, sentence meaning, and truth-conditional semantics. It investigates how propositions can be evaluated as true or false through various linguistic and logical frameworks.
- Theoretical definitions of truth and their corresponding philosophical theories.
- Logical tools for evaluating sentence relations, including entailment and presupposition.
- Distinctions between a priori vs. a posteriori, necessary vs. contingent, and analytic vs. synthetic truths.
- The impact of syntactic and pragmatic contexts on the truth values of propositions.
Excerpt from the Book
6.1.1 A posteriori truth
A posteriori truth on the one hand is also known as empirical truth as empirical testing is required to know whether a certain statement is true or false. So statements can be declared true from experience and in hindsight. Thus, it is crucial what the speaker knows or needs to know before making a judgement about the truth of any proposition. It is widely discussed whether truth is preserved or lost by putting sentences into different patterns. Truth here is taken to mean a correspondence with facts or, in other words, correct descriptions of states of affairs in the world.25
My father was the first man to visit Mars.
The truth or falsehood of this sentence depends on facts about the speaker’s father’s life. Thus the truth here can only be known on the basis of empirical input and hence is a posteriori. The constituent words alone cannot indicate whether the proposition is true or false. There are different ways in which the truth value of a proposition may be discovered.
A very simple but semantically weighty example of a linguistic effect on truth value comes from negating a sentence. As mentioned before, adding not to a statement will reverse its truth value as the following example demonstrates:
Summary of Chapters
1 Introduction: Provides an overview of the difficulty of defining truth and sets the scope of the paper on semantic relations and logical tools.
2 Sentence Semantics: Explains the basic assumptions of sentence semantics and the goal of determining truth values in declarative speech acts.
3 Propositions in General: Discusses the nature of propositions as the true bearers of truth and falsity and addresses semantic ambiguity.
4 Logic: Defines logic as the study of valid arguments and introduces the Aristotelian perspective on logic.
5 Truth: Explores classical theories of truth including the Correspondence and Coherence theories, alongside Tarski's definition.
6 Truth-Conditional Semantics: Details epistemological, metaphysical, and semantic distinctions of truth, including the a priori/a posteriori dichotomy.
7 The Semantic Relation of Entailment: Analyzes the logical necessity of entailment influenced by linguistic and syntactic structures.
8 Presuppositions: Investigates the role of contextual background and triggers in presuppositions and their failure.
9 Conclusion: Synthesizes the complex nature of truth classification and reaffirms the importance of logic in understanding meaning.
Keywords
Semantics, Propositions, Logic, Truth-Conditional Semantics, Entailment, Presupposition, A Priori, A Posteriori, Analyticity, Correspondence Theory, Coherence Theory, Linguistic Structure, Pragmatics, Truth Values, Tarski.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the central focus of this paper?
The paper primarily explores how truth values are attributed to sentences within the framework of semantics, focusing on logical relations and various philosophical distinctions of truth.
What are the key themes addressed?
Key themes include the definition of truth, the role of logic in sentence meaning, the identification of entailments, and the pragmatic and semantic nature of presuppositions.
What is the primary goal of the author?
The goal is to illustrate how semantic relations and logical tools allow speakers and listeners to identify the truth value of propositions within different contexts.
Which scientific methods are employed?
The work utilizes conceptual and philosophical analysis, applying logical tools such as truth tables, definitions of entailment, and the examination of linguistic structures.
What is covered in the main body?
The main body covers sentence semantics, the definition of propositions, logical frameworks (including Aristotelian logic), theories of truth, and specific distinctions such as analytic/synthetic and necessary/contingent truths.
Which terms characterize this research?
The research is characterized by terms like truth-conditional semantics, a priori, a posteriori, presupposition, entailment, and semantic ambiguity.
How does the author explain the difference between a priori and a posteriori knowledge?
A priori knowledge is based on linguistic structure and reasoning independent of sensory experience, while a posteriori knowledge relies on empirical investigation and real-world facts.
What does the paper conclude about truth-conditional semantics?
The conclusion states that discovering truth is a highly complex process dependent on context, speaker intent, and common background, necessitating a multidisciplinary approach involving logic and philosophy.
- Citation du texte
- Andreas Nauhardt (Auteur), 2009, Logic: Sentence Relations and Truth, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/138235
