Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 7
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Gupta, Anil and Standefer, Shawn 2016. Conditionals in Theories of Truth. Journal of Philosophical Logic,

    STANDEFER, SHAWN 2015. SOLOVAY-TYPE THEOREMS FOR CIRCULAR DEFINITIONS. The Review of Symbolic Logic, Vol. 8, Issue. 03, p. 467.

    Orilia, Francesco 2011. Relational Order and Onto-Thematic Roles. Metaphysica, Vol. 12, Issue. 1, p. 1.

    Andrea, Cantini 2009. Logic from Russell to Church.

    Aitken, Wayne and Barrett, Jeffrey A. 2006. Stability and Paradox in Algorithmic Logic. Journal of Philosophical Logic, Vol. 36, Issue. 1, p. 61.

    Orilia, Francesco 2005. The Property-theoretical, Performative-nominalistic Theory of Proper Names⋆. Dialectica, Vol. 54, Issue. 3, p. 155.

    ORILIA, Francesco 2005. A Description Theory of Singular Reference. Dialectica, Vol. 57, Issue. 1, p. 7.


Property theory and the revision theory of definitions


§1. Introduction. Russell's type-theory can be seen as a theory of properties, relations, and propositions (PRPs) (in short, a property theory). It relies on rigid type distinctions at the grammatical level to circumvent the property theorist's major problem, namely Russell's paradox, or, more generally, the paradoxes of predication. Type theory has arguably been the standard property theory for years, often taken for granted, and used in many applications. In particular, Montague [27] has shown how to use a type-theoretical property-theory as a foundation for natural language semantics.

In recent years, it has been persuasively argued that many linguistic and ontological data are best accounted for by using a type-free property theory. Several type-free property theories, typically with fine-grained identity conditions for PRPs, have therefore been proposed as potential candidates to play a foundational role in natural language semantics, or for related applications in formal ontology and the foundations of mathematics (Bealer [6], Cocchiarella [18], Turner [35], etc.).

Attempts have then been made to combine some such property theory with a Montague-style approach in natural language semantics. Most notably, Chierchia and Turner [15] propose a Montague-style semantic analysis of a fragment of English, by basically relying on the type-free system of Turner [35]. For a similar purpose Chierchia [14] relies on one of the systems based on homogeneous stratification due to Cocchiarella. Cocchiarella's systems have also been used for applications in formal ontology, inspired by Montague's account of quantifier phrases as, roughly, properties of properties (see, e.g., Cocchiarella [17], [19], Landini [25], Orilia [29]).

Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

[1]P. Aczel , Frege structures and the notions of propositions, truth and set, The Kleene symposium (J. Barwise , H. J. Keisler , and K. Kunen , editors), North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1980, pp. 3139.

[6]G. Bealer , Quality and concept, Oxford University Press, London, 1982.

[9]N. Belnap , Gupta's rule of revision theory of truth, Journal of Philosophical Logic, vol. 11 (1982), pp. 103116.

[11]H.-N. Castañeda , Ontology and grammar: I. Russell's paradox and the general theory of properties in natural language, Theoria, vol. 42 (1976), pp. 4492.

[13]A. Chapuis , Alternative revision theories of truth, Journal of Philosophical Logic, vol. 25 (1996), pp. 399423.

[15]G. Chierchia and R. Turner , Semantics andproperty theory, Linguistics and Philosophy, vol. 11 (1988), pp. 261302.

[17]N. Cocchiarella , Meinong reconstructed versus early Russell reconstructed, Journal of Philosophical Logic, vol. 11 (1982), pp. 183215.

[19]N. Cocchiarella , Conceptualism, realism, and intensional logic, Topoi, vol. 8 (1989), pp. 1534.

[21]A. Gupta , Truth and paradox, Journal of Philosophical Logic, vol. 11 (1982), pp. 160.

[23]H. G. Herzberger , Notes on naive semantics, Journal of Philosophical Logic, vol. 11 (1982), pp. 61102.

[24]P. Kremer , The Gupta-Belnap systems S# and S* are not axiomatisable, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, vol. 34 (1993), pp. 583596.

[25]G. Landini , HOW to Russell another Meinongian: a Russellian theory of fictional objects versus Zalta's theory of abstract objects, Grazer Philosophische Studien, vol. 37 (1990), pp. 93122.

[29]F. Orilia , Belief representation in a type-free doxastic logic, Minds and Machines, vol. 4 (1994), pp. 163203.

[33]R. Smullyan , First-order logic, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1968.

[34]R. Thomason , A note on syntactical treatments of modality, Synthese, vol. 44 (1980), pp. 391395.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

The Journal of Symbolic Logic
  • ISSN: 0022-4812
  • EISSN: 1943-5886
  • URL: /core/journals/journal-of-symbolic-logic
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *