Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!mailrus!iuvax!purdue!bu-cs!buengc!bph
From: bph@buengc.BU.EDU (Blair P. Houghton)
Newsgroups: comp.ai
Subject: Re: Fun with the semantics of paradox
Message-ID: <1901@buengc.BU.EDU>
Date: 14 Jan 89 18:42:30 GMT
References: <1883@buengc.BU.EDU> <2996@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu>
Reply-To: bph@buengc.bu.edu (Blair P. Houghton)
Followup-To: comp.ai
Organization: Boston Univ. Col. of Eng.
Lines: 15

In article <2996@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu> lee@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu (Greg Lee) writes:
>From article <1883@buengc.BU.EDU>, by bph@buengc.BU.EDU (Blair P. Houghton):
>" ...
>" Hurm.  Astirottle rears his ponderous head.  He'd never read Rudy Carnap's
>" eminently unreadable "The Logical Syntax of Language."  All sentences
>" (ansatzen) can be reduced logically to their syntax; semantics are irrelevant
>" to logic.
>
>Hurm.  Where does Carnap say that??

It wasn't a quotation.  I pretty much remember that somewhere in there
was a statement to the effect that "the logic of languange is in its
syntax" and only in its syntax.

				--Blair