Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!cs.rpi.edu!nl-kr-request From: nl-kr-request@cs.rpi.edu (NL-KR Moderator Chris Welty) Newsgroups: comp.ai.nlang-know-rep Subject: Volume 6 No. 18 of NL-KR Digest Message-ID: <8904062120.AA09102@fs3.cs.rpi.edu> Date: 6 Apr 89 21:20:50 GMT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Reply-To: nl-kr@cs.rpi.edu (NL-KR Digest) Organization: The Internet Lines: 288 Approved: nl-kr@cs.rpi.edu NL-KR Digest (Thu Apr 6 11:01:54 1989) Volume 6 No. 18 Today's Topics: Moderators Notes: N16 Buffalo Logic Colloquium Answer on Esperanto to Beutel CSLI Calendar, April 6, 4:21 Addition to Calendar Submissions: nl-kr@cs.rpi.edu Requests, policy: nl-kr-request@cs.rpi.edu Back issues are available from host archive.cs.rpi.edu [128.213.1.10] in the files nl-kr/Vxx/Nyy (ie nl-kr/V01/N01 for V1#1), mail requests will not be promptly satisfied. If you can't reach `cs.rpi.edu' you may want to use `turing.cs.rpi.edu' instead. --------------------------------------------------------- To: nl-kr@cs.rpi.edu Date: Thu, 6 Apr 89 11:00:12 EDT >From: weltyc@fs3.cs.rpi.edu (Christopher A. Welty) Subject: Moderators Notes: N16 For some reason, many people did not get #16 of this volume, so I sent it a second time, this means some may have gotten it twice or even three times. ----------------------------- To: nl-kr@cs.rpi.edu Date: Mon, 3 Apr 89 14:14:52 EDT >From: rapaport@cs.Buffalo.EDU (William J. Rapaport) Subject: Buffalo Logic Colloquium UNIVERSITY AT BUFFALO STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK BUFFALO LOGIC COLLOQUIUM GRADUATE GROUP IN COGNITIVE SCIENCE and GRADUATE RESEARCH INITIATIVE IN COGNITIVE AND LINGUISTIC SCIENCES PRESENT JACEK PASNICZEK Institute of Philosophy and Sociology Department of Logic Marie Curie-Sklodowska University Lublin, Poland FIRST- AND HIGHER-ORDER MEINONGIAN LOGIC Meinongian logic is a logic based on Alexius Meinong's ontological views. Meinong was an Austrian philosopher who lived and worked around the turn of the century. He is known as a creator of a very rich objec- tual ontology including non-existent objects, and even incomplete and impossible ones, e.g., "the round square". Such objects are formally treated by Meinongian logic. The Meinongian logic presented here (M- logic) is not the only Meinongian one: there are some other theories that are formalizations of Meinong's ontology and that may be considered as Meinongian logics (e.g., Parsons's, Zalta's, Rapaport's, and Jacquette's theories). But the distinctive feature of M-logic is that it is a very natural and straightforward extension of classical first- order logic--the only primitive symbols of the language of M-logic are those occurring in the first-order classical language. Individual con- stants and quantifiers are treated as expressions of the same category. This makes the syntax of M-logic close to natural-language syntax. M- logic is presented as an axiomatic system and as a semantical theory. Not only is first-order logic developed, but the higher-order M-logic as well. Wednesday, April 26, 1989 4:00 P.M. 684 Baldy Hall, Amherst Campus For further information, contact John Corcoran, Dept. of Philosophy, 716-636-2444, or Bill Rapaport, Dept. of Computer Science, 716-636-3193. ------------------------------ To: nl-kr@cs.rpi.edu Date: Tue, 4 Apr 89 08:30:53 +0200 >From: Klaus Schubert Phone: +31 30 911911 Telex: 40342 bso nl Subject: Answer on Esperanto to Beutel Dear David Beutel, I read your questions about the use of Esperanto as an intermediate language in the NL-KR Digest, Vol. 6, No. 16. Please note that one number before that I answered a similar question asked by someone else. See NL-KR Digest 6:15. Regards, Klaus Schubert schubert@dlt1.uucp ------------------------------ To: nl-kr@cs.rpi.edu Date: Wed, 5 Apr 89 17:23:14 PDT >From: emma@csli.Stanford.EDU (Emma Pease) Subject: CSLI Calendar, April 6, 4:21 C S L I C A L E N D A R O F P U B L I C E V E N T S _____________________________________________________________________________ 6 April 1989 Stanford Vol. 4, No. 21 _____________________________________________________________________________ A weekly publication of The Center for the Study of Language and Information, Ventura Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305 ____________ CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR THIS THURSDAY, 6 April 1989 1:00 p.m. TINLunch Cordura Hall Consciousness, Unconsciousness and Intentionality Conference Room John Searle 2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar Cordura Hall Varieties of Context: Overview Conference Room (Abstract below) 3:30 p.m. Tea Ventura Hall ____________ CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR NEXT THURSDAY, 13 April 1989 2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar Cordura Hall Varieties of Context: Session 2 Conference Room 3:30 p.m. Tea Ventura Hall ____________ ANNOUNCEMENT Please note that the TINLunch for this week is at 1:00 instead of the usual time of 12:00. ____________ CSLI SPRING SEMINAR SERIES Varieties of Context led by Jim Greeno, Brian Smith, Susan Stucky 2:15, Thursdays Even people who haven't been around CSLI realize the the word `I' can be used to refer to different people depending on circumstance. So why is such a fuss being made of this fact? There are two reasons. First, rather than view contextual dependence as a peripheral or complicating incident, recent theories of language have started to treat it as central and enabling---as a core phenomenon. Second, contextual dependence has been cited in other semantical fields, too: logic, psychology, computation, etc. In this seminar, we'll look at context in a wide range of examples---drawn from syntax, Tarskian satisfaction, the Mac interface, natural-language discourse, programming-language semantics, even mechanics. The goal is both to understand what is common among such cases, and also to see how they differ. Is context-dependence really a coherent phenomenon, to justify the single rallying cry? ____________ THIS WEEK'S TINLUNCH Consciousness, Unconsciousness and Intentionality John Searle Thursday, April 6, 1:00 Cordura Conference Room Professor Searle's view is that it is a mistake to try to account for mental phenomena without reference to consciousness---a mistake he believes most cognitive scientists and analytic philosophers make. At today's TINLunch he will examine some recent work in this tradition purported to have some bearing on questions of consciousness and discuss the notion of "unconscious mental process," which plays a crucial role in all such work. The postulation of these kinds of processes, Searle believes, is a result of the inability of the tradition to account for the subjectivity of conscious states. ____________ SYMBOLIC SYSTEMS FORUM What Does Hermeneutics have to do with Symbolic Systems? Terry Winograd Friday, 14 April, 3:15, 60:62N Over the past few years, I have participated in developing theories of language and meaning that differ in substantial ways from the mainstream of work in cognitive science, computer science, and analytic philosophy. One of the earlier traditions that has played a prominent role in this development is that of "phenomenological hermeneutics" as reflected in the writings of Heidegger, Gadamer, and others. These writings have not generally found a sympathetic listening among the community associated with "symbolic systems," and I often hear questions like: "What in the world does hermeneutics have to do with science? Does hermeneutics even make sense?" In the talk I will engage these questions by examining the deeper questions and assumptions that set the background in which they were framed. The invevitable conclusion will be that the answer to the question posed by the title is "Everything!" ____________ PHILOSOPHY DEPARTMENT COLLOQUIUM Aristotle on Practical Reasoning Christopher Taylor Corpus Christi College, Oxford Monday, 10 April, 5:15 90:92Q (Philosophy Department Seminar Room) ____________ CSLI PUBLICATIONS The CSLI Publications Office is pleased to announce the publication of two new titles. They can be bought at many academic bookstores including the Stanford Bookstore or can be ordered directly from the University of Chicago Press by phoning 1-800-621-2736, or by writing University of Chicago Press 11030 S. Langley Avenue Chicago, IL 60628 "The Situation in Logic" by Jon Barwise (336 pp.) Situation theory and situation semantics are recent approaches to language and information first formulated by Jon Barwise and John Perry in "Situations and Attitudes" (1983). The present volume collects some of Barwise's papers written since then, specifically those directly concerned with relations between logic, situation theory, and situation semantics. Several papers appear here for the first time. Cloth ISBN: 0-937-07333-4 $34.95 Paper ISBN: 0-937-07332-6 $14.95 and "Attribute-Value Logic and the Theory of Grammar" by Mark Johnson (180 pp.) Because of the ease of their implementation, attribute value-based theories of grammar are becoming increasingly popular in theoretical linguistics as an alternative to transformational accounts, as well as in computational linguistics. Johnson provides a formal analysis of attribute value structures, of their use in a theory of grammar, of the representation of grammatical relations in such theories of grammar, and the implications of different representations. A classical treatment of disjunction is also included. Cloth ISBN: 0-937-07337-7 $37.50 Paper ISBN: 0-937-07336-9 $15.95 ------------------------------ To: nl-kr@cs.rpi.edu Date: Tue, 4 Apr 89 12:47:45 PDT >From: emma@csli.Stanford.EDU (Emma Pease) Subject: Addition to Calendar Updated abstract for the Spring Seminar series. CSLI SPRING SEMINAR SERIES Varieties of Context Thursdays, 2:15 Even people who haven't been around CSLI realize the the word 'I' can be used to refer to different people depending on circumstance. So why is such a fuss being made of this fact? There are two reasons. First, rather than view contextual dependence as a peripheral or complicating incident, recent theories of language have started to treat it as central and enabling---as a core phenomenon. Second, contextual dependence has been cited in other semantical fields, too: logic, psychology, computation, etc. In this seminar, we'll look at context in a wide range of examples---drawn from syntax, Tarskian satisfaction, the Mac interface, natural-language discourse, programming-language semantics, even mechanics. The goal is both to understand what is common among such cases, and also to see how they differ. Is context-dependence really a coherent phenomenon, to justify the single rallying cry? ------------------------------ End of NL-KR Digest *******************