Although a variety of proofs are available for the Craig-Lyndon Interpolation Lemma, they all seem to make essential use of negation, with the result that they are inapplicable to deductive theories in which negation cannot be expressed. It is here shown that this use of negation can be avoided by extending the Interpolation Lemma to the pure implicational calculus PCI.

Determinate Parameter Lemma. For each formula A, ⊨PA ⊃ A for some sentence parameter PA occurring in A.

Proof. By induction on the construction of A.

Interpolation Lemma For PCI. Let Γ be the set of sentence parameters common to A and C.If ⊨A ⊃ and C is not valid, then there is a formula B containing no sentence parameter not in Y such that ⊨A ⊃ B and ⊨B ⊃ C.

Proof. Since ⊨PA ⊃ A by the Determinate Parameter Lemma and ⊨A ⊃ C, ⊨PA ⊃ C. But C is by hypothesis an invalid formula, so PA must occur in C as well as in A. Thus PA Є Γ.