Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-k7p5g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-10T09:31:58.748Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Hauptsatz for higher-order modal logic

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Hirokazu Nishimura
Hirokazu Nishimura*
Affiliation:
Research Institute for Mathematical Sciences, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606, Japan
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In spite of the philosophical significance of higher-order modal logic, the modal logician's main concern has been with sentential logic. In this paper we do not intend to go into philosophical details, but we only remark that higher-order modal logic has a close relationship with Montague's well-known idea of “universal grammar”, which is an ambitious attempt to build a logical theory of natural languages with exact syntax and semantics, comparable with the artificial languages of mathematical logic. For this matter, the reader can consult, e.g., Montague [8], [9] and Gallin [2].

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Symbolic Logic , Volume 48 , Issue 3 , September 1983 , pp. 744 - 751
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

[1]Feys, R., Modal logics, E. Nauwelaerts, Louvain, 1965.Google Scholar
[2]Gallin, D., Intensional and higher order modal logic, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1975.Google Scholar
[3]Gentzen, G., Untersuchungen über das logische Schliessen, Mathematische Zeitschrift, vol. 39 (1934), pp. 176–210 and 405–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4]Henkin, L., Completeness in the theory of types, this Journal, vol. 14 (1949), pp. 159–166.Google Scholar
[5]Kanger, S., Provability in logic, Almqvist and Wiksell, Stockholm, 1957.Google Scholar
[6]Kripke, S.A., A completeness theorem in modal logic, this Journal, vol 24 (1959), pp. 1–14.Google Scholar
[7]Kripke, S.A., Semantical analysis of modal logic 1, Zeitschrift für Mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik, vol. 9 (1963), pp. 67–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8]Montague, R., Pragmatics and intensional logic, Synthese, vol. 22 (1970), pp. 68–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[9]Kripke, S.A., Universal grammar, Theoria, vol. 36 (1970), pp. 373–398.Google Scholar
[10]Ohnishi, M. and Matsumoto, K., Gentzen method in modal calculi, Osaka Mathematical Journal, vol. 9 (1957), pp. 113–130; vol. 11 (1959), pp. 115–120.Google Scholar
[11]Prawitz, D., Hauptsatz for higher order logic, this Journal, vol. 33 (1968), pp. 452–457.Google Scholar
[12]Schütte, K., Syntactical and semantical properties of simple type theory, this Journal, vol. 25 (1960), pp. 305–326.Google Scholar
[13]Takahashi, M., A proof of cut-elimination theorem in simple type theory, Journal of the Mathematical Society of Japan, vol. 19 (1967), pp. 399–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[14]Takahashi, M., A system of simple type theory of Gentzen style with inference on extensionality, and the cut-elimination in it, Commentarii Mathematici Universitatis Sancti Pauli, vol. 18 (1970), pp. 127–147.Google Scholar
[15]Takeuti, G., Proof theory, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1975.Google Scholar