| |
| | Common Logic: Abstract Syntax and Semantics |
 | | However, to smooth the semantics for the highly unrestricted syntax of CL languages, in which there is no syntactic distinction between individual constants and predicates, the individuals of D are assigned extensions as well, albeit always empty ones — thus, the result of predicating one individual of another, while semantically meaningful, will always yield falsehood. |
 | | The traditional language of first-order logic, relative to some choice of constants, is a prime example of an indirectly conformant language. |
 | | To motivate this alteration, note that, because we include relations in the basic logical ontology of CL, the validities of a TFO language with respect to the model theory of CL are not coextensive with the validities of that language relative to traditional model theory. |
| cl.tamu.edu /docs/cl/cl-latest.html (4959 words) |
|