Titlebook: Language in Focus: Foundations, Methods and Systems; Essays in Memory of Asa Kasher Book 1976 D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Hol

ODE

書目名稱Language in Focus: Foundations, Methods and Systems影響因子(影響力)




書目名稱Language in Focus: Foundations, Methods and Systems影響因子(影響力)學(xué)科排名




書目名稱Language in Focus: Foundations, Methods and Systems網(wǎng)絡(luò)公開度




書目名稱Language in Focus: Foundations, Methods and Systems網(wǎng)絡(luò)公開度學(xué)科排名




書目名稱Language in Focus: Foundations, Methods and Systems被引頻次




書目名稱Language in Focus: Foundations, Methods and Systems被引頻次學(xué)科排名




書目名稱Language in Focus: Foundations, Methods and Systems年度引用




書目名稱Language in Focus: Foundations, Methods and Systems年度引用學(xué)科排名




書目名稱Language in Focus: Foundations, Methods and Systems讀者反饋




書目名稱Language in Focus: Foundations, Methods and Systems讀者反饋學(xué)科排名

exclusice

討人喜歡

ODIUM

Substance Logicd (b) logical connectives. Substance Logic (henceforth, ‘SL’) is designed to be a perspicuous nominalistic system, offering the philosopher a canonical notation for an ontology (and ideology) in which one can countenance substances only. Its primitive non-logical expressions are, therefore, ‘this So

modish

fibula

corn732

Presuppositional Policiesthy event. When that expansion is not only powerful but also classical in spirit, it is doubly auspicious. Over the last few years, super- valuational methods have been applied to several difficult philosophical topics, and without exception these applications have proved illuminating.. Above all, t

SLAG

The Dilemma Between Orthodoxy and Identitytifiers, and variables stack up”.. In previous publications,. I have argued that this doctrine is both arbitrary and mistaken because the so- called “non-logical (or extra-logical) vocabulary” contributes just as much to implication relations among sentences as the so-called “l(fā)ogical vocabulary”. My

向前變橢圓

袋鼠

On Relating Pragmatics, Linguistics, and Non-Semiotic Disciplinest in the social aspects of language and language use. At the same time preoccupation with morpho-syntactic questions has given way to conceptions that explicitly include semantics, and during the past few years ‘pragmatics’ has become the fashionable slogan.. Curiously enough, few linguists seem to