The paper continues a series of results on cut-rule axiomatizability of the Lambek calculus. It provides a complete solution of a problem which was solved partially in one of the author''s earlier papers. It is proved that the product-free Lambek Calculus with the empty string (L 0) is not finitely axiomatizable if the only rule of inference admitted is Lambek''s cut rule. The proof makes use of the (infinitely) cut-rule axiomatized calculus C designed by the author exactly for this purpose.

An axiomatics of the product-free syntactic calculus L ofLambek has been presented whose only rule is the cut rule. It was alsoproved that there is no finite axiomatics of that kind. The proofs weresubsequently simplified. Analogous results for the nonassociativevariant NL of L were obtained by Kandulski. InLambek's original version of the calculus, sequent antecedents arerequired to be nonempty. By removing this restriction, we obtain theextensions L 0 and NL 0 ofL and NL, respectively. Later, the finiteaxiomatization problem for L (...) 0 andNL 0 was partially solved, viz., for formulas withoutleft (or, equivalently, right) division and an (infinite) cut-ruleaxiomatics for the whole of L 0 has been given. Thepresent paper yields an analogous axiomatics forNL 0. Like in the author's previous work, the notionof rank of an axiom is introduced which, although inessentialfor the results given below, may be useful for the expectednonfinite-axiomatizability proof. (shrink)

Prioritized bases, i.e., weakly ordered sets of sentences, have been used for specifying an agent’s ‘basic’ or ‘explicit’ beliefs, or alternatively for compactly encoding an agent’s belief state without the claim that the elements of a base are in any sense basic. This paper focuses on the second interpretation and shows how a shifting of priorities in prioritized bases can be used for a simple, constructive and intuitive way of representing a large variety of methods for the change of belief (...) states—methods that have usually been characterized semantically by a system-of-spheres modeling. Among the methods represented are ‘radical’, ‘conservative’ and ‘moderate’ revision, ‘revision by comparison’ in its raising and lowering variants, as well as various constructions for belief expansion and contraction. Importantly, none of these methods makes any use of numbers. (shrink)

Geach’s rich paper ‘A Program for Syntax’ introduced many ideas into the arena of categorial grammar, not all of which have been given the attention they warrant in the thirty years since its first publication. Rather surprisingly, one of our findings (Section 3 below) is that the paper not only does not contain a statement of what has widely come to be known as “Geach’s Rule”, but in fact presents considerations which are inimical to the adoption of the rule in (...) question. With regard to at least some amongst the numerous other points extracted here from Geach’s discussion, we shall not be able to reach so definitive a conclusion, and content ourselves with giving the issues an airing. (shrink)

We prove the finite model property (fmp) for BCI and BCI with additive conjunction, which answers some open questions in Meyer and Ono [11]. We also obtain similar results for some restricted versions of these systems in the style of the Lambek calculus [10, 3]. The key tool is the method of barriers which was earlier introduced by the author to prove fmp for the product-free Lambek calculus [2] and the commutative product-free Lambek calculus [4].

The aim of this paper is to define a λ-calculus typed in aMixed (commutative and non-commutative) Intuitionistic Linear Logic. The terms of such a calculus are the labelling of proofs of a linear intuitionistic mixed natural deduction NILL, which is based on the non-commutative linear multiplicative sequent calculus MNL [RuetAbrusci 99]. This linear λ-calculus involves three linear arrows: two directional arrows and a nondirectional one (the usual linear arrow). Moreover, the -terms are provided with seriesparallel orders on free variables. We (...) prove a normalization theorem which explicitly gives the behaviour of the order during the normalization procedure. (shrink)

The three essays presented here concern natural connections between grammatical derivations and structures provided by certain standard grammar formalisms, on the one hand, and deductions in logical systems, on the other hand. In the first essay we analyse the adequacy of Polish notation for higher-order languages. The Ajdukiewicz algorithm (Ajdukiewicz 1935) is discussed in terms of generalized MP-deductions. We exhibit a failure in Ajdukiewicz’s original version of the algorithm and give a correct one; we prove that generalized MP-deductions have the (...) frontier property, which is essential for the plausibility of Polish notation. The second essay deals with logical systems corresponding to different grammar formalisms, as e.g. Finite State Acceptors, Context-Free Grammars, Categorial Grammars, and others. We show how can logical methods be used to establish certain linguistically significant properties of formal grammars. The third essay discusses the interplay between Natural Deduction proofs in grammar oriented logics and semantic structures expressible by typed lambda terms and combinators. (shrink)