Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. A remark on collective quantification.Juha Kontinen & Jakub Szymanik - 2008 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 17 (2):131-140.
    We consider collective quantification in natural language. For many years the common strategy in formalizing collective quantification has been to define the meanings of collective determiners, quantifying over collections, using certain type-shifting operations. These type-shifting operations, i.e., lifts, define the collective interpretations of determiners systematically from the standard meanings of quantifiers. All the lifts considered in the literature turn out to be definable in second-order logic. We argue that second-order definable quantifiers are probably not expressive enough to formalize all collective (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Dependence Logic with a Majority Quantifier.Arnaud Durand, Johannes Ebbing, Juha Kontinen & Heribert Vollmer - 2015 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 24 (3):289-305.
    We study the extension of dependence logic \ by a majority quantifier \ over finite structures. We show that the resulting logic is equi-expressive with the extension of second-order logic by second-order majority quantifiers of all arities. Our results imply that, from the point of view of descriptive complexity theory, \\) captures the complexity class counting hierarchy. We also obtain characterizations of the individual levels of the counting hierarchy by fragments of \\).
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Generalized quantifiers.Dag Westerståhl - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  • Some observations about generalized quantifiers in logics of imperfect information.Fausto Barbero - 2019 - Review of Symbolic Logic 12 (3):456-486.
    We analyse the two definitions of generalized quantifiers for logics of dependence and independence that have been proposed by F. Engström, comparing them with a more general, higher order definition of team quantifier. We show that Engström’s definitions can be identified, by means of appropriate lifts, with special classes of team quantifiers. We point out that the new team quantifiers express a quantitative and a qualitative component, while Engström’s quantifiers only range over the latter. We further argue that Engström’s definitions (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark