Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Movement paradox: In transformational linguistics, there are pairs of sentences in which the sentence without movement is ungrammatical while the sentence with movement is not. Sayre's paradox : In automated handwriting recognition, a cursively written word cannot be recognized without being segmented and cannot be segmented without being ...
Although statements can be self referential without being paradoxical ("This statement is written in English" is a true and non-paradoxical self-referential statement), self-reference is a common element of paradoxes. One example occurs in the liar paradox, which is commonly formulated as the self-referential statement "This statement is false ...
The example in the previous section used unformalized, natural-language reasoning. Curry's paradox also occurs in some varieties of formal logic.In this context, it shows that if we assume there is a formal sentence (X → Y), where X itself is equivalent to (X → Y), then we can prove Y with a formal proof.
A movement paradox is a phenomenon of grammar that challenges the transformational approach to syntax. [1] The importance of movement paradoxes is emphasized by those theories of syntax (e.g. lexical functional grammar, head-driven phrase structure grammar, construction grammar, most dependency grammars) that reject movement, i.e. the notion that discontinuities in syntax are explained by the ...
Logical analyses focus on "truth values", for example by identifying it as paradox of self-reference. Epistemological studies of the paradox instead focus on issues relating to knowledge; [2] for example, one interpretation reduces it to Moore's paradox. [3] Some regard it as a "significant problem" for philosophy. [4]
However, while Moore's paradox remains a philosophical curiosity, Moorean-type sentences are used by logicians, computer scientists, and those working with artificial intelligence as examples of cases in which a knowledge, belief, or information system is not modified in response to new data. [6]
Although the Pinocchio paradox belongs to the liar paradox tradition, it is a special case because it has no semantic predicates, as for example "My sentence is false" does. [2] The Pinocchio paradox has nothing to do with Pinocchio being a known liar. If Pinocchio were to say "I am getting tired," this could be either true or false, but ...
Quine's paradox is a paradox concerning truth values, stated by Willard Van Orman Quine. [1] It is related to the liar paradox as a problem, and it purports to show that a sentence can be paradoxical even if it is not self-referring and does not use demonstratives or indexicals (i.e. it does not explicitly refer to itself).