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 ...
One example occurs in the liar paradox, which is commonly formulated as the self-referential statement "This statement is false". [16] Another example occurs in the barber paradox, which poses the question of whether a barber who shaves all and only those who do not shave themselves will shave himself. In this paradox, the barber is a self ...
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 ...
In literature, the paradox is an anomalous juxtaposition of incongruous ideas for the sake of striking exposition or unexpected insight. It functions as a method of literary composition and analysis that involves examining apparently contradictory statements and drawing conclusions either to reconcile them or to explain their presence.
There is currently not any generally accepted explanation of Moore's paradox in the philosophical literature. 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 ...
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. One example of such a formal proof ...
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).
Trying to assign a truth value to either of them leads to a paradox. If the first statement is true, then so is the second. But if the second statement is true, then the first statement is false. It follows that if the first statement is true, then the first statement is false. If the first statement is false, then the second is false, too.