Meaning and Interpretation. I

The paper is an attempt at a logical explication of some crucial notions of current general semantics and pragmatics. A general, axiomatic, formal-logical theory of meaning and interpretation is outlined in this paper.In the theory, accordingto the token-type distinction of Peirce, language is formalised on two levels: first as a language of token-objects (understood as material, empirical, enduring through time-and space objects) and then – as a language of type-objects (understood as abstract objects, as classes of tokens). The basic concepts of the theory, i.e. the notions: meaning, denotation and interpretation of well-formed expressions (wfes) of the language are formalised on the type-level, by utilising some semantic-pragmatic primitive notions introduced on the token-level. The paper is divided into two parts.In Part Ia theoryof meaningand denotation is proposed, and in Part II - its expansion to the theory of meaning and interpretation is presented.The meaninga wfe is defined as an equivalence class of the relation possessing the same manner of using types (cf. Ajdukiewicz [1934], Wittgenstein [1953]). The concept of denotation is defined by means of the relation of referring which holds between wfe-types and objects of reality described by the given language. Presented by Wojciech Buszkowski     

Sequent-systems and groupoid models. I

The purpose of this paper is to connect the proof theory and the model theory of a family of propositional logics weaker than Heyting's. This family includes systems analogous to the Lambek calculus of syntactic categories, systems of relevant logic, systems related toBCK algebras, and, finally, Johansson's and Heyting's logic. First, sequent-systems are given for these logics, and cut-elimination results are proved. In these sequent-systems the rules for the logical operations are never changed: all changes are made in the structural rules. Next, Hubert-style formulations are given for these logics, and algebraic completeness results are demonstrated with respect to residuated lattice-ordered groupoids. Finally, model structures related to relevant model structures (of Urquhart, Fine, Routley, Meyer, and Maksimova) are given for our logics. These model structures are based on groupoids parallel to the sequent-systems. This paper lays the ground for a kind of correspondence theory for axioms of logics with implication weaker than Heyting's, a correspondence theory analogous to the correspondence theory for modal axioms of normal modal logics.The first part of the paper, which follows, contains the first two sections, which deal with sequent-systems and Hubert-formulations. The second part, due to appear in the next issue of this journal, will contain the third section, which deals with groupoid models.     

Normalization and excluded middle. I

The usual rule used to obtain natural deduction formulations of classical logic from intuitionistic logic, namely is stronger then necessary, and will give classical logic when added to minimal logic. A rule which is precisely strong enough to give classical logic from intuitionistic logic, and which is thus exactly equivalent to the law of the excluded middle, is It is a special case of a version of Peirce's law: In this paper it is shown how to normalize logics defined using these last two rules. Part I deals with propositional logics and first order predicate logics. Part II will deal with first order arithmetic and second order logics. This research was supported in part by grants EQ1648, EQ2908, and CE 110 of the program Fonds pour la Formation de Chercheurs et l'aide à la Recherche (F.C.A.R.) of the Quèbec Ministry of Education.     

Development and validation of the Childhood Perfectionism Inventory (I.P.I.)

There are a few studies linking children's perfectionism with diverse internalized or externalized disorders. Likewise, in Spanish, there is no scale that measures the diverse aspects that comprise it. This paper presents the Children's Perfectionism Inventory (IPI). The sample comprised 2,260 participants (51.2% males and 48.8% females). The age range is between 8 and 13 years (mean= 9.94 and SD= 1.27). Sampling was stratified and random. Of the sample, 78.1% are from public education and 21.9% from private education. 16.2% reside in rural areas and 83.8% in urban areas. To study the validity of the questionnaire, cross-validation was performed. Initially three factors were obtained through exploratory factor analysis: Self-assessment, Self-imposed and External Pressures, with adequate reliability indices (Cronbach's alpha= .89, .87 and .88, respectively). Subsequently, using a confirmatory method, it was found that the three initial factors were explained by a single second-order factor called Perfectionism.     

I.P. Pavlov vs. N.I. Bukharin: The critical mind and the arrogance of power

In 1923, Pavlov criticized the Marxist theses and the policy of the Soviet regime. In 1924, N.I. Bukharin, a Marxist theoretician and member of the Soviet government, responded to Pavlov’s passionate speech with a sarcastic diatribe. I suggest that Pavlov’s speech and Bukharin’s article represent a conflict between a scientist critical of the Marxist pseudotheory and a journalist’s abusive response to the realization that his theory was without much merit.