Cover not available
Part of
Handbook of Pragmatics: Manual
Edited by Jef Verschueren and Jan-Ola Östman
[Handbook of Pragmatics M2] 2022
► pp. 786–794

Intensional logic

Article outline
  • 1.The distinction between intension and extension
  • 2.The principle of extensionality and its failures
  • 3.The Frege-Carnap treatment of intensional contexts
  • 4.The problem of hybrid contexts
  • 5.Intensional constructions in natural language: The Montagovian paradigm
  • 6.Inadequacies of the standard semantics of intensional logic
  • 7.Hyperintensionality
  • 8.Propositional attitudes and pragmatics
  • 9.Intension, compositionality and context-dependence
  • References
Published online: 3 October 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/hop.m2.int2
References
Van Benthem, J.
1988 A manual of intensional logic. Center for the Study of Language and Information, Stanford. Google Scholar
Boolos, G.
1971 The iterative conception of a set. The Journal of Philosophy 68: 215–231. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bealer, G. & U. Mönnich
1989 Property theories. In D. Gabbay & F. Guenthner (eds.) Handbook of philosophical logic 4: 133–251. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carnap, R.
1956 Meaning and necessity. University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar
Chierchia, G.
1985 Formal semantics and the grammar of predication. Linguistic Inquiry 16: 417–443. Google Scholar
Chierchia, G., B. Partee & R. Turner
1989 Properties, types and meaning, 2 vols. Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Church, A.
1941 The calculi of lambda conversion. Princeton University Press. Google Scholar
Cocchiarella, N.
1988 Predication versus membership in the distinction between logic as language and logic as calculus. Synthese 77: 37–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1989 Conceptualism, realism, and intensional logic. Topoi 8: 15–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davidson, D.
1968–9 On saying that. Synthese 19: 130–146. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dowty, D., R. Wall & S. Peters
1981 Introduction to Montague Semantics. Springer. Google Scholar
Frege, G.
(1949) [1892] On sense and nominatum. In H. Feigl & W. Sellars (eds.) Readings in philosophical analysis: 85–102. Appelton Century Crofts. Google Scholar
Gamut, L. T. F.
1991 Logic, language and meaning, vol. 2. Intensional Logic and Logical Grammar. University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar
Heny, F.
(ed.) 1981 Ambiguities in intensional contexts. Reidel. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hintikka, J.
1969 Models for modalities. Reidel. Google Scholar
Hintikka, J. & M. Hintikka
1989 The logic of epistemology and the epistemology of logic. Reidel. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lambalgen, M.Van & F. Hamm
2005 The Proper Treatment of Events. Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miller, D.
1991 A Logic Programming Language with Lambda-abstraction, Function Variables and Simple Unification. Journal of Logic and Computation 1: 497–536. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Montague, R.
1974 Formal philosophy. Yale University Press. Google Scholar
Moschovakis, Y.
1993 Sense and denotation as algorithm and value. In J. Oikkonen & J. Väänänen (eds.) Lecture Notes in Logic: 210–249. Association for Symbolic Logic, A.K. Peters Ltd. Google Scholar
1994 Sense and Denotation as Algorithm and Value. Logic Colloquium 90 (Helsinki 1990), vol.2 of Lectures Notes in Logic: 210–249. Springer. Google Scholar
Muskens, R.
2005 Sense and the computation of reference. Linguistics and Philosophy 28: 473–504. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007 Intensional Models for the Theory of Types. Journal of Symbolic Logic 72: 98–118. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Niiniluoto, I. & E. Saarinen
(eds.) 1982 Intensional logic. Acta Philosophica Fennica 35. Google Scholar
Orilia, F.
1999 Predication, analysis and reference. Clueb. Google Scholar
Putnam, H.
1975 The meaning of ‘meaning’. In H. Putnam Mind, Language and Reality, Philosophical papers, vol.2: 215–271. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quine, W. V.
1994 Promoting Extensionality. Synthese 98: 143–151. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Recanati, F.
2000 Opacity and the Attitudes. In P. Kotatko & A. Orenstein (eds.) Knowledge, Language and Logic. Questions for Quine: 367–407. Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rijke, M.De
(ed.) 1997 Advances in Intensional Logic. Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Russell, B.
1940 An inquiry into meaning and truth. Allen & Unwin. Google Scholar
Salmon, N.
2002 Puzzles about Intensionality. In D. Jacquette (ed.) A Companion to, Philosophical Logic: 73–85. Blackwell. Google Scholar
Tarski, A.
1956 Logic, semantics, metamathematics. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
Thayse, A.
(ed.) 1989 From modal logic to deductive databases, vol. 2. Wiley. Google Scholar
Thomason, R.
1980 A Model Theory for Propositional Attitudes. Linguistics and Philosophy 4: 47–70. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tichy, P.
1978 Two kinds of intensional logic. Epistemologia 1: 143–162. Google Scholar
Vergauwen, R.
1993 A metalogical theory of reference. University of America Press. Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, L.
(1960) [1921] Tractatus-logico-philosophicus, with a new Translation by D.F. Pears & B.F. McGuinness and with the Introduction by B. Russell. Routledge & Kegan Paul. Google Scholar
Zalta, E.
1988 Intensional logic and the metaphysics of intensionality. MIT Press. Google Scholar