Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T18:29:07.931Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Semantics for RKt1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

M. K. Rennie
M. K. Rennie*
Affiliation:
University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In Chapter XIII of [4], Prior discusses a system QKt, designed to stand to the “minimal” tense logic Kt as the modal system Q of [3] stands to S5. In this paper I provide semantics for a similar system, slightly weaker than QKt: the weakening is due to the fact that Prior's axioms are slightly too strong for a “minimal” system. An extended post-Henkin style completeness proof for the axiomatization with respect to the semantics provided is then given: the underlying three-valued nature of the semantics requires a twist in the proof which is new to its author at least, and also results in some details being set out which could well be glossed over in the two-valued case.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Symbolic Logic , Volume 36 , Issue 1 , March 1971 , pp. 97 - 107
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1971

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

1

For the detection of an error in the original, I want to thank Robert Bull: its correction is due to Dov Gabbay.

References

[1]Hughes, G. E. and Cresswell, M. J., An introduction to modal logic, Methuen, London, 1968.Google Scholar
[2]Makinson, D. C., On some completeness theorems in modal logic, Zeitschrift für mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik, vol. 12 (1966), pp. 379–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3]Prior, A. N., Time and modality, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1957.Google Scholar
[4]Prior, A. N., Papers on time and tense, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1968.Google Scholar
[5]Rennie, M. K., On postulates for temporal order, The Monist, vol. 3 (1969), pp. 457–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar