User:Magnap/Inquisitive Semantics Proposal: Difference between revisions

An important thing to bear in mind about inquisitive semantics is that it does not give us a Boolean algebra, but only a Heyting algebra, meaning that <math>\neg\neg\text{P} = \text{P}</math> is not guaranteed. In fact, the non-inquisitive projection operator <math>\lambda \text{P}. !\text{P}</math>, which collapses all the alternatives of a proposition into just one (called <math>\text{info}\left(\text{P}\right)</math>) which contains them all, thus keeping the assertion the same but ensuring that no question is asked, ''is'' just <math>\lambda \text{P}. \neg\neg\text{P}</math>. Another important operator is the non-informative projection operator <math>\lambda \text{P}. ?\text{P} = \lambda \text{P}. \text{P} \lor \neg\text{P}</math>, which ensures that a proposition does not assert anything by adding an alternative which covers all worlds that would otherwise have been ruled out. Finally (TODO source! well tbf I made it up initially but it ''is'' attested, at least in one presentation by one of the inqsem guys) there's the presupposition operator <math>\lambda \text{P}. ;\text{P} = \lambda \text{P}. \left(\text{P} | \text{info}\left(\text{P}\right)\right)</math>.

===Examples===

The complementizer {{t|ma}} will gain semantics, specifically <math>\lambda \text{P}. ?!P</math>.

We'll probably want prefixes that apply to quantifiers and apply one of the following to the result of applying the quantifier (in other words, applying them outside the quantifier): <math>!</math>, <math>;</math>, <math>?</math>, <math>?!</math>.