Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The ante-in antecedent means 'before; in front of'. Thus, when a pro-form precedes its antecedent, the antecedent is not literally an antecedent, but rather it is a postcedent, post-meaning 'after; behind'. The following examples, wherein the pro-forms are bolded and their postcedents are underlined, illustrate this distinction:
In propositional logic, modus ponens (/ ˈ m oʊ d ə s ˈ p oʊ n ɛ n z /; MP), also known as modus ponendo ponens (from Latin 'mode that by affirming affirms'), [1] implication elimination, or affirming the antecedent, [2] is a deductive argument form and rule of inference. [3] It can be summarized as "P implies Q. P is true. Therefore, Q ...
[2] An interrogative pro-form is a pro-form that denotes the (unknown) item in question and may itself fall into any of the above categories. The rules governing allowable syntactic relations between certain pro-forms (notably personal and reflexive/reciprocal pronouns) and their antecedents have been studied in what is called binding theory.
This indicated dependencies (i.e. antecedent propositions) by line numbers at the left of each line. 1963: Stoll (1979 , pp. 183–190, 215–219) uses sets of line numbers to indicate antecedent dependencies of the lines of sequential logical arguments based on natural deduction inference rules.
(The Center Square) – Colorado has over $2 billion in unclaimed property that it owes to millions of individuals. The funds are held by the Great Colorado Payback, the Colorado Department of ...
In astronomy, 100,000 metres, 100 kilometres, or 100 km (62 miles) is the altitude at which the Fédération Aéronautique Internationale (FAI) defines spaceflight to begin. In paleoclimatology , the 100,000-year problem is a mismatch between the temperature record and the modeled incoming solar radiation .
The antecedent, therefore, becomes the new goal: Fritz is a frog 2. Again substituting Fritz for X, rule #1 becomes: If Fritz croaks and Fritz eats flies – Then Fritz is a frog Since the consequent matches the current goal ("Fritz is a frog"), the inference engine now needs to see if the antecedent ("Fritz croaks and eats flies") can be proven.
–The anaphor it follows the expression to which it refers (its antecedent). b. Our neighbors i dislike the music. If they i are angry, the cops will show up soon. – The anaphor they follows the expression to which it refers (its antecedent). Cataphora a. If they i are angry about the music, the neighbors i will call the cops.