Estudos de cunho estritamente teorico, apresentam a Logica Paraconsistente como uma boa solucao para fazer tratamento de situacoes reais, onde a Logica Classica, por ser binaria, se mostra ineficaz ou impossibilitada de ser aplicada. Estas situacoes como, as de indefinicoes, as de ambiguidades e principalmente as de inconsistencias, aparecem e sao descritas no mundo real com muita frequencia. Neste trabalho e apresentado um metodo inovador que permite a Logica Paraconsistente sair de um campo estritamente teorico para uma aplicacao simples, pratica e direta, permitindo-se que Sistemas de Controle possam efetuar tratamento de situacoes nao cobertas pela Logica Classica e assim conquistando um avanco significativo na forma de dar tratamento a sinais contraditorios. 
Os resultados dos estudos apresentados neste trabalho sao baseados numa classe de logica Nao-Classica denominada de Logica Paraconsistente Anotada de anotacao com dois valores-LPA2v. A analise de sinais utilizando a LP A2v permite que varios problemas ocasionados por situacoes contraditorias e paracompletas possam ser tratados de uma maneira proxima da realidade, atraves da consideracao de evidencias. Este metodo de interpretacao traz relevantes resultados que culminaram na construcao do algoritmo denominado "Para-Analisador". O algoritmo pode ser implementado por software, em linguagem de computacao convencional, e proporciona a aplicacao da Logica Paraconsistente em Sistemas de Controle de Inteligencia Artificial, Automacao e Robotica. Com base na descricao do Algoritrno Para-Analisador e projetado um Sistema de Controle denominado de Controlador Logico Paraconsistente-Para-Control capaz de fazer tratamento de sinais contraditorios conforme as bases teoricas da Logica Paraconsistente. 
Os metodos de aplicacao da LP A2v apresentados podem ser aplicados por meio de Software ou Hardware em diversas areas como: Sistemas Especialistas, Redes Neurais, Robotica e Inteligencia Artificial.

Logics and languages

Métodos de Aplicações da Lógica Paraconsistente Anotada de anotação com dois valores - LPA2v

In his article ‘Some Linguistic Obstacles to Machine Translation’ (1960) Yehoshua Bar-Hillel dealt with the merits of categorial grammar for the analysis of certain kinds of simple sentences, the so-called kernel sentences, and with the shortcomings of categorial grammar in regard to more complex sentences. He followed Chomsky in that he proposed that categorial grammar “has to be supplemented by additional procedures, the so-called transformations” (Bar-Hillel 1960, p. 83). More than 10 years later the same stand was taken by David Lewis in his article ‘General Semantics’ (1972): “The time therefore seems ripe to explore categorially based transformational grammars, obtained by taking an Ajdukiewicz categorial grammar as base and adding a transformational component. So far as I know, this proposal has been made only once before (Lyons, 1966), but it seems an obvious one”. The motivation for the call for a transformational component is the same as in Bar-Hillel (1960). Lewis says very little about this component, only that he assumes that, if a problem arises in categorial grammar, transformations will handle it. Lewis puts one restriction on the transformational component: “In fact the only restriction I place on syntax is that transformational grammars should be categorially based”; what that means is obscured by the next sentence “In other words: a transformational component should operate on a set of categorial phrase markers representing a set of meanings generated by some lexicon” Lewis, (1972, p. 190).

The Role of Categorial Syntax in Grammatical Theory

Can Epistemology Be Naturalized

Publisher Summary This chapter reconciles the more or less elaborate approaches in linguistics and intensional logic to deal with the formal aspect of verbal utterance type of mental operation. A simple example is described in the chapter to clarify the notion of utterance meaning, which is to be distinguished from the semantic structure of a sentence. One type of differences depends on the time and the addressee of an utterance—that is, on the interpretation of the “deictic elements” “you,” “your,” and “will.” This type of context dependent variation in the utterance meaning is fairly obvious and is widely discussed both in linguistics and logic. The crucial point of the initial considerations is that assigning a linguistic structure to an inscription does not yet determine the pertinent utterance meaning. The chapter also describes the model-theoretic semantics and intensional logic. The distinction between semantic structure and utterance meaning to the Fregean distinction between “Sinn” and “Bedeutung,” taken up by Carnap in terms of intension and extension are connected.

Utterance Meaning and Mental States

It is arguably desirable to have a theory of meaning that (i) does not identify propositions with sets of worlds, (ii) enables to capture the dynamic character of semantic interpretation and (iii) provides the basis for a semantic program that incorporates and extends the achievements of Montague semantics A theory of properties and propositions that meets these desiderata is developed and several applications to the semantic analysis of natural languages are explored

/pdf/intensionality-and-context-change-576gl88lvl.pdf

Logics and languages

Citations

Métodos de Aplicações da Lógica Paraconsistente Anotada de anotação com dois valores - LPA2v

The Role of Categorial Syntax in Grammatical Theory

Can Epistemology Be Naturalized

Utterance Meaning and Mental States

Intensionality and Context Change

Related Papers (5)

The Proper Treatment of Quantification in Ordinary English

Logic and conversation

Word and Object

Situations and Attitudes

Naming and Necessity