Remark: For Gillon, each choice of covering determines a specific interpretation of the sentence.
Specifically, 74 is problematic for my account because the interpretation of the sentence is not consistent with the expected meaning from the structure in 75a.
Understood along these lines, metaphorical truth would be something like the revelatory power conferred upon a metaphorical sentence (or on the impulse to use such a sentence) by a successful metaphorical interpretation of the sentence, a successful ascription to it of metaphorical meaning.
On its model-theoretic interpretation, however, the sentence only says that R contains all the real numbers which happen to live in M, as these are the only real numbers which get "seen" by the initial ∀x quantifier in the sentence.
Participants were read a sentence, and were then asked to select the correct interpretation of the sentence from a choice of four possibilities.
I take the concessive meaning as the default interpretation in the sentences featuring 都 to 1, unless this interpretation is overridden by the interpretation of 都 to 1 as a maximality operator.
And a federal appeals court in New Orleans had previously ruled that Mr. Skilling's sentence should be recalculated because the trial court judge erred in his interpretation of the sentencing guidelines.
Company A purchased Company B. Besides, going even deeper in the interpretation of the sentences, we can understand their meaning they are related to some takeover and we can, for example, infer that there will be some impacts on the business environment.
In the case of symbolization 1′′), since (r → s) is logically equivalent to (~r ∨ s), and the two troublesome formulas associated with this symbolization reduce to OB~r → OB(~r ∨ s) and OBs → OB(~r ∨ s), these are also instances of Ross' Paradox given this SDL interpretation of the sentences.
The account showed the right responsiveness in interaction with independently motivated interpretations for the sentences involved.
