I have problem understanding the entailment logic on these examples and would like some help.

Here's my answers:

  1. Sally works together with Polly. Sally works. => I think one entails other, but not the other way around.

  2. In tennis matches, Bill regularly beats Sue, and Sue regularly beats Jack. In tennis matches, Bill regularly beats Jack. => Again, one entails other, but not the other way around.

  3. Polly thinks that Fido is a dog. Fido is a dog. Now, this is very confusing to me. I think there is no relationship between these two. They are not mutually entailing. They are not incompatible and one doesn't entail other.

Is my logic right?

Thank you

  • 3
    I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is about Philosophy or Formal Logic rather than Linguistics. Try asking it on Philosophy.SE. Nov 22, 2015 at 2:50
  • I'm not sure this cannot be a Linguistics SE question. But anyway -- your logic is alright. Except #2 -- you reason as if "beats" was a transitive relation (like "taller than"), but I think it is intransitive (think of "likes"). Nov 22, 2015 at 13:07
  • 1
    @bytebuster AFAIK, semantics is taught in practically every linguistics department, and these are the kinds of exercise they give. gist.ugent.be/file/216
    – prash
    Nov 25, 2015 at 4:45


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.