Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T04:57:14.841Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Satisfaction for n-th order languages defined in n-th order languages

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

William Craig*
Affiliation:
University of California, Berkeley

Extract

In this paper we show that for n-th order languages L′ with p nonlogical constants, 2 ≦ n < ω, 0 ≦ p < ω, a notion of satisfaction can be defined in an n-th order language containing one additional nonlogical constant, say S. By the usual methods we also show that this notion cannot be defined in L′. Hence, in its present formulation, Beth's Theorem in [1] for first order languages has no analogue for L′.

Our defining expression is such that, given any values of the other nonlogical constants and any appropriate m-tuple, it allows us to determine whether or not the m-tuple belongs to the value S of S without considering the totality of objects which are of the same type as S. Whether every definition in an n-th order language is equivalent to one thus “predicative”, and hence whether there is a formulation of Beth's Theorem which generalizes to higher orders, we do not know.

The falsehood for L′ of the analogue of Beth's Theorem implies the falsehood of an analogue of an interpolation theorem for first order languages. The above definability of satisfaction for L′ implies a result on finite axiomatizability in slightly richer languages. Details are given in § 4.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1965

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

[1]Beth, E. W., On Padoa's method in the theory of definitions, Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen, Proceedings, ser. A, vol. 56 (also Indagationes mathematicae, vol. 15) (1953), pp. 330339.Google Scholar
[2]Craig, W. and Vaught, R., Finite axiomatizability using additional predicates, this Journal, vol. 23 (1958), pp. 289308.Google Scholar
[3]Craig, W., Three uses of the Herbrand-Gentzen Theorem in relating proof theory and model theory, this Journal, vol. 22 (1957), pp. 269285.Google Scholar
[4]Svenonius, L., A theorem on permutations in models, Theoria, vol. 25 (1959), pp. 8294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[5]Tarski, A., A problem concerning the notion of definability, this Journal, vol. 13 (1948), pp. 107111.Google Scholar
[6]Tarski, A., Mostowski, A. and Robinson, R. M., Undecidable Theories, Amsterdam (North Holland Pub. Co.), 1953.Google Scholar