Something went amiss with Question 4, part C. This question asks you to transform the structure given in the problem by using the Quantifier Raising rule. It doesn’t say you need to do Tense raising (and the Tense raising rule is not provided), so the structure you wind up still won’t quite be interpretable (contrary …
This is probably relatively clear, but due to a word processing error, Question 6 on the practice final makes reference to “the sentence in (Error! Reference not found.)” being ambiguous. What it is talking about is “the sentence in (8)”.
It took me far, far longer to get this ready than I had anticipated it would, but I have now posted the clarifications for homework #7. You can download a new PDF file of it, on which I have marked the changes. Except for the change I made to the sentences about Alaska and Texas, …
I’m going back over homework 7, and I’m discovering a number of things that either weren’t clear or were even backwards. I will post a revision later today, and I’ll outline the changes here on the blog. For the moment, though, there’s not much point in working past Problem 1, because there will be substantial …
I should point out, as I’m looking at this homework I handed out again, that the two sentences in (1) (1a: Texas is bigger than Alaska, 1b: Alaska is smaller than Texas) are both false. Texas is in fact smaller than Alaska, but this need not get in the way of your answering the question. …
A couple of weeks ago I handed out a short list of talks that seemed to have something to do with semantics. However, in the meantime there have been a couple of changes. So: Don’t trust the locations (particularly) on the handout, trust the online schedule instead. Systematically, things labeled “B” on my handout will …
Homework 5 was prepared in a bit of a rush, and there are a couple of oddities about question #2. If you read the directions carefully, you’ll see that it is anticipated that the sentences in the problem might have more than one interpretation, based on the de re/de dicto distinction. However, when the context …
I see that in my definition of “tall” on handout 4b, I left out something relatively important. The definition should be: [tall]M = λP[λx[P(x) ∧ x is tall compared to {y:P(y)} in M]] The important difference between what is on the handout and what I have here is that the definition here requires not only …
It’s been called to my attention that there is a typo on the key I gave out for Homework 2. A new version will be posted online shortly, but the changes are few, so you might just pencil it into your copy. Addition: The error goes back a bit further than I originally thought, the …
Continue reading ‘HW2 Key: Typo at the end of Part 1, (3)’ »
It seems I spent a bit too much time drawing cats and mats and a bit too little time proofreading on Homework 1. I was just trying to write up a key, and it turns out that Part 3 is wrong in a startlingly large number of ways. My suggestion: burn the copy of Homework …