**Principle of Compositionality**

Instead of using truth tables, logical connective symbols can be interpreted by means of an interpretation function and a functionally complete set of truth-functions (Gamut 1991), as detailed by the principle of compositionality of meaning. Let *I* be an interpretation function, let *Φ*, *Ψ* be any two sentences and let the truth function *f*_{nand} be defined as:

*f*_{nand}(T,T)=F;*f*_{nand}(T,F)=*f*_{nand}(F,T)=*f*_{nand}(F,F)=T

Then, for convenience, *f*_{not}, *f*_{or} *f*_{and} and so on are defined by means of *f*_{nand}:

*f*_{not}(*x*)=*f*_{nand}(*x*,*x*)*f*_{or}(*x*,*y*)=*f*_{nand}(*f*_{not}(*x*),*f*_{not}(*y*))*f*_{and}(*x*,*y*)=*f*_{not}(*f*_{nand}(*x*,*y*))

or, alternatively *f*_{not}, *f*_{or} *f*_{and} and so on are defined directly:

*f*_{not}(T)=F;*f*_{not}(F)=T;*f*_{or}(T,T)=*f*_{or}(T,F)=*f*_{or}(F,T)=T;*f*_{or}(F,F)=F*f*_{and}(T,T)=T;*f*_{and}(T,F)=*f*_{and}(F,T)=*f*_{and}(F,F)=F

Then

*I*(~)=*I*(¬)=*f*_{not}*I*(&)=*I*(^)=*I*(&)=*f*_{and}*I*(*v*)=*I*=*f*_{or}*I*(~*Φ*)=*I*(¬*Φ*)=*I*(¬)(*I*(*Φ*))=*f*_{not}(*I*(*Φ*))*I*(*Φ*&*Ψ*) =*I*(&)(*I*(*Φ*),*I*(*Ψ*))=*f*_{and}(*I*(*Φ*),*I*(*Ψ*))

etc.

Thus if *S* is a sentence that is a string of symbols consisting of logical symbols *v*_{1}...*v*_{n} representing logical connectives, and non-logical symbols *c*_{1}...*c*_{n}, then if and only if *I*(*v*_{1})...*I*(*v*_{n}) have been provided interpreting *v*_{1} to *v*_{n} by means of *f*_{nand} (or any other set of functional complete truth-functions) then the truth-value of I(s) is determined entirely by the truth-values of *c*_{1}...*c*_{n}, i.e. of *I*(*c*_{1})...*I*(*c*_{n}). In other words, as expected and required, *S* is true or false only under an interpretation of all its non-logical symbols.

Read more about this topic: Truth Function

### Other articles related to "principle of compositionality, principle":

**Principle Of Compositionality**- Critiques

... The

**principle of compositionality**has been the subject of intense debate ... Indeed, there is no general agreement as to how the

**principle**is to be interpreted, although there have been several attempts to provide formal definitions of it ... The

**principle**has been attacked in all three spheres, although so far none of the criticisms brought against it have been generally regarded as compelling ...

### Famous quotes containing the words principle of and/or principle:

“Antagonistic cooperation is the *principle of* all markets and many marriages.”

—Mason Cooley (b. 1927)

“Look through the whole history of countries professing the Romish religion, and you will uniformly find the leaven of this besetting and accursed *principle* of action—that the end will sanction any means.”

—Samuel Taylor Coleridge (1772–1834)