<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.4 20241031//EN"
        "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.4/JATS-journalpublishing1-4.dtd">
<article  article-type="research-article"        dtd-version="1.4">
            <front>

                <journal-meta>
                                    <journal-id></journal-id>
            <journal-title-group>
                                                                                    <journal-title>Felsefe Arkivi</journal-title>
            </journal-title-group>
                            <issn pub-type="ppub">0378-2816</issn>
                                        <issn pub-type="epub">2667-7644</issn>
                                                                                            <publisher>
                    <publisher-name>Istanbul University</publisher-name>
                </publisher>
                    </journal-meta>
                <article-meta>
                                        <article-id/>
                                                                <article-categories>
                                            <subj-group  xml:lang="en">
                                                            <subject>Philosophy</subject>
                                                    </subj-group>
                                            <subj-group  xml:lang="tr">
                                                            <subject>Felsefe</subject>
                                                    </subj-group>
                                    </article-categories>
                                                                                                                                                        <title-group>
                                                                                                                        <trans-title-group xml:lang="en">
                                    <trans-title>Lachelier’s Semantics of Predication and the Syllogism</trans-title>
                                </trans-title-group>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <article-title>Lachelier’nin Yükleme Semantiği ve Tasım</article-title>
                                                                                                    </title-group>
            
                                                    <contrib-group content-type="authors">
                                                                        <contrib contrib-type="author">
                                                                    <contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">
                                        https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0553-9131</contrib-id>
                                                                <name>
                                    <surname>Besler</surname>
                                    <given-names>Arman</given-names>
                                </name>
                                                                    <aff>NEVŞEHİR HACI BEKTAŞ VELİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ</aff>
                                                            </contrib>
                                                                                </contrib-group>
                        
                                        <pub-date pub-type="pub" iso-8601-date="20191231">
                    <day>12</day>
                    <month>31</month>
                    <year>2019</year>
                </pub-date>
                                                    <issue>51</issue>
                                        <fpage>61</fpage>
                                        <lpage>77</lpage>
                        
                        <history>
                                    <date date-type="received" iso-8601-date="20191110">
                        <day>11</day>
                        <month>10</month>
                        <year>2019</year>
                    </date>
                                                    <date date-type="accepted" iso-8601-date="20191216">
                        <day>12</day>
                        <month>16</month>
                        <year>2019</year>
                    </date>
                            </history>
                                        <permissions>
                    <copyright-statement>Copyright © 1945, Archives of Philosophy</copyright-statement>
                    <copyright-year>1945</copyright-year>
                    <copyright-holder>Archives of Philosophy</copyright-holder>
                </permissions>
            
                                                                                                <trans-abstract xml:lang="en">
                            <p>The main doctrines of the traditional logic of terms (logica termini) are standardly organized according to the formation structure of syllogistic inferences. A syllogistic inference is analyzed into propositions, and propositions, in the last instance, to terms; the logic of terms, in line with this formation structure, is partitioned into the doctrines, respectively, of terms (terminorum), of propositions (propositionum) or judgments (judiciorum), and of immediate and mediate inferences or followings (consequentiarum immediatarum/mediatarum). This structure communicates the idea that a given doctrine could be treated, to a certain extent, independently of the next one to come, so that propositions, for instance, could be examined, at least to a certain extent, independently of syllogistic inferences. Some classical philosophers such as Immanuel Kant have developed approaches that break in part this order of analysis which finds its clearest expression in the Port-Royal logic (Arnauld &amp; Nicole’s Logic or the Art of Thinking). In Kant’s case the order is changed  in favor of the doctrine of judgements. This paper examines the French philosopher Jules Lachelier’s (1832-1918) approach which similarly breaks the same doctrinal order, and which, more specifically, refines the typification of propositions according to the roles to be played by propositions in syllogisms. What lies at the core of this approach is the identification of the semantic values of categorical propositions (or, as Lachelier calls them, of propositions of inherence) in terms of modal statuses which are to determine these roles. Lachelier seems to use the set of values he assigns to the categorical forms as a tool for testing logical implication among types of predication, that is, as some sort of semantic theory in the modern sense. Lachelier also discusses the three-figured categorical syllogistic along with a method, effectively used by G. W. Leibniz, of transforming syllogistic moods into each other, and tries to confirm his semantic theory in terms of such syllogistic. This paper explains Lachelier’s analysis of meaning by treating it as a non-formal semantics of predication, and tries to make some modern sense of Lachelier’s general approach to syllogistic.</p></trans-abstract>
                                                                                                                                    <abstract><p>Geleneksel terim mantığının (logica termini) temel öğretileri, tasımlık çıkarımların oluşum yapısına uygun olarak düzenlenir. Tasımlık bir çıkarım önermelere, önermelerse – son aşamada – terimlere çözümlenir; bu oluşum yapısına uygun olarak da terim mantığı, (i) terimler (termini) öğretisi, (ii) önermeler (propositiones) veya yargılar (judicia) öğretisi ve (iii) dolaylı/dolaysız çıkarımlar veya izlemeler (consequentiae immediatae/mediatae) öğretisi olarak bölümlenir. Bu yapı, bir öğretinin, kendinden sonra gelen öğretiden belli bir dereceye kadar bağımsızca işlenebileceği fikrini doğurabilir, öyleyse, örneğin, önermeler, en azından bir dereceye kadar, tasımlık çıkarımlardan bağımsız olarak incelenebilecektir. Immanuel Kant gibi bazı klasik felsefeciler, en parlak ifadesini, Port-Royal Mantığı’nda (Arnauld &amp; Nicole’ün Mantık veya Düşünme Sanatı’nda) bulan bu öğreti düzenindeki çözümleme sırasını kısmen (Kant örneğinde, yargı öğretisi lehine) bozan yaklaşımlar geliştirmiştir. Bu yazı, Fransız felsefeci Jules Lachelier’nin (18321918) yine aynı öğreti düzenini kısmen bozan, daha özelde, önerme tipleşmesini, önermelerin tasımlarda oynayacakları rollere göre incelten yaklaşımını incelemektedir. Bu yaklaşımın odak noktası, yüklemeli önermelerde (Lachelier’nin terimleriyle, içindelik önermelerinde) anlam değeri tiplerinin, bahsedilen rolleri belirleyen kiplik statüleri üzerinden ayırt edilmesidir. Lachelier, yüklemeli biçimlere atadığı anlam değerlerini, hangi yükleme tiplerinin hangi yükleme tiplerini mantıki olarak içerdiğini denetlemenin bir aracı olarak, yani adeta, modern anlamıyla, bir tür semantik kuram olarak kullanıyor görünmektedir. Lachelier, üç şekilli kategorik tasım kuramını da, G. W. Leibniz’in etkin bir biçimde kullanmış olduğu, tasım kiplerini birbirlerine dönüştürme yöntemiyle birlikte ele alarak, önerdiği anlam kuramının bunun üzerinden bir tür sağlamasını yapmaya çalışmaktadır. Lachelier’nin anlam çözümlemesini, formel olmayan bir yükleme semantiği olarak ele alıp açıklayan bu yazı, Lachelier’nin genel tasım kuramı anlayışını modern terimlerle anlamaya çalışmaktadır.</p></abstract>
                                                            
            
                                                                                        <kwd-group>
                                                    <kwd>Lachelier</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>  Kant</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>  yükleme</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>  dolayım</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>  kiplik</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>  semantik</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>  tasım kuramı</kwd>
                                            </kwd-group>
                            
                                                <kwd-group xml:lang="en">
                                                    <kwd>Lachelier</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>  Kant</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>  predication</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>  mediation</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>  modality</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>  semantics</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>  syllogistic</kwd>
                                            </kwd-group>
                                                                                                                                        </article-meta>
    </front>
    <back>
                            <ref-list>
                                    <ref id="ref1">
                        <label>1</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Arnauld, Antoine &amp; Nicole, Pierre. La logique ou l’art de penser. Paris: Gallimard, 1996.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref2">
                        <label>2</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Belna, Jean-Pierre. Histoire de la Logique. Paris: Ellipses, 2014. Besler, Arman. “Syllogistic Expansion in the Leibnizian Reduction Scheme”. Kilikya Felsefe Dergisi, 0 (2018): 1-16.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref3">
                        <label>3</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Corcoran, John. “Aristotle’s Natural Deduction System”. Ancient Logic and Its Modern Interpretations (Proceedings of the Buffalo Symposium on Modernist Interpretations of Ancient Logic, 21 and 22 April, 1972). Edited by John Corcoran. Dordrecht-Holland: D. Reidel, 1974.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref4">
                        <label>4</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Fara, Delia Graff. “Socratizing”. American Philosophical Quarterly, vol. 48 (2011): 229-238.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref5">
                        <label>5</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Greenwood, Thomas. “The Logic of Jules Lachelier”. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, vol. 35 (1935): 75-94.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref6">
                        <label>6</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Kant, Immanuel. Introduction to Logic – The Mistaken Subtilty of the Four Syllogistic Figures. Translated by Thomas Kingsmill Abbott. London: Longsman, Green, &amp; Co, 1885.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref7">
                        <label>7</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">_______Lectures on Logic. Translated and edited by J. Michael Young. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref8">
                        <label>8</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">_______Critique of Pure Reason. Translated and edited by Paul Guyer &amp; Allen W. Wood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref9">
                        <label>9</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Lachelier, Jules. “Étude sur la Théorie du Syllogisme”. Revue Philosophique de la France et de l’Étranger, 1(1876): 468-487.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref10">
                        <label>10</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">__________Du Fondement de l’Induction, suivi de Psychologie et Métaphysique. Paris: Felix Alcan, 1896.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref11">
                        <label>11</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">__________“La Proposition et le Syllogisme”. Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale, 14 (1906): 135-164.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref12">
                        <label>12</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm. Logical Papers. Translated and edited by G. H. R. Parkinson. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1966.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref13">
                        <label>13</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">_____________Discours de Métaphysique suivi de Monadologie et autres textes. Édition de Michel Fichant. Paris: Gallimard, 2004.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref14">
                        <label>14</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Parsons, Terence. Articulating Medieval Logic. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref15">
                        <label>15</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Rose, Lynn. “Aristotle’s Syllogistic and the Fourth Figure”. Mind, vol. 74 (1965): 382-389.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                            </ref-list>
                    </back>
    </article>
