Partial answers to exercises on truth-functional structures

A2. The problem here is that disjunction is a binary operation while the sentence involves three
possibilities; the solution is to group two of them together initially. That is, read the sentence as
‘John is sick, or Mary or Alice is sick’ – (J∨ (M∨A)) – or as ‘John or Mary is sick, or Alice is
sick’ – ((J∨M)∨A). Since we are interested in representing truth-functional dependence, it
doesn’t matter which way they are grouped, since the final column of values (↓) in each truth
table is the same:

↓ ↓
(J ∨ (M ∨ A)) ((J ∨ M) ∨ A)
T T T T T T T T T T
T T T T F T T T T F
T T F T T T T F T T
T T F F F T T F T F
F T T T T F T T T T
F T T T F F T T T F
F T F T T F F F T T
F F F F F F F F F F
0 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 2 0

The numerals at the bottom of the columns indicate the order in which they are done. Note that
there are 8 rows of truth values, corresponding to the different possible assignments of T and F to
the 3 constituent sentences represented by ‘J’, ‘M’, and ‘A’.

A3. ‘neither ... nor’ can be done either as a conjunction of negations:

Neither John nor Mary is sick

(¬J & ¬M)
┌───────┼───────┐
John isn’t sick and Mary isn’t sick
¬J & ¬M
┌───┴───┐ ┌───┴───┐
n’t John is sick n’t Mary is sick
¬ J ¬ M

or as a negated disjunction: Neither John nor Mary is sick

¬(J ∨ M)
┌───┴───┐
N...n either John or Mary is sick
¬ (J ∨ M)
┌───────┼───────┐
John is sick either...or Mary is sick
J ∨ M
These structures are equivalent in the sense of representing the same truth-functional dependence
of the value of ‘Neither John nor Mary is sick’ on the values of the constituents ‘John is sick’
and ‘Mary is sick’: the final column of truth values (↓) is the same in each table.

↓ ↓
(¬ J & ¬ M) ¬ (J ∨ M)
F T F F T F T T T
F T F T F F T T F
T F F F T F F T T
T F T T F T F F F
1 0 2 1 0 2 0 1 0

A4. This is the negation of A2.

A5. ‘but’ is conjunctive: ‘(J & ¬M)’.
A6. ‘(J & ¬(M ∨ A))’
A7. ‘at least one’ is disjunctive: ‘(J ∨ M)’.
A8. ‘at most one’ means not both: ‘¬(J & M)’. Alternatively, ‘at most one’ means John and not
Mary, or Mary and not John; or neither: ‘(((J&¬M) ∨ (M&¬J)) ∨ (¬J&¬M))’.
A9. ‘exactly one’ means at least one and at most one, so this is just the conjunction of A7 and
A8: ((J∨M) & ¬(J&M)). Alternatively, you can spell it out: ‘((J&¬M) ∨ (M&¬J))’. Note that
this way of doing it is just exclusive disjunction.
A11. Here ‘or’ means and, so A11 might be represented ‘(V & S)’, where ‘V’ represents ‘Mary
prefers chocolate to vanilla’ and ‘S’ represents ‘Mary prefers chocolate to strawberry’.
A12. ‘(O ∨ E)’ is probably best, where ‘O’ represents ‘9 is odd’ and ‘E’ represents ‘9 is even’,
though ‘(¬E ∨ E)’ might be OK.
A13. Cannot be truth-functionally structured. ‘(O ∨ E)’, where ‘O’ represents ‘every number is
odd’ and ‘E’ represents ‘every number is even’, is not correct, for it makes A13 false (why?),
though it is true.
A14. This is the negation of A12.
A15. ‘¬(O & E)’, where ‘O’ and ‘E’ are as in A12.
A16. The main issue here is what kind of punishments are prohibited by the last clause (from the
8th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution): punishments that are either cruel or unusual, or only
those that are both cruel and unusual?
If we take it the first way, then we can represent the sentence as ‘((¬B & ¬F) & ¬(C ∨
U))’, where ‘B’ represents ‘excessive bail shall be required’, ‘F’ represents ‘excessive fines shall
be imposed’, ‘C’ represents ‘cruel punishments shall be inflicted’, and ‘U’ represents ‘unusual
punishments shall be inflicted’. Note that the second conjunct is one way of doing neither-nor
constructions, and thus could be replaced by the other way: ‘(¬C & ¬U)’.
If we take the sentence the second way, then the best we can do at this point is ‘((¬B &
¬F) & ¬P)’, where ‘P’ represents ‘punishments that are both cruel and unusual shall be inflicted’.
The sentence represented by ‘P’ cannot be adequately represented by ‘(C&U)’, since ‘C’ and ‘U’
can be true without ‘P’ being true.
Later, we shall be able to do better by both readings: the first one might be represented
‘∀x((C(x) ∨ U(x)) → ¬I(x))’, read ‘for all punishments x, if x is either cruel or unusual, then x
shall not be inflicted’, while the second might be represented ‘∀x((C(x) & U(x)) → ¬I(x))’, read
‘for all punishments x, if x is both cruel and unusual, then x shall not be inflicted’.

B1. Incorrect: not enough parentheses. ‘(A & (B ∨ C))’ represents ‘Alice is clever, and either
Beth or Clara is also’.
B2. Either Beth is clever, or neither Alice nor Clara is.
B3. Incorrect: not enough parentheses. ‘(A ∨ ((¬B & ¬C) ∨ C))’ represents ‘Alice is clever, or
neither Beth nor Clara is, or Clara is clever’.
B4. Incorrect: too many parentheses. ‘(A & ¬B)’ represents ‘Alice is clever, but Beth isn’t’.
B5. It’s not the case that both Clara and Alice are clever.
B6. Incorrect: misplaced parentheses. ‘¬(C & A) is B5 while ‘(¬C & A)’ represents ‘Clara isn’t
clever, but Alice is’.
B7. Either it’s not the case that Clara isn’t clever, or Beth is clever.
B8. It’s false that neither Alice nor Beth is clever.
B9. Incorrect: too many parentheses. ‘¬¬(A ∨ B)’ is B8.
B10. Incorrect: not enough parentheses. ‘(A & (B ∨ C))’ represents ‘Alice is clever, and either
Beth or Clara is as well’.

C1. DNF is ‘((A&¬B)∨(¬A&B))’. Eliminating ‘∨’ in favor of ‘¬’ and ‘&’, we have
‘¬(¬(A&¬B) & ¬(¬A&B))’. If we now eliminate ‘¬’ and ‘&’ in favor of ‘|’ from the inside out,
we get, successively:

¬(¬(A&¬B) & ¬(¬A&B))

¬(¬(A&(B|B)) & ¬((A|A)&B))

¬((A | (B|B)) & ((A|A) | B))

((A | (B|B)) | ((A|A) | B))

In eliminating ‘¬’ and ‘&’, I have treated ¬(S1&S2) as (S1|S2).

C2. DNF is ‘(((A&B) ∨ (A&¬B)) ∨ (¬A&B))’ because we are explicitly describing all the T-
cases.