\brief{Rudolf Carnap an W.V.O. Quine, 8. Juni 1934}{Juni 1934}

%Prof. Dr. Rudolf Carnap

%Prag XVII

%N. Motol, Pod Homolkou

%Prague, June 8, 1934

\anrede{Dear Dr. \textit{Quine},}

\haupttext{My book ``Logische Syntax''\IC{\logischesyntax} is not quite ready. I think it will appear in 2 weeks. Concerning the English translation\IC{\logischesyntaxenglisch} I
have come to an agreement with the German publisher; I am sorry I must make the concession that the English edition is
not to appear before April\,1, 1935. May I ask you for your advice in some \uline{terminological questions} regarding the
English translation?

1. \uline{Satz}: sentence (I think this is better than `proposition', because the series of signs is meant, not its
meaning; and a second\fnAmargin{hsl. \original{\textsp{sentence}}} advantage: as a syntactical gothic letter I could keep, \blockade{symbol} (gothic S)).

\sout{2. (Ein Satz ist) \uline{Folge} (anderer Sätze): conclusion (consequence?)}\fnAmargin{hsl. \original{\textsp{consequence}}}

3. \uline{Gehalt}: content.\fnAmargin{hsl. \original{\textsp{OK}}}

4. \uline{gehaltgleich}: equal in content (is there no simple word?)\fnAmargin{hsl. \original{\textsp{equipollent}}}

5. \uline{Alloperator}: universal (or: general) operator.\fnAmargin{hsl. \original{\textsp{universal quantifier}}}

6. \uline{Ausdruck} (any series of signs): expression.\fnAmargin{hsl. \original{\textsp{OK}}}

7. Strich (e.\,g. in `o\textsuperscript{|}'): stroke (or would this produce a confusion with Sheffers Stroke `|', which
does not occur in my ``Syntax''?), dash.\fnAmargin{hsl. \original{\textsp{accent}}}

8. \uline{Strichausdruck} (e.\,g. `o\textsuperscript{| | |}'): stroke expression (if no danger of confusion with e.\,g.
`p|q' which however does not occur; the advantage would be that I could keep the gothic sign, \{symbol\} \textkritik{(=St)}\fnE{hsl.} as in
German), dash expression.

9. \uline{Spielraum} (as in Wittgenstein, p.\,98): domain, range.\fnAmargin{hsl. \original{\textsp{range}}}


\uline{a-Begriffe}:

10. \uline{Ableitung}: derivation.

11. \uline{Beweis}: proof (demonstration?)

12. \uline{ableitbar}: derivable

13. \uline{beweisbar}: provable (demonstrable?)

14. \uline{widerlegbar}: disprovable\fnAmargin{hsl. \original{\textsp{refutable}}}

15. \uline{entscheidbar}: decidable\fnAmargin{hsl. \original{\textsp{resoluble}}}

16. \uline{unentscheidbar}: indecidable\fnAmargin{hsl. \original{\textsp{irresoluble}}}

\uline{f-Begriffe}:

17. \uline{Folgereihe}: conclusion-series (?)

18. \uline{Folgeklasse}: conclusion-class, class of conclusions.

19. \uline{Folge}: conclusion (consequence).

20. \uline{gültig}: valid.

21. \uline{widergültig} : contra-valid (I think, `invalid' would not do)

22. \uline{determiniert}: determinate.

23. \uline{indeterminiert}: indeterminate. \neueseite{}

Explanations: Ableitung and Beweis are certain finite series of sentences. Folgereihe is a series of classes of
sentences. The concepts in left column (a-Begriffe) have the meaning of something which can really be done; therefore I
think that for (12)-(16) words with the ending `-able' are preferable. The concepts in the right column (f-Begriffe)\blockade{Formatierung!} have
a meaning which is in a certain sense absolutistic. For (19): a sentence can be a Folge of an other sentence or of a
class of sentences.

24. \uline{Zahl} - (-Ausdruck, -Zeichen, -Variable): numerical (expression, sign, variable) or numeral?\fnE{Quine
underlines 'sign' and 'numbered' and connects them with an identity sign ('=')}

25. \uline{freie und gebundene} Variable: (I would prefer not to take, as Russell\IN{\russell}, `real' and `apparent variable')
free, bound variable.

In your answer you may simply refer to the numbers of the concepts.

With best greetings 2:2}

\grussformel{very truly yours\\
R. Carnap}

\ebericht{Brief, msl, 2 Seiten, \href{https://doi.org/10.48666/853818}{WQ (Dsl. RC 102-60-10)}; Briefkopf: msl. \original{Prague, June, 8, 1934}.}