Your letter of March 31 was very satisfying for me, as well by your optimism concerning my further chances in USA as by your great personal kindness.
We too had already considered the plan of coming some time before August 1936 to the US in order to spend the summer there, to see friends and to learn English. Your very kind proposal gives us a strong stimulus in this direction.
I hope with you that the HarvardIHarvard University, Cambridge MA invitation will have a strong effect on other American universities, and I suppose, that this effect will be strengthened by the fact that, according to the President’sPConant, James B., 1893–1978, am. Chemiker letter, the Honorary Doctorate of Science will be conferred upon me. Do I owe this also to Prof. HendersonPHenderson, Lawrence Joseph, 1878–1942, am. Chemiker?
You have rendered an extremely effective help by interesting Prof. HendersonPHenderson, Lawrence Joseph, 1878–1942, am. Chemiker and Mr. CurtisPCurtis on my work. Would you, please, give me their addresses and those of other people which you would consider to be worth for sending separata? It would be very useful for me, if you gave me kind suggestions as to which separata would be of interest for each of them. You may simply note the numbers, according to the following list:
*(5. Physikalische Begriffsbildung.)B1926@Physikalische Begriffsbildung, Karlsruhe, 1926
*(7. Der Logische Aufbau der Welt.)B1928@Der logische Aufbau der Welt, Berlin-Schlachtensee, 1928
*(8. Scheinprobleme.)B1928@Scheinprobleme in der Philosophie. Das Fremdpsychische und der Realismusstreit, Berlin-Schlachtensee, 1928
*(9. Abriß der Logistik.)B1929@Abriß der Logistik. Mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der Relationstheorie und ihrer Anwendungen, Wien, 1929
*13 F. L’Ancienne et la Nouvelle Logique. (Translation of Erkenntnis I, p. 12.)B1930@„Die alte und die neue Logik“, Erkenntnis 1, 1930/31, 12–26
*19 F. La Science et la Metaphysique. (Translation of Erkenntnis II, p. 219)B1931@„Überwindung der Metaphysik durch logische Analyse der Sprache“, Erkenntnis 2, 1931, 219–241. (I have no more offprints of the German originals 13 and 19.)
*20 E. Unity of ScienceB1934@The Unity of Science. Übersetzung und Einleitung von Max Black, London, 1934.
21. Psychologie in physikalischer Sprache. (Erkenntnis)B1932@„Psychologie in physikalischer Sprache“, Erkenntnis 3, 1932/33, 107–142
22. Erwiderung auf Zilsel und Dunker. ( “ )B1932@„Erwiderung auf die vorstehenden Aufsätze von E. Zilsel und K. Duncker“, Erkenntnis 3, 1932/33, 177–188
23. Protokollsätze. ( “ )B1932@„Über Protokollsätze“, Erkenntnis 3, 1932/33, 215–228🕮
26. On the Character of Philos. Problems. (In: Phil.of Science)B1934@„On the Character of Philosophic Problems“, Philosophy of Science 1 (1), 1934, 5–19
* 28. Logische Syntax der SpracheB1934@Logische Syntax der Sprache, Wien, 1934
* 31. Philosophy and Logical SyntaxB1934@Philosophy and Logical Syntax, London, 1935.
34. Formalwissenschaft und Realwissenschaft. (Just appeared in “Erkenntnis”; offprint has been sent to you.)B1934@„Formalwissenschaft und Realwissenschaft“, Erkenntnis 5, 1935, 30-37
35. Les Concepts Psychologiques et les Concepts Physiques. (Is to appear soon in the French Periodical “Synthèse”).B1935@„Les Concepts psychologiques et les concepts physiques sont-ils foncièrement différent?“ Trad. par Robert Bouvier, Revue de synthèse 10 (1), 1935, 43–53
* Appeared not in periodicals, but as independent issues. Please note also, if somebody has already something of the list (bought, or as subscriber of the journal, or offprint given by you.) I would like to keep my card-index complete; everybody who has offprints of mine, is contained in it.
Please write me whether you yourself have all of the list. Perhaps not (5)B1926@Physikalische Begriffsbildung, Karlsruhe, 1926 and (8)B1928@Scheinprobleme in der Philosophie. Das Fremdpsychische und der Realismusstreit, Berlin-Schlachtensee, 1928 (if my card-index is right); if so, I shall send them. And would you like to have (13 F)B1930@„Die alte und die neue Logik“, Erkenntnis 1, 1930/31, 12–26 and (19 F)B1931@„Überwindung der Metaphysik durch logische Analyse der Sprache“, Erkenntnis 2, 1931, 219–241 in French?
In the next time you will receive an offprint of a paper (33) “Über ein Gültigkeitskriterium. …”.B1935@„Ein Gültigkeitskriterium für die Sätze der klassischen Mathematik“, Monatshefte für Mathematik und Physik 42 (1), 1935, 163–190 The contents of this paper and the previous one (32) “Antinomien”B1934@„Die Antinomien und die Unvollständigkeit der Mathematik“, Monatshefte für Mathematik 41 (1), 1934, 263-284 will be contained in the English translation of “Syntax”B1937@The Logical Syntax of Language, London, 1937. Therefore in general I do not send offprints of these papers to American readers, with few exceptions.
May I perhaps read a copy of the manuscript of your lecturesB?
The English translation of “Syntax”B1937@The Logical Syntax of Language, London, 1937 is said to be nearly complete. OgdenPOgden, Charles Kay, 1889–1957, brit. Linguist und Philosoph sent me Ch. I and II of it. I had to spend much work in revising and correcting them; I found a lot of mistakes, misunderstandings and unsuitable expressions. Therefore I suggested OgdenPOgden, Charles Kay, 1889–1957, brit. Linguist und Philosoph once more most urgently to take another translator. But he answered that this were impossible; he went through all my corrections and asserts that there were only 5 (!) real mistakes. He promises that the rest will be examined very carefully before it comes to me. Thus I hope that the translation after all will not be too bad. You may imagine that after these experiences 🕮 I am still more angry about that OgdenPOgden, Charles Kay, 1889–1957, brit. Linguist und Philosoph did not accept the proposal of PrallPPrall, David Wight, 1886–1940, am. Philosoph in January.
Concerning my remarks on your bookBQuine, Willard Van Orman!1934@A System of Logistic, Cambridge MA, 1934. 1)2). You may be right in making the syntactic explanations of your system as simple as possible, considering the class of supposed readers. Your use of the intuitive blanks “- - -”, “…” etc. instead of special syntactical symbols seems to me very suitable for the purpose. Nevertheless I think it would be desirable or even necessary to state formation rules; that may be done in a simple form, using your blanks, e. g.: “Every class expression has one of the following forms: 1.) variable in class-position, 2.) “\(\hat{x}(...)\)” where “ …” has sentencial form, 3.) “…”. And analogously for “sentence”. Then it will be easy to formulate the rule of substitution so as to avoid the contradiction 3c.
3b). I am not quite sure whether or not my considerations are right, but still the following seems to me to be the case:
folgender Abschnitt: Inhalt ok, Formatierung nicht
A) The addition of “every free” in the definition of “substitution” p. 142 is necessary; for we do not wish to call the transformation of
(1) \(...\alpha ...\hat{\alpha }(–\alpha –)\)kurze Bindestriche werden in Formelumgebung 2 Mal „minus“
into
(2a) \(...V...\hat{\alpha }(–V–)\)
or into
(2b) \(...V...\hat{V}(–V–)\)
a substitution.
B) When the mentioned addition is made, the word “free” may be left out in the rule of substitution.
C) If that addition is made and the convention at the end of p. 44 is left out, a theorem of the form
(3) \([\alpha ], \hat{x}(- - \hat{x}(...)- -)\)
does not seem to me to be dangerously ambiguous. Or do you think, it is so? Could you perhaps give me an 🕮 example of a contradiction resulting from it? or a proof of a theorem which we should not wish to be demonstrable?
My best thanks for your reviewsBB of PiercePPeirce, Charles Sanders, 1839–1914, am. Philosoph IIIB and IVB.
Simultaneously I send you your bookBQuine, Willard Van Orman!1934@A System of Logistic, Cambridge MA, 1934.
I proposed the terms “formative rules” and “transformative r[ules]” to the translator already in a letter of June 1934; but she did not accept them. As you find them preferable, I too shall use them in the future.
I enclose your German letter with my corrections. If you wish to exercise your German I am of course always ready for correcting German letters; it does not take more than a minute.
We are glad that in the next year we shall find you as a triad. We send Naomi our most hearty wishes for her hard examination in August; that is more than writing logic. And we are glad too that you will soon be living on the countryside and have it more quiet. That will be good for health and work.
With cordial greetings 2 \(\rightarrow \) 2‚
