AI Tutor
Library
›Library›Logic›forall x: Calgary›Truth-functional logic›Sentences of TFL
Back to forall x: Calgary

Sentences of TFL

Deciding whether strings count as sentences of TFL, strictly or under relaxed bracketing conventions, and identifying the scope of each connective.

forall x: Calgary, Sentences of TFL

Status
FlagsLoading your progress…

3 exercises

Exercise A

For each of the following: (a) Is it a sentence of TFL, strictly speaking? (b) Is it a sentence of TFL, allowing for our relaxed bracketing conventions?

  1. (A)(A)

  2. J374∨¬J374J_{374}\vee\neg J_{374}

  3. ¬¬¬¬F\neg\neg\neg\neg F

  4. ¬∧S\neg\wedge S

  5. (G∧¬G)(G\wedge\neg G)

  6. (A→(A∧¬F))∨(D↔E)(A\rightarrow(A\wedge\neg F))\vee(D\leftrightarrow E)

  7. [(Z↔S)→W]∧[J∨X][(Z\leftrightarrow S)\rightarrow W]\wedge[J\vee X]

  8. (F↔¬D→J)∨(C∧D)(F\leftrightarrow\neg D\rightarrow J)\vee(C\wedge D)

3.0

Exercise B

Are there any sentences of TFL that contain no atomic sentences? Explain your answer.

3.0

Exercise C

What is the scope of each connective in the sentence

3.0
ConnectivesAmbiguity

Adapted from forall x: Calgary © 2025 P. D. Magnus, Tim Button, Robert Trueman, and Richard Zach. Licensed under CC BY 4.0. Source: forall x: Calgary. Imported at revision ec34df8.

AI Tutor

A study tool built on open educational resources. Content from OpenStax and other openly licensed textbooks — every book, section and exercise page carries its source’s license and attribution.

Product
  • About AI Tutor
  • Library
  • Premium
Legal
  • Terms of Service
  • Privacy Policy
© 2026 AI Tutor. Openly licensed content is attributed to its authors under their respective licenses.