Apollonius Dyscolus and the ambiguity of ambiguity
نویسندگان
چکیده
منابع مشابه
Ambiguity and Ambiguity Aversion
Consider the following choice problem, known as “Ellsberg’s three-color urn example”, or simply the “Ellsberg Paradox” (Ellsberg [7]). An urn contains 30 red balls, and 60 green and blue balls, in unspecified proportions; subjects are asked to compare (i) a bet on a red draw vs. a bet on a green draw, and (ii) a bet on a red or blue draw vs. a bet on a green or blue draw. If the subject wins a ...
متن کاملinvestigating the relationship between ambiguity tolerance and willingness to translate of iranian prospective english translators: an sem revalidation study
cognitive studies of translation process have recently been awarded a great deal of attention. there exists a psychological angle to almost all translation activities. the present study, thus, deals with analysing the relationships between iranian prospective translators tolerance for ambiguity (ta) and their willingness to translate (wtt). the research was conducted as a mixed methods study, d...
Semantic Ambiguity and Perceived Ambiguity
I explore some of the issues that arise when trying to establish a connection between the underspecification hypothesis pursued in the NLP literature and work on ambiguity in semantics and in the psychological literature. A theory of underspecification is developed ‘from the first principles’, i.e., starting from a definition of what it means for a sentence to be semantically ambiguous and from...
متن کاملDifferentiating ambiguity and ambiguity attitude
The objective of this paper is to show how ambiguity, and a decision maker (DM)’s response to it, can be modelled formally in the context of a general decision model. We introduce a relation derived from the DM’s preferences, called ‘‘unambiguous preference’’, and show that it can be represented by a set of probabilities. We provide such set with a simple differential characterization, and argu...
متن کاملDefining Ambiguity and Ambiguity Attitude
According to the well-known distinction attributed to Knight (1921), there are two kinds of uncertainty. The first, called “risk,” corresponds to situations in which all events relevant to decision making are associated with obvious probability assignments (which every decision maker agrees to). The second, called “(Knightian) uncertainty” or (following Ellsberg (1961)) “ambiguity,” corresponds...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
ژورنال
عنوان ژورنال: The Classical Quarterly
سال: 1995
ISSN: 0009-8388,1471-6844
DOI: 10.1017/s0009838800043512