Alfred Tarski and the "Concept of Truth in Formalized Languages": A Running Commentary with Consideration of the Polish Original and the German ... Epistemology, and the Unity of Science)

197 Pages·2016·7.152 MB·

by  Gruber, Monika, Tarski, Alfred

Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science 39
Monika Gruber
Alfred Tarski and
the “Concept
of Truth in Formalized
Languages”
A Running Commentary with
Consideration of the Polish Original and
the German Translation
Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science
Volume 39
Series editors
Shahid Rahman, University of Lille III, France
John Symons, University of Texas at El Paso, USA
Editorial Board
Jean Paul van Bendegem, Free University of Brussels, Belgium
Johan van Benthem, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Jacques Dubucs, CNRS/Paris IV, France
Anne Fagot-Largeault, Collège de France, France
Göran Sundholm, Universiteit Leiden, The Netherlands
Bas van Fraassen, Princeton University, USA
Dov Gabbay, King’s College London, UK
Jaakko Hintikka, Boston University, USA
Karel Lambert, University of California, Irvine, USA
Graham Priest, University of Melbourne, Australia
Gabriel Sandu, University of Helsinki, Finland
Heinrich Wansing, Ruhr-University Bochum, Germany
Timothy Williamson, Oxford University, UK
Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science aims to reconsider the question
oftheunityofscienceinlightofrecentdevelopmentsinlogic.Atpresent,nosingle
logical, semantical or methodological framework dominates the philosophy of
science. However, the editors of this series believe that formal techniques like, for
example, independence friendly logic, dialogical logics, multimodal logics, game
theoretic semantics and linear logics, have the potential to cast new light on basic
issues in the discussion of the unity of science.
Thisseriesprovidesavenuewherephilosophersandlogicianscanapplyspecific
technical insights to fundamental philosophical problems. While the series is open
toawidevarietyofperspectives,includingthestudyandanalysisofargumentation
and the critical discussion of the relationship between logic and the philosophy of
science,theaimistoprovideanintegratedpictureofthescientificenterpriseinall
its diversity.
More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/6936
Monika Gruber
Alfred Tarski
“
and the Concept
of Truth in Formalized
”
Languages
A Running Commentary with Consideration
of the Polish Original and the German
Translation
123
Monika Gruber
University of Vienna
Vienna
Austria
ISSN 2214-9775 ISSN 2214-9783 (electronic)
Logic, Epistemology, andtheUnityof Science
ISBN978-3-319-32614-6 ISBN978-3-319-32616-0 (eBook)
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-32616-0
LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2016937945
©SpringerInternationalPublishingSwitzerland2016
Thisworkissubjecttocopyright.AllrightsarereservedbythePublisher,whetherthewholeorpart
of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations,
recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission
orinformationstorageandretrieval,electronicadaptation,computersoftware,orbysimilarordissimilar
methodologynowknownorhereafterdeveloped.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publicationdoesnotimply,evenintheabsenceofaspecificstatement,thatsuchnamesareexemptfrom
therelevantprotectivelawsandregulationsandthereforefreeforgeneraluse.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this
book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the
authorsortheeditorsgiveawarranty,expressorimplied,withrespecttothematerialcontainedhereinor
foranyerrorsoromissionsthatmayhavebeenmade.
Printedonacid-freepaper
ThisSpringerimprintispublishedbySpringerNature
TheregisteredcompanyisSpringerInternationalPublishingAGSwitzerland
Preface
When today someone speaks of Alfred Tarski’s renowned monograph about the
conceptoftruthinformalizedlanguages,shecanmeanoneofthethreedifferenttexts:
(1) The English translation published for the first time in 1956, in Tarski’s col-
lected works Logic, Semantics, Metamathematics. Papers from 1922 to 1938
whichisusedasthestandardtexttoday.ForthetranslationofhisEnglishtext,
J.H. Woodger used the German edition as a basis.
(2) The German version published in 1935 under the title “Der Wahrheitsbegriff
in den formalisierten Sprachen” in Vol. 1 of Studia Philosophica. Until the
publication of the English version (1), the German edition served as the most
important basis for the scientific discussion of Tarski’s ideas outside of
Poland. Also in the case of the German version, we are dealing with a
translation, however here from the Polish original.
(3) The Polish original written at the end of the 1920s and the beginning of the
1930s of the twentieth century. On March 21, 1931, it was presented by Jan
ŁukasiewicztotheWarsawScientificSociety.In1933,thePolishoriginalwas
published under the title “Pojęcie prawdy w językach nauk dedukcyjnych.”
Thecomplexityofthis—generallyknown—situationisreflectedinaseriesof
problems with which both translations (from Polish into German and from
German into English) were confronted:
(a) A translation of a scientific text requires, apart from the language profi-
ciency,expertiseinthesubject matter. Atthe timewhenTarski’s textwas
translated from Polish into German,only a very small group of specialists
were familiar with Tarski’s ideas and with the applied methods and tech-
niquesofmodernlogic.AnadequatetranslationofTarski’scomplicatedtext
turned out to be tremendously challenging for the translator. Hence, it is
hardlysurprisingthatthetranslatorhadtodealwithaseriesofobstacles.
(b) The translation of the English version, which is used as a standard text
sinceitspublication,isnotbasedonthePolishoriginalbutontheGerman
translation.
v
vi Preface
Tarski’sarticle isconsidered oneofthemajorcontributions tologic,semantics,
and epistemology in the twentieth century. It has, not without good reason, been
called “the watershed between early and modern methodology of deductive sci-
ences”(Corcoran2006).ItisimportanttorememberthatTarskiwrotethisarticlein
Polishandpublisheditin1933.KazimierzTwardowskiapproachedTarskiwiththe
suggestionthathisarticlebetranslatedintoaninternationallyknownlanguage.Ina
letter written on the November 22, 1933, Tarski expresses his gratitude.
Iamverythankfulfortheoffertopublishmypaperontheconceptoftruth,translatedinto
German language, in the journal “Studia philosophica”; this proposal agrees completely
withmyownwishes..…Iwouldnotundertakethetranslationofmyworkmyselfbecause
this task would significantly exceed my knowledge of the German language, and in the
currentfinancialsituationIcouldbearneitherthewholenorevenapartofthetranslation
cost.[TranslationM.G.]1
It took two years and two translation attempts before it was translated into
German in 1935. At first, a young and promising student of Kazimierz
Adjukiewicz,ZygmuntSchmiererwastotranslateapartofTarski’sarticle.Having
read this sample translation and consulted on it with Adjukiewicz and Ingarden,
Kazimierz Twardowski, who acted on behalf of Tarski, decided that Schmierer
could not be entrusted with this task. Following this, Twardowski considered
another candidate, Leopold Blaustein, who met the high expectations and was
entrusted with the German translation, as Twardowski writes to Tarski on the
April 16, 1934.
The translation has been undertaken by Mr. Dr. Blaustein. I attach a sample of this
translation, and ask Dear Mr. Colleague, to send me his possible remarks regarding the
termsusedinthetranslation–onthelinguistic–stylisticside,thetranslationiscompletely
correct.Italsoisabsolutelyadequate.[TranslationM.G.]2
Tarskireadthetranslation,togetherwithoneofthelogiciansfromVienna,3and
wassatisfiedwithBlaustein’ssampleofthetranslationandexpressedhiscontentin
a letter written to Twardowski on the April 21, 1934.
1“Zapropozycjewydrukowaniamejpracyopojęciuprawdy,przełożonejnajęzykniemiecki,w
czasopiśmie“Studiaphilosophica”jestembardzowdzięczny;propozycjataodpowiadacałkowicie
mym własnym życzeniom.…sam nie podjąłbym się przełożyć mej pracy, gdyż zadanie to
przekraczałobyznacznie mojąznajomośćjęzyka niemieckiego, awobecnej sytuacji materialnej
nie mógłbym ponieść ani w całości ani nawet w części kosztów przekładu”. Letter L. 194/33
archivedinPolskieTowarzystwoFilozoficzne,Poznań.
2“Podjął się mianowicie przekładu Pan Dr. Blaustein. Próbkę tego przekładu załączam, prosząc
SzanownegoPanaKolegę,abyzechciałmiprzesłaćSwojeewentualneuwagi,dotycząceużytych
w przekładzie terminów – co do strony jezykowostylistycznej bowiem przekład jest zupełnie
poprawny. Jest też zupełnie wierny”. Letter L. 98/933 archived in Polskie Towarzystwo
Filozoficzne,Poznań.
3InapostcardfromVienna,datedApril6,1935,TarskiwroteTwardowskithat“Korektębędzie
przeglądać–obokmnie–jedenztutejszychlogików”–“Nexttome,oneofthelocallogicians
will look through the correction”. Letter 109/35 archived in Polskie Towarzystwo Filozoficzne,
Poznań.
Preface vii
I am very happy that mr. dr. Blaustein took up the translation; from the sent sample I
concludethattheentiretranslationwillbesatisfactoryineveryrespect.[TranslationM.G.]4
BythetimetheGermantranslationappeared,andduringhisstayinVienna,and
laterinParis,TarskihaswrittenPostscriptwhichwasaddedforthefirsttimetothe
Germanpublicationofhismanuscript.Atthattime,therewerealreadytwoGerman
logicians interested in Tarski’s work and helping him with the corrections of the
translationsofthemaintextandofthepostscript.TarskiwrotefromParisaletterto
Twardowski on the August 28, 1935, requesting additional copies of the German
translation.
Ifsending it in three copies meets difficulties, Iwill settle for just one; Ineeded the two
additionalcopiesmostlybecauseI’vebeensendingthemtotwoGermanlogicians,whoare
veryinterestedinmyworkandforwhommyworkisveryaccurate(I’vedonethesame
thingwiththecopyofthefirstcorrection.)[TranslationM.G.]5
The English translation followed in 1956, written by Joseph H. Woodger.
Unfortunately, it had to be based on the German version. Moreover, the circum-
stances made it impossible for the translator to discuss with Tarski the difficulties
encounteredinhiswork.Duetosimilarreasons,Tarskididnotgetachancetoread
a greater part of the translation before it was submitted for publication. Therefore,
certainmistakeswhichoccurredintheGermanversionhavebeencarriedoverinto
the English one. Additionally, new discrepancies came up in the process of
translation from the already once translated version. Also, there are some mistakes
which appear only in German or English, while others in both translations.
Havingsaidthat,Ihopetohaveclarifiedthepictureforthereadersofthepresent
work, assuming that most of Tarski readers are already familiar with this complex
situation. Now, there are a few words on the present project. This book deals with
the translational discrepancies between the most often read and quoted English
version, the German translation which served as its basis, and the Polish original
whichwasusedfortheGermantranslation.Duetothelegalmatters,specificallyto
copyright issues, it was not possible to reprint the English pages and comment
directlyonthem,oneafteranother.Instead,thesentencesorsimplephraseswillbe
quotedfromthe(Tarski2006)edition.Moreover,inspiteofthecourtesyofHackett
Publishing, legally the quotes cannot extend a certain length, and hence, occa-
sionally they may be seen a bit taken out of context. Additionally to the transla-
tional issues, I will comment on certain, possibly most essential and perhaps most
controversial, problems of Tarski’s monograph. My commentary will not be
4“Radteżjestembardzo,żeprzekładupodjąłsięp.dr.Blaustein;znadesłanejpróbkiwnoszę,że
całość przekładu wypadnie pod każdym względem zadowalająco”. Letter archived in Polskie
TowarzystwoFilozoficzne,Poznań.
5“Jeśliprzesyłaniejejwtrzechegzemplarzachnastręczatrudności,zadowolęsięjednym;dwainne
egzemplarze potrzebne mi były z tego glównie względu, że przesyłałem je dwum logikom nie-
mieckim,którzybardzosięmąpracąinteresująidlaktórychpracamojajestb.aktualna(tosamo
czyniłem z jednym egzemplarzem pierwszej korekty).” Letter L. 224/35 archived in Polskie
TowarzystwoFilozoficzne,Poznań.
viii Preface
exhaustive,acommentaryrarelyis.Tarski’swritings,especiallyhismonographon
truth, have been read, reread, and commented on multiple times. The scholars
dealingwithTarski’sworkhavemuchmoreexperienceandexpertiseinthesubject
matterthanIdo,andIshallnotpretendotherwisejustbecausePolishismynative
language; instead, I will suggest further literature to the reader.
This monograph is meant to be read parallel to the English edition of Tarski’s
“Concept of Truth in Formalized Languages,” as a kind of manual or a guide for
better apprehension of the text. It is thought as auxiliary means for all scholars
having the expertise in the subject but lacking the knowledge of Polish. It should
also be helpful to philosophy students, of all levels, making the understanding of
this very complex and groundbreaking text somewhat more reachable. The com-
prehension itself is left to the reader.
The last chapter consists of a rare and most valuable collection of the letters
concerningthetranslationofTarski’smanuscript.Mostofthepresentedletterswere
exchanged between Alfred Tarski and Kazimierz Twardowski, but there are also
lettersfromKarlPopper.Additionally,thereareafewlettersnotdirectlyregarding
the translation of Tarski’s article, but interesting, nevertheless. The collection has
neverbeenpublishedbefore,whichmakesitevenmoreprecioustoincludeitinthis
publication.
Reference
Tarski, A. (2006). The concept of truth in formalized languages. In J. Corcoran (Ed.), Logic,
semantics, metamathematics (pp. 152–278). Papers from 1923 to 1938 by Alfred Tarski.
HackettPublishingCompany.
Acknowledgments
There are several people to whom I am deeply thankful for their ongoing support
and help. Without them, this project would not have been possible.
This publication is based upon my dissertation written at the University of
Salzburg under the supervision of Egdar Morscher and Alexander Hieke. I’m
thankfulfortheirsupport,especiallytoProf.EdgarMorscher,whoapproachedme
with the idea of writing this dissertation and devoted a lot of time helping me,
re-reading the final version and suggesting corrections and improvements. Certain
partsofmydissertation,however,havebeendeleted,rewritten,orextendedforthe
presentpublication.Thesoleresponsibilityforthispublicationlieswiththeauthor.
My thanks go also to Arianna Betti and Iris Loeb, who took an interest in my
dissertationbeforeitwasevenfinishedandusedthedraftsofitintheseminarthey
held, later sharing their useful comments. Following, they invited me to the
workshoptheyorganizedandaskedmetopresentsomeofmyresults.Thisgaveme
a rare opportunity to discuss some of the crucial issues with the specialists in this
field, among them Steven Givant, Peter Simons, and Göran Sundholm to whom
I am thankful for their inspiring comments and suggestions. To Göran Sundholm,
I’m especially thankful for taking interest in my dissertation and for pointing me
towardthisseriesbySpringer.IwouldalsoliketothankHartryField,whobrought
to my attention the philosophical discussion regarding Tarski’s Postscript and for
the following discussions. To Jan Woleński, I am grateful for his invaluable
comments and suggestions, and also for sending me the copies of the correspon-
dence between Twardowski and Tarski, twice. Furthermore, I’m very indebted to
Krzysztof Brzechczyn for copying and sending me the entire archived collection
of the Polish Philosophical Society in Poznań, and for agreeing to quoting and
reprinting some of the letters in this publication.
I special thanks go to Alexander Jones for proofreading of my manuscript and
for making multiple corrections contributing greatly to my publication. I’m very
thankful to Christi Jongepier-Lue and Shaly Fermine from Springer Verlag and to
the whole Springer team for their continuous assistance with the publication, and
ix