A fuller semantic for the non-alethic domain (Fiat-pvq entailed by Fiat-p, etc.)

From the online document,

"Dynamic Semantics, Imperative Logic and Propositional Attitudes

by B. Zarnic

Contents 1 ’One move’ eliminative semantics 2 1.1 Someremarks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.2 Semanticnotions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2 Simple update system for imperatives 9 2.1 ’Three moves’ language L!•¡forimperativelogic 12 2.2 Reduction of uncertainty in the practical setting 15 3Prima facie consequence 18 3.1 Nonpersistent sentences and preferred model . . 20 4 Negation of imperatives and notion of change 24 4.1 ExtendedlanguageL¬!♦!•¡and refined models . 27 4.1.1 Explanation of semantic moves:¬!♦and !♦. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29 4.1.2 Conditionalimperative. . . . . . . . . . . 32 5 Semantics of propositional attitudes reports 35 5.1 Characterization of intentional states. . . . . . . 37 5.2 Validityofrationalizations. . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 5.2.1 Two modes of validity for rationalizations 39 5.3 Application: anatomy of excuse. . . . . . . . . . 42 6 Appendix1 47